5 thoughts on “Is It Or Isn’t It?”

  1. Based on Chris’s notes on L2, I think Rob may be misinterpretting things (which wouldn’t be the first time). I think NASA is still investigating the Aerospace report (trying to find a way to do damage control), and thus is claiming that the investigation is still ongoing. But trying to represent this as just ULA’s pitch to Aerospace as opposed to Aerospace’s conclusions doesn’t sound like what Chris was originally saying (and other with access to the data were confirming).

    Once again, Chris very well could be wrong, but Rob doesn’t have a 100% track record either.

    ~Jon

  2. I thought the same thing when I read Rob’s post: this is just NASA in damage control mode. What is the chance that when the report is officially released it will still say EELVs are a viable option?

  3. You might be interested in this article on Av Leak’s website this morning:

    Weight Forcing NASA To Shrink Orion Crew

    NASA engineers are “on the verge” of pulling two crew seats from their design for the Orion crew exploration vehicle, at least at first, to save weight.

    That would mean that when NASA regains the ability to fly astronauts to orbit in the post-shuttle era, it will start with a crew of four instead of six. Four seats have been the baseline for the version of Orion that would take astronauts back to the Moon, but the initial operational capability (IOC) to deliver crew to the International Space Station (ISS) currently calls for a six-seat version.

    Jeff Hanley, manager of the Constellation Program that is developing the Orion, its Ares I crew launch vehicle and the follow-on lunar vehicles, told Aviation Week on April 22 that the Orion design is within “plus or minus a couple of hundred pounds” of the 21,000-pound maximum for the command module set by a requirement to land safely with only two of the three main parachutes deployed.

    We’ve seen articles suggesting that Ares I performance isn’t good enough and now we’re hearing that the Orion is too heavy. It just goes to show that NASA can still manage big programs so long as we remember “anything is possible if you lower your standards far enough.”

Comments are closed.