A non-space publication is noticing the implications of the election for space policy.
[Afternoon update]
Artemis has slipped the schedule again (no surprise), and SLS is looking like it’s in serious trouble.
Moving Space Command to Huntsville in exchange for killing SLS looks like the art of the deal.
[Friday-morning update]
Why Orion’s heat shield offers an opportunity for Isaacman to cancel the entire mess.
[Bumped]
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/12/how-did-the-ceo-of-an-online-payments-firm-become-the-nominee-to-lead-nasa/
“Multiple sources have told Ars that the SLS rocket—which has long had staunch backing from Congress—is now on the chopping block. No final decisions have been made, but a tentative deal is in place with lawmakers to end the rocket in exchange for moving US Space Command to Huntsville, Alabama.”
Bribery at its finest.
This would make the logical off-ramp after Artemis III when the last IUS is used-up. Gives the workforce a few years to transition.
Won’t need a new upper, won’t need a new MLT, won’t need new solids.
Lotta wasted money on the mobile launcher and other infrastructure.
It isn’t a waste if they get in the Guinness Book of World Records
“his reputation as a repudiator of international cooperation is vastly overstated”
Yes, Trump wasn’t trying to end the “rules based global order” or whatever BS people call it these days but re-center American primacy over the order we created. That means getting the free riders to stop being so worthless and start being more responsible. Clean your room, spend 2% of your allowance on military, and stop handing out with dirtballs.
Hanging**
Throwing this here for now, as it represents the old era:
NASA Shares Orion Heat Shield Findings
Meat of the findings:
Extensive analysis, including from more than 100 tests at unique facilities across the country, determined the heat shield on Artemis I did not allow for enough of the gases generated inside a material called Avcoat to escape, which caused some of the material to crack and break off.
What are they doing about it? Nothing.
Although a crew was not inside Orion during Artemis I, data shows the temperature inside Orion remained comfortable and safe had crew been aboard.
Engineers already are assembling and integrating the Orion spacecraft for Artemis III based on lessons learned from Artemis I and implementing enhancements to how heat shields for crewed returns from lunar landing missions are manufactured to achieve uniformity and consistent permeability.
They’ll fix future missions, but full steam ahead (and I do mean full steam, as it will pop off parts of the heatshield again for Artemis II).
The golden nugget is this:
“Throughout our process to investigate the heat shield phenomenon and determine a forward path, we’ve stayed true to NASA’s core values; safety and data-driven analysis remained at the forefront,” said Catherine Koerner, associate administrator, Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington.
Yes you have. Oh yes, yes you have.
To be fair, they changed the re-entry profile.
It does add margin to what is necessary, but it won’t limit the heat below what would be necessary for the same “popcorning” phenomenon to occur.
Popcorning is a term we used to describe insulation coming off the ET from trapped air pockets breaking apart once the ET hit vacuum. The AVCOAT is likely a bit stronger than ET foam, but the effect described in the report comes from that trapped air being heated and expanded against the entry pressures (not necessarily a vacuum to push against).
More importantly, by rushing to launch Artemis II, it prevents an opportunity to test a solution before the next entry profile. SpaceX has shown more willingness to do another flight test, but then they have a design that is cheaper to fly (and likely will replace the need for SLS/Orion in due course).
To miss the Earth entirely?
To be Murphy, they’ve never tested this re-entry profile on a manned vehicle, ever, and the first time they test will have crew aboard.
The whole irony of this is NASA was so risk-averse with the design of Orion. The original plan was to go with PICA but didn’t because of risk, meanwhile someone else decided PICA was yummy and used it…
The conservative ‘safe’approach bit them in the ass.
I was part of that original decision. I’ll admit the options were pretty close, but it seemed clear that PICA would be better to maintain. Except there isn’t so much maintenance. The heat shield for Orion is fly once. On the other hand, that PICA could have been removed might have provided options for venting as was done on Shuttle, although I can see problems with that solution.
It’s been a decade, and I been happy ever since I left. I get paid a lot more and treated a lot better. I work with several others that left after Shuttle, and none of us would go back.
Someone remind the Not A Space Agency that metals corrode, and florida tends to be salty.
Because with a launch scheduled 17 months away, it’ll likely be 36 months before they attempt it
They will likely keep it in the high bay till launch is imminent.
That helped SO MUCH last time
A helpful guide for Mr. Issacman…
From:
https://helpfulprofessor.com/conspicuous-consumption-examples/
Conspicuous Consumption Examples:
Luxury Cars
Jewelry
Vacation Homes
Yachts
Fancy Restaurants
Private Jets
Private Education
Collectible Art & Objects
Charitable Giving
List of Additional Examples:
Private islands
Elite schools, colleges and universities
Designer handbags like Hermes Birkin [etc.]
Luxury homes in exclusive neighborhoods
Private membership clubs like Soho House
Exotic vacations to private resorts like Aman and Four Seasons
Personalized chef services
Luxury skincare and beauty treatments
Designer pets like pure-bred cats and dogs
Personalized luxury perfume
Exclusive boxes at sporting events
Private concerts with A-list performers
Personalized home theaters
Exclusive golf courses and memberships
Add to that list: Cost-plus Space Capsules.
Scotty Kilmer says a mechanic should never drive a nice car to work because it leads customers to think they are being overcharged and taken advantage of.
It is like when you go to the doctor and see a Tesla taking up two spots at the charging station. “For Physicians ONLY”
So, NASA decided to fly Artemis 2 with the existing heat shield, AND slipped the schedule anyway.
Plus, for added goodness, they’re flying Artemis 2 with issues they’d never allow for a private company.
I hope SLS gets canceled, quick.
A thought did occur to me though; would it be financially worthwhile to use any already-completed (at the time of cancellation) SLS launch vehicles, perhaps for planetary probe launches (where its high C3 might be of use)? Or, would the enormous overhead costs of NASA make even this financially unwise?
And yes, I still want to see one SLS preserved as a monument, emplaced on the Capitol Mall as a reminder to congress to never, ever do anything like that again.