Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday April 19 2022, @01:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the try-try-again dept.

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


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This discussion has been archived.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: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday April 19 2022, @07:22AM (2 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Tuesday April 19 2022, @07:22AM (#1238110) Homepage Journal

    cost and disinterest of the contractors in the outcome

    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.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Underrated=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @09:30PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 19 2022, @09:30PM (#1238285)

    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

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 20 2022, @12:12AM (#1238318)

      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.