SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NASA to roll back its mega rocket after failing to complete countdown test
After three attempts to complete a critical fueling test of the Space Launch System rocket, NASA has decided to take a break.
On Saturday night the space agency announced plans to roll the large SLS rocket from the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center to the Vehicle Assembly Building in the coming days. This marks a notable step back for the program, which has tried since April 1 to complete a "wet dress rehearsal" test, during which the rocket is fueled and brought to within 10 seconds of launch.
The decision comes after three tries during the last two weeks. Each fueling attempt was scuttled by one or more technical issues with the rocket, its mobile launch tower, or ground systems that supply propellants and gases. During the most recent attempt, on Thursday April 14, NASA succeeded in loading 49 percent of the core-stage liquid oxygen fuel tank and 5 percent of the liquid hydrogen tank.
While this represents progress, it did not include the most dynamic portion of the test, during which the rocket is fully fueled and pressurized; and it, the ground systems, and computer systems are put into a terminal countdown when every variable is closely monitored. NASA had hoped to complete this wet dress rehearsal test to work out the kinks in the complicated launch system so that, when the rocket is rolled out later this year for its actual launch, the countdown will proceed fairly smoothly.
Also at Spaceflight Now.
Previously: Artemis I Wet Dress Rehearsal Now Scheduled to Begin April 12
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @02:01AM (10 children)
to rag on SLS, and rightfully so.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 19 2022, @04:06AM (9 children)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @04:41AM (1 child)
It don't matter for SLS. It's a pork project.
Alabama's gonna Alabama.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @09:59AM
It isn't just Alabama. Every single state gets a piece of the pie, exactly like the F-35. Both programs were also designed from the ground up by Congress to take as long as possible and cost as much as possible to feed as many dollars as possible to their biggest campaign donors, primarily Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The only difference is that the Pentagon has enough clout to eventually force a working vehicle out of that mess despite the political pressure, while NASA is forced to grin and bear it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday April 19 2022, @07:22AM (2 children)
Disinterest? Nah. At the level of the engineers, they are frustrated and disappointed. At the level of upper management, they are rubbing their hands over more charges for those cost-plus contracts. Ultimately, success will end the program, since the launches are far too expensive. Failure can be dragged out for many more years.
I would add a sarcasm tag, but...it's not sarcasm when it's true.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @09:30PM (1 child)
No, but it isn't true. I know it feels all fun and cool to be nihilistic and all, but even upper management wants this to succeed because that is great PR and that means more work like this. They'd love to stand up there cheering and celebrating in Mission Control, etc. Not only is pulling off something like this really cool, maybe they get to feel like it was due to their great leadership, they get to plaster their corporate logos all over everything, get to run full-page ads in newspapers and magazines saying how awesome they are and how cool they are to work for, etc. The problem you have with the big contractors is that they are dinosaurs with years of embedded bureaucracies and processes and stovepipes and internal management conflicts and all that other crap that all very large organizations have. They are also shackled with decades of NASA processes, with a lot of that resulting from failures with loss of life. Pick any company, agency, organization, when they get "too big to fail", they've got many layers of managers and VPs and inertia, which also results in a lot of extra cost to pay for all of those people. This will also be the future of SpaceX when they suffer a catastrophic failure resulting in some sort of non-trivial loss that invokes Congressional investigations and "Blue Ribbon" panels of experts. The root cause will be identified, and the solution ultimately ends up being adding more levels of oversight and tests, and changing the test and design process to add more nines onto the end of the percentage of success calculation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 20 2022, @12:12AM
NASA management wants this bird to fly, possibly a bit too much. Historically they are the most likely source of get-there-itis. Boeing management would be perfectly happy with another decade of paid delays.
NASA is shackled by Congress's mandated cost plus contracting scheme, which is the root of the problems with SLS. Boeing and Lockheed Martin have lobbied hard for decades to ensure it stays that way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @10:32AM (3 children)
Excluding Orion and the EUS, the SLS program burns around $5.5M per day. At that rate, once they finish rolling it back to the VAB on the 26th, this test will have cost around $143M. Between building both stages, permit fees, launch costs, and renting the Pacific Missile Range [wikipedia.org], Starship's upcoming orbital flight test could easily break $200M.
Wait, you said similar tests. My bad. ;)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 19 2022, @06:16PM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @09:36PM (1 child)
So a bit less than ULA charges NASA for a single launch ($422M). By that logic Starship R&D should come in around $4B. That actually sounds about right if you include ground infrastructure and factory complex.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 19 2022, @10:14PM
$4 billion would indeed be over $2.5 billion.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @02:06AM (4 children)
If the faa would stop fucking around, maybe elon wouldn't get distracted by buying twitter.
At this point it almost feels like someone is throwing spanners in gears so sls can do something interesting before starship.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by coolgopher on Tuesday April 19 2022, @02:20AM
I wouldn't worry too much. SLS is likely to have their own oversupply of spanners for a long time. Which isn't surprising, when one stacks a bunch of pork barrels on top of each other and calls it a rocket...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @10:40AM
I've been saying that for over a year, though IIRC this month's delay was from Fish and Wildlife. We'll see who asks for more time at the end of the month.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday April 19 2022, @11:21AM (1 child)
Maybe Dragon XL will get axed in favor of Starship:
https://www.teslarati.com/nasa-spacex-dragon-xl-lunar-cargo-spacecraft-rfi/ [teslarati.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @11:30PM
Musk will just deliver Dragon by Starship. Much cheaper that way. ;) Thanks for the link.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday April 19 2022, @02:23AM (1 child)
Smooth NASA countdown?
Cheerful pessimists,
crash landing,
eloquent silence,
genuine imitation,
military intelligence.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @10:36AM
Don't knock it. Unlike these jokers [arstechnica.com], NASA can count down from 10. Though, in fairness, Pythom Space haven't actually killed anyone (yet).