Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday October 28 2021, @09:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the why-buy-one-when-you-can-buy-two-at-twice-the-price? dept.

NASA wants to buy SLS rockets at half price, fly them into the 2050s

NASA has asked the US aerospace industry how it would go about "maximizing the long-term efficiency and sustainability" of the Space Launch System rocket and its associated ground systems.

[...] In its request NASA says it would like to fly the SLS rocket for "30 years or more" as a national capability. Moreover, the agency wants the rocket to become a "sustainable and affordable system for moving humans and large cargo payloads to cislunar and deep-space destinations."

[...] Among the rocket's chief architects was then-Florida Senator Bill Nelson, who steered billions of dollars to Kennedy Space Center in his home state for upgraded ground systems equipment to support the rocket. Back in 2011, he proudly said the rocket would be delivered on time and on budget.

"This rocket is coming in at the cost of... not only what we estimated in the NASA Authorization act, but less," Nelson said at the time. "The cost of the rocket over a five- to six-year period in the NASA authorization bill was to be no more than $11.5 billion. This costs $10 billion for the rocket." Later, he went further, saying, "If we can't do a rocket for $11.5 billion, we ought to close up shop."

After more than 10 years, and more than $30 billion spent on the rocket and its ground systems, NASA has not closed up shop. Rather, Nelson has ascended to become the space agency's administrator.

Previously:


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 29 2021, @11:29PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 29 2021, @11:29PM (#1191852)

    True, but there isn't much schedule left to slip. They've finished stacking and are currently completing final integration and testing. For any other launch provider that would take a couple of weeks at most. "Sometime next year" means sometime in the next 14 months, or about 30x longer than it should take. Even Boeing can only drag it out so long

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:22AM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:22AM (#1191866) Journal
    We'll see. My take is that there's plenty of schedule to slip. Sure, they have a good chance of launching successfully in 2022. But they also have a good chance of putting that launch off for more years.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:36PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:36PM (#1191928)

      This late in the game that becomes increasingly difficult to justify. Unless they have another major test failure, which would make Boeing look bad at a time when they are already getting bad press due to Starliner, I'm not sure how they can slow things down more than they currently are. The only meaningful way I can see to drag it out more is to cancel Artemis, say, due to lack of space suits, and then "redesign" SLS for a different mission again. Probably either back to Mars or deep space probes. I'd bet on the latter since that would do the most damage to NASA's scientific mission.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:44PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 30 2021, @12:44PM (#1191930) Journal

        This late in the game that becomes increasingly difficult to justify.

        Doesn't matter if they find a flaw that's too dangerous or blow up the rocket.