Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday October 24 2019, @06:04PM   Printer-friendly
from the sudden-outbreak-of-common-sense? dept.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/what-is-going-on-with-nasas-space-launch-system-rocket/

In a remarkable turnaround, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine on Wednesday said the space agency would consider launching its first Orion mission to the Moon on commercial rockets instead of NASA's own Space Launch System. This caught virtually the entire aerospace world off guard, and represents a bold change from the status quo of Orion as America's spacecraft, and the SLS as America's powerful rocket that will launch it.

[...] During a hearing of the Senate Commerce committee to assess America's future in space, committee chairman Sen. Roger Wicker opened by asking Bridenstine about Exploration Mission-1's ongoing delays. The EM-1 test flight involves sending an uncrewed Orion spacecraft on a three-week mission into lunar orbit, and is regarded as NASA's first step toward returning humans to the Moon. This mission was originally scheduled for late 2017, but it has slipped multiple times, most recently to June 2020. It has also come to light that this date, too, is no longer tenable.

"SLS is struggling to meet its schedule," Bridenstine replied to Wicker's question. "We are now understanding better how difficult this project is, and it's going to take some additional time. I want to be really clear. I think we as an agency need to stick to our commitment. If we tell you, and others, that we're going to launch in June of 2020 around the Moon, I think we should launch around the Moon in June of 2020. And I think it can be done. We should consider, as an agency, all options to accomplish that objective."

The only other option at this point is using two large, privately developed heavy lift rockets instead of a single SLS booster. While they are not as powerful as the SLS rocket, these commercial launch vehicles could allow for the mission to happen on schedule.

[...] One heavy-lift rocket would launch a fully fueled upper stage—most likely a Delta Cryogenic Second Stage or the Centaur upper stage currently used on United Launch Alliance rockets. Then, a second heavy-lift rocket would launch an Orion capsule and its service module into orbit, and these two vehicles would dock. The fueled upper stage would then inject Orion into a lunar orbit.

Bridenstine did not name rockets during the hearing, but it seems almost certain that at least one of them would be a Delta IV Heavy, built by United Launch Alliance. NASA used this rocket to launch a version of the Orion spacecraft to an altitude of 3,600km in 2014. Both United Launch Alliance and SpaceX—with its Falcon Heavy rocket—would be invited to bid on the second launch.

The SLS is the Space Launch System. It's a heavy launch vehicle that's been funded by NASA and contracted out to Boeing with more than $14 billion spent on it so far. It's been in development since 2010. If and when it's completed launches are expected to run $500 million. It's designed to be mostly an incremental improvement over the Apollo program from 50 years ago which includes no reusability as well as reliance on solid rocket boosters; A solid rocket booster uses solid fuel that—once ignited— cannot be stopped.

SpaceX's alternatives are fully reusable and rely on liquid fuel engines which can be throttled on or off at will. The Falcon Heavy is operational today and runs $90-$150 million for a launch. Their development has been almost entirely privately funded as well.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday October 24 2019, @10:14PM (3 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday October 24 2019, @10:14PM (#911395) Journal

    NASA has a long history of using private contracting and management firms to consume theirs

    I really doubt that NASA have had rocket (or parts) production capabilities on its own
    Bottom line, it's defined as an agency (i.e. service provider mainly).

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday October 24 2019, @10:25PM (2 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday October 24 2019, @10:25PM (#911399)

    Even Apollo had the vehicles provided by private firms, Lockheed Martin IIRC for the lander.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]