User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 3:03:37 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's getting very hard to justify that when SpaceX is the one doing shit and everybody else is either dragging things out or fucking up. The big boys try to deflect onto SpaceX because they - the big defense players - are in bed with the politicians, and have been for a long time. They don't like that an upstart has come along that actually wants to get shit done rather than milk customers for all that they possibly can. SpaceX is poised to be the one launching the majority of stuff to orbit for the entire world. As already posted previously, they were >40% of tonnage to orbit last year. It won't be long before they are >50%. All the while doing it cheaper than everybody else, too. It gets really hard to justify why you need extra scrutiny on them while the big boys more or less get a pass when they are, in actuality, the ones dominating the field. SpaceX also launched the majority of people to orbit last year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 3:04:28 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And how many years before Starship hauls a payload ? Once again , so far we have a glorified grain silo that flew to 40,000 feet and did a fancy maneuver and crashed and exploded. SpaceX is nowhere near building a complete Starship , nor a booster , nor getting one in to orbit any time soon. From the looks of things , SLS will be hauling the mail and very well may be a stopgap for years until SpaceX is ready to take over that task. With that being said , with the new political admin change , a new NASA admin change is coming along with it. It always does. Whoever that is will have to answer directly to Biden or Harris , which ever one of the 2 takes up that duty. NASA programs will survive to a degree , but contractors are going to face a massive shakedown and Musk will be at the top of the list. He's going to have to toe the line and take what he's told , otherwise he and his company will face dire consequences. Remember when Obama took over ? Wonder how SLS survived during that time period ? (somebody got the pork , SLS got the rinds) Elon Musk hates toeing the line , so the near future for SpaceX is going to be very interesting. Starship will likely be hauling Starlink no later than next year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 3:26:18 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And how many years before Starship hauls a payload ? Once again , so far we have a glorified grain silo that flew to 40,000 feet and did a fancy maneuver and crashed and exploded. SpaceX is nowhere near building a complete Starship , nor a booster , nor getting one in to orbit any time soon. From the looks of things , SLS will be hauling the mail and very well may be a stopgap for years until SpaceX is ready to take over that task. With that being said , with the new political admin change , a new NASA admin change is coming along with it. It always does. Whoever that is will have to answer directly to Biden or Harris , which ever one of the 2 takes up that duty. NASA programs will survive to a degree , but contractors are going to face a massive shakedown and Musk will be at the top of the list. He's going to have to toe the line and take what he's told , otherwise he and his company will face dire consequences. Remember when Obama took over ? Wonder how SLS survived during that time period ? (somebody got the pork , SLS got the rinds) Elon Musk hates toeing the line , so the near future for SpaceX is going to be very interesting. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: SLS will stagger along for about ten more years and fly a few early Artemis missions until the absurdity of it vs Starship becomes too much for pork to overcome. No one is going to put more good money into something that will be hopelessly obsolete by then. The best way to fix SLS is to shift its payloads over to Starship. That said, it’s not going away any time soon because pork. And how many years before Starship hauls a payload ? Once again , so far we have a glorified grain silo that flew to 40,000 feet and did a fancy maneuver and crashed and exploded. SpaceX is nowhere near building a complete Starship , nor a booster , nor getting one in to orbit any time soon. From the looks of things , SLS will be hauling the mail and very well may be a stopgap for years until SpaceX is ready to take over that task. With that being said , with the new political admin change , a new NASA admin change is coming along with it. It always does. Whoever that is will have to answer directly to Biden or Harris , which ever one of the 2 takes up that duty. NASA programs will survive to a degree , but contractors are going to face a massive shakedown and Musk will be at the top of the list. He's going to have to toe the line and take what he's told , otherwise he and his company will face dire consequences. Remember when Obama took over ? Wonder how SLS survived during that time period ? (somebody got the pork , SLS got the rinds) Elon Musk hates toeing the line , so the near future for SpaceX is going to be very interesting. The reality is that the federal government needs Elon Musk a LOT more than Elon Musk needs the federal government. When Starlink is up and running (which it will be whether starship is putting satellites into orbit or not), Musk will be printing so much money that he literally will be able to got to the moon and Mars without NASA and FedGov. Biden will not be willing to pay the price of the bad PR/optics of trying to freeze SpaceX out, when they are literally the only people that can deliver American astronauts to the ISS, and they are the cheaper option to launch payloads for various US agencies (like NRO, Air Force, etc). In the good old days of government run space programs, sure they could just give contracts to whoever their favorite companies were (and who paid them the most political donations), or which senators they had to please by sending money to their districts - but in today’s Information Age society, where everyone KNOWS what SpaceX can do - deliberately snubbing an American company to give business to the Russians, or deliberately paying MORE to launch government payloads with ULA or others, is the kind of bad PR that I don’t think a Biden administration wants. But, my point is, even if they did, SpaceX and Musk would be fine. The old rules of the “space industry” are dead, and if Biden tries to strongarm Musk (whether via regulatory agencies, or withholding contracts, or whatever), i think it’s going to blow up in their face. Either way, it will be interesting to see. Heck, for all I know, Biden is going to cancel SLS, and give more business to Musk.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 3:33:33 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Starship will likely be hauling Starlink no later than next year. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: And how many years before Starship hauls a payload ? Once again , so far we have a glorified grain silo that flew to 40,000 feet and did a fancy maneuver and crashed and exploded. SpaceX is nowhere near building a complete Starship , nor a booster , nor getting one in to orbit any time soon. From the looks of things , SLS will be hauling the mail and very well may be a stopgap for years until SpaceX is ready to take over that task. With that being said , with the new political admin change , a new NASA admin change is coming along with it. It always does. Whoever that is will have to answer directly to Biden or Harris , which ever one of the 2 takes up that duty. NASA programs will survive to a degree , but contractors are going to face a massive shakedown and Musk will be at the top of the list. He's going to have to toe the line and take what he's told , otherwise he and his company will face dire consequences. Remember when Obama took over ? Wonder how SLS survived during that time period ? (somebody got the pork , SLS got the rinds) Elon Musk hates toeing the line , so the near future for SpaceX is going to be very interesting. Starship will likely be hauling Starlink no later than next year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 5:09:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the piece people really seem to be missing, not just with Starship, but the SpaceX/F9/Starlink vertical integration in general. The ROI of using your already paid for boosters to launch your own satellites is, well, A LOT. No one else can touch that. There is absolutely no doubt that SpaceX has cornered that market and is doing a fine job of it. I do enjoy the launches , taking pics and overall sniffing around to see what's coming up next. Musk has also been the recipient of ~$4.9 billion of .gov funding and with what's coming in the way of .gov he is going to have his feet held to the fire. That administration would not care if Musk is Jesus Christ Himself as they have already proven with people who contribute immensely and have kicked them to the curb. If you don't fit their narrative , you are OUT. The incoming power trip is going to be like nothing seen before , and capitalists are going to bear the brunt of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 5:14:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the piece people really seem to be missing, not just with Starship, but the SpaceX/F9/Starlink vertical integration in general. The ROI of using your already paid for boosters to launch your own satellites is, well, A LOT. No one else can touch that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: And how many years before Starship hauls a payload ? Once again , so far we have a glorified grain silo that flew to 40,000 feet and did a fancy maneuver and crashed and exploded. SpaceX is nowhere near building a complete Starship , nor a booster , nor getting one in to orbit any time soon. From the looks of things , SLS will be hauling the mail and very well may be a stopgap for years until SpaceX is ready to take over that task. With that being said , with the new political admin change , a new NASA admin change is coming along with it. It always does. Whoever that is will have to answer directly to Biden or Harris , which ever one of the 2 takes up that duty. NASA programs will survive to a degree , but contractors are going to face a massive shakedown and Musk will be at the top of the list. He's going to have to toe the line and take what he's told , otherwise he and his company will face dire consequences. Remember when Obama took over ? Wonder how SLS survived during that time period ? (somebody got the pork , SLS got the rinds) Elon Musk hates toeing the line , so the near future for SpaceX is going to be very interesting. Starship will likely be hauling Starlink no later than next year. NASA will try. NASA (or any federal agency for that matter) doesn't have to try and save money however. They can always lobby for more money. The moment someone in a government bureaucracy tries to save a dime, someone else somewhere in the program will spend it. NASA is an obsolete agency building obsolete rockets. Commercial lift is the obvious way forward. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 11:00:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Scott Manley was...
 First Full Test Of SLS Booster Fails as Engines Trigger Emergency Shutdown. Not impressed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2021 11:05:55 PM EDT
[#8]
SLS is just a wealth-transfer program from the American taxpayers pockets to Boeing et al.
It never has to fly to meet the goal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 1:13:38 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. If you want another example of why you can't just replace engines like some redneck throwing a fox mustang 5.0l in his '73 F-150 go look at the threads where people can't grasp why we can't just throw some new bigger/different engines on the B-52. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why in the world would Musk build engines for SLS?  I'm not even sure what you are talking about. He's a capitalist ??? IOW , money. Other than that , probably 1/2 of his design team took part in the SLS program and know it well. If you want another example of why you can't just replace engines like some redneck throwing a fox mustang 5.0l in his '73 F-150 go look at the threads where people can't grasp why we can't just throw some new bigger/different engines on the B-52. I swear, you don't even need to make fun of Dagger41, he makes such a big fool of himself with each post. To actually suggest, without sarcasm, that SpaceX might get brought in to replace the entire engine system for SLS, shouts such utter ignorance of everything from technical design constraints, to scheduling, to motivation, to political ignorance. It's basically the equivalent of just claiming ULA should hire Scotty to install a warp drive instead. But, my point is, even if they did, SpaceX and Musk would be fine. The old rules of the “space industry” are dead, and if Biden tries to strongarm Musk (whether via regulatory agencies, or withholding contracts, or whatever), i think it’s going to blow up in their face. Musk has also been the recipient of ~$4.9 billion of .gov funding and with what's coming in the way of .gov he is going to have his feet held to the fire. That administration would not care if Musk is Jesus Christ Himself as they have already proven with people who contribute immensely and have kicked them to the curb. If you don't fit their narrative , you are OUT. I could see Musk actually trying (and maybe succeeding) at making a break from the US and going overseas to continue, if interference from DC became strong enough. DC would try to throw ITAR at SpaceX, and it might work, but ultimately Musk isn't aiming for money, he's a crusader on a holy mission to Mars...whether you like him or not, that's the best descriptor for his actions and publicly stated intentions. It has nothing to do with being American, or patriotism, or anything else...only the cold hard goal of establishing a Martian colony. The rest is basically window dressing. As for the funding...SpaceX has been delivering launches cheaper. They've received so many dollars because they're now the cheapest and most reliable provider in the world. Boeing has received $5.1 billion to date for the Commercial Crew program, and couldn't even get to the right orbit on their maiden voyage. SpaceX has received $3.1 billion to date for their contract, has successfully launched and returned their first mission, and their second mission is ongoing. Their third manned mission is scheduled to launch before Boeing makes their second attempt at an unmanned test. And all for $2 billion less than has been wasted on Boeing thus far. So tell me, which company should be most worried about cost-cutting measures from the Biden administration? The company that has been reliably delivering cargo and crew to space, far cheaper than anyone else? Or the company that continues to bilk the government for billions of dollars while failing to deliver a successful product? Your avatar is an apt representation of Boeing and the rest of Old Space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 1:24:28 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SLS will probably end up purchasing engines from SpaceX (which were not available when the design was put to paper) once SpaceX get's the reliability issues with them sorted out. Someone needs to put a pistol behind SLS's ear and put it out of it's misery. It's years late, many times over budget, and so damned expensive to launch that the country can't afford it. It's the product of an out of date development methodology that really only worked when you were working on a highly focused project, with unlimited resources, on a short timescale, and in competition with a major political adversary. If NASA had rational management that didn't feel a political need to justify the enormous sunk cost in this project it would be canceled yesterday. In a country where the taxpayers paid any attention they'd all be parked outside of NASA headquarters with torches, pitchforks, tar, and feathers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 1:38:49 AM EDT
[#11]
It occurs to me that there's an extremely apt passage from Dune that fits the Boeing/ULA situation all too well.
“Stop playing the fool,” Paul barked. “The Guild is like a village beside a river. They need the water, but can only dip out what they require. They cannot dam the river and control it, because that focuses attention on what they take, it brings down eventual destruction. The spice flow, that’s their river, and I have built a dam. But my dam is such that you cannot destroy it without destroying the river.” Old Space is the Guild. They dip from the waters of government largesse, but lack the vision to dam the river and build a power unto themselves. Boeing, ULA, Lockmart..they could have done it years ago. But it would have meant burning their own money, risking the careers of numerous executives, and running their business off of a vision of future growth and evolution, rather than a safe course of revenue extraction from bribing Congresscritters to give them their annual dole. Audentes Fortuna iuvat may as well be the motto of SpaceX..and will someday be written on the tombstone of Old Space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 1:49:26 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone needs to put a pistol behind SLS's ear and put it out of it's misery. It's years late, many times over budget, and so damned expensive to launch that the country can't afford it. It's the product of an out of date development methodology that really only worked when you were working on a highly focused project, with unlimited resources, on a short timescale, and in competition with a major political adversary. If NASA had rational management that didn't feel a political need to justify the enormous sunk cost in this project it would be canceled yesterday. In a country where the taxpayers paid any attention they'd all be parked outside of NASA headquarters with torches, pitchforks, tar, and feathers. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: SLS will probably end up purchasing engines from SpaceX (which were not available when the design was put to paper) once SpaceX get's the reliability issues with them sorted out. Someone needs to put a pistol behind SLS's ear and put it out of it's misery. It's years late, many times over budget, and so damned expensive to launch that the country can't afford it. It's the product of an out of date development methodology that really only worked when you were working on a highly focused project, with unlimited resources, on a short timescale, and in competition with a major political adversary. If NASA had rational management that didn't feel a political need to justify the enormous sunk cost in this project it would be canceled yesterday. In a country where the taxpayers paid any attention they'd all be parked outside of NASA headquarters with torches, pitchforks, tar, and feathers. You mistake the buyer with the user. NASA didn't get to choose SLS. Congress chose the SLS...because corruption is so deep in DC it isn't even hidden anymore. It's all just a means of printing money and handing it to the largest corporate sponsors. Good luck finding someone higher up in NASA foolish enough to point out that the Emperor has no clothing, though...the brass there know that they have to kowtow to Congress because if they don't, NASA gets no funding at all. Of course, all the pork wouldn't be completely idiotic..if they had the balls to actually *do* something with the cubic currency they're handed every year..and throw away every year on endless bureaucracy without a damn thing to show for it. I would direct the audience's attention over to Constellation...$6.3 billion dollars spent and it managed to deliver a single unmanned demonstrator launching a dead weight that couldn't even make orbit. SLS promises to waste even MORE money to deliver an extremely tardy and useless demo mission before being axed! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 2:08:11 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You mistake the buyer with the user. NASA didn't get to choose SLS. Congress chose the SLS...because corruption is so deep in DC it isn't even hidden anymore. It's all just a means of printing money and handing it to the largest corporate sponsors. Good luck finding someone higher up in NASA foolish enough to point out that the Emperor has no clothing, though...the brass there know that they have to kowtow to Congress because if they don't, NASA gets no funding at all. Of course, all the pork wouldn't be completely idiotic..if they had the balls to actually *do* something with the cubic currency they're handed every year..and throw away every year on endless bureaucracy without a damn thing to show for it. I would direct the audience's attention over to Constellation...$6.3 billion dollars spent and it managed to deliver a single unmanned demonstrator launching a dead weight that couldn't even make orbit. SLS promises to waste even MORE money to deliver an extremely tardy and useless demo mission before being axed! Don't image that NASA hasn't been complicit in this. Everyone's been lying about the development schedule, development costs, and flight cost from the get go. NASA included. They actually have a long history of this sort of lying going right back to the Space Shuttle. Now maybe you can argue that NASA has been a party to the lying just to keep Congress happy. Maybe. Or hell, maybe at this point they were just lying out of habit. But when NASA puts a schedule and cost projections out there of a major project, everyone in the room knows they're lying, even the people that are ostensibly being lied to. When you get right down to it, NASA doesn't much give a damn about exploring space or pushing any boundaries. It's all about keeping bureaucrats and contractors in high cotton. Has been for a long time now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 12:58:29 PM EDT
[#14]
I cannot figure out if it was arrogance/hubris that the webcast and hosts apparently had NO preparation for the possibility of any kind of failure or unexpected events, and just hilariously plowed onwards with the script, talking about how the next step was to ship the core to KSC, where it would be stacked and prepared for launch ... or if it was just run-of-the mill incompetence, because NASA is not as experienced with web-casts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 2:54:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I cannot figure out if it was arrogance/hubris that the webcast and hosts apparently had NO preparation for the possibility of any kind of failure or unexpected events, and just hilariously plowed onwards with the script, talking about how the next step was to ship the core to KSC, where it would be stacked and prepared for launch ... or if it was just run-of-the mill incompetence, because NASA is not as experienced with web-casts. NASA TV has been around since the shuttle program started... and SpaceX has been running circles around em for over a decade launch webcast-wise. There's no excuse to not have a failure script figured out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 3:58:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: NASA TV has been around since the shuttle program started... and SpaceX has been running circles around em for over a decade launch webcast-wise. There's no excuse to not have a failure script figured out. Yeah, it seems pretty basic to have at least three scripts already prepared for the post test coverage. Scenario 1: Everything went well, and we are excited to ship the core to KSC and get ready for next steps. Scenario 2: The test didn't quite go as planned, but there was no serious event event or obvious major failure. We will update you with next steps after the data have been reviewed. Scenario 3: Holy shit, did you see the size of that explosion?  It's pretty bizarre that nobody seemed prepared for anything other than a successful test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 4:00:31 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, it seems pretty basic to have at least three scripts already prepared for the post test coverage. Scenario 1: Everything went well, and we are excited to ship the core to KSC and get ready for next steps. Scenario 2: The test didn't quite go as planned, but there was no serious event event or obvious major failure. We will update you with next steps after the data have been reviewed. Scenario 3: Holy shit, did you see the size of that explosion? It's pretty bizarre that nobody seemed prepared for anything other than a successful test. Shit, Elon managed to tweet #1 and #3 at the same time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 4:00:37 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryThanks for posting that, I enjoy his videos. The assembly animation at six minutes was very nice, as well as the animated flight at the end, at least NASA is good at that. Their 'Glory Days' are over, I.M.H.O. I don't see this program coming to fruition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 4:03:18 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for posting that, I enjoy his videos. The assembly animation at six minutes was very nice, as well as the animated flight at the end, at least NASA is good at that. Their 'Glory Days' are over, I.M.H.O. I don't see this program coming to fruition. Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for posting that, I enjoy his videos. The assembly animation at six minutes was very nice, as well as the animated flight at the end, at least NASA is good at that. Their 'Glory Days' are over, I.M.H.O. I don't see this program coming to fruition. I used to think SLS would never fly. Now I am thinking that it will have one or two flights - just to "prove" some kind of point - and then will quietly be retired/cancelled, and NASA will either go full-bore with commercial contracts, or will just stop talking about going to the moon and mars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 7:55:07 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I used to think SLS would never fly. Now I am thinking that it will have one or two flights - just to "prove" some kind of point - and then will quietly be retired/cancelled, and NASA will either go full-bore with commercial contracts, or will just stop talking about going to the moon and mars. They better hope it only flies once or twice. NASA projects that an SLS launch will cost "over 2 billion dollars". It will of course be a good bit more because NASA is a habitual liar. The NASA budge is about $22B. So every time that thing launches, something around 10% of NASA's budget evaporates. And that's only the launch cost. The mission itself will cost even more. The cost of this system is absolutely ridiculous. Particularly in light of what SpaceX has been doing with respect to cost reduction and re-usability. To fly it on a routine basis would require a significant increase in NASA's budget or it will crowd out all unmanned science projects for the foreseeable futures. It's a typical big government program. Nobody in the government has any respect for the money they take from you. They spend it with utter disregard. They've never given a damn about what anything costs and never will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:43:25 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They better hope it only flies once or twice. NASA projects that an SLS launch will cost "over 2 billion dollars". It will of course be a good bit more because NASA is a habitual liar. The NASA budge is about $22B. So every time that thing launches, something around 10% of NASA's budget evaporates. And that's only the launch cost. The mission itself will cost even more. The cost of this system is absolutely ridiculous. Particularly in light of what SpaceX has been doing with respect to cost reduction and re-usability. To fly it on a routine basis would require a significant increase in NASA's budget or it will crowd out all unmanned science projects for the foreseeable futures. It's a typical big government program. Nobody in the government has any respect for the money they take from you. They spend it with utter disregard. They've never given a damn about what anything costs and never will. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I used to think SLS would never fly. Now I am thinking that it will have one or two flights - just to "prove" some kind of point - and then will quietly be retired/cancelled, and NASA will either go full-bore with commercial contracts, or will just stop talking about going to the moon and mars. They better hope it only flies once or twice. NASA projects that an SLS launch will cost "over 2 billion dollars". It will of course be a good bit more because NASA is a habitual liar. The NASA budge is about $22B. So every time that thing launches, something around 10% of NASA's budget evaporates. And that's only the launch cost. The mission itself will cost even more. The cost of this system is absolutely ridiculous. Particularly in light of what SpaceX has been doing with respect to cost reduction and re-usability. To fly it on a routine basis would require a significant increase in NASA's budget or it will crowd out all unmanned science projects for the foreseeable futures. It's a typical big government program. Nobody in the government has any respect for the money they take from you. They spend it with utter disregard. They've never given a damn about what anything costs and never will. To me, the illustration that really demonstrates how out-dated and inappropriate SLS is, is that EACH engine costs about $150 million dollars, and they throw away four of them with each launch (in addition to anywhere between one and four RL-10 engines in the upper stage). So each SLS launch will literally discard over half a billion dollars in engines alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:45:37 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To me, the illustration that really demonstrates how out-dated and inappropriate SLS is, is that EACH engine costs about $150 million dollars, and they throw away four of them with each launch (in addition to anywhere between one and four RL-10 engines in the upper stage). So each SLS launch will literally discard over half a billion dollars in engines alone. This may sound incredibly naive, but I think even washington based bean counters can see the folly in this when compared to what spacex and other upstarts are doing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:49:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To me, the illustration that really demonstrates how out-dated and inappropriate SLS is, is that EACH engine costs about $150 million dollars, and they throw away four of them with each launch (in addition to anywhere between one and four RL-10 engines in the upper stage). So each SLS launch will literally discard over half a billion dollars in engines alone. Each RS-25 they drop in the drink would buy them an expendable Falcon Heavy launch 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:51:49 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To me, the illustration that really demonstrates how out-dated and inappropriate SLS is, is that EACH engine costs about $150 million dollars, and they throw away four of them with each launch (in addition to anywhere between one and four RL-10 engines in the upper stage). So each SLS launch will literally discard over half a billion dollars in engines alone. SpaceX is going to end up being able to do a Starship/Super Heavy launch for less that the cost of one of those engines NASA would dump in the ocean. Maybe a lot less. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:55:58 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SpaceX is going to end up being able to do a Starship/Super Heavy launch for less that the cost of one of those engines NASA would dump in the ocean. Maybe a lot less. Going to say this just one more time. Those engines should be in museums. Are we going to have to get Harrison Ford to steal them from NASA?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2021 8:56:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This may sound incredibly naive, but I think even washington based bean counters can see the folly in this when compared to what spacex and other upstarts are doing. That would assume that the purpose of NASA is to explore space. That is not the purpose and hasn't been for a long time. NASA is a white collar jobs program and a means to funnel money into various government contractors. NASA is actually doing what it is intended to do. Not originally of course, but as the old saying goes "No matter what the original goal is of any government bureaucracy, in the long run the goal becomes the perpetuation of the bureaucracy". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:19:46 PM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:29:19 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SpaceX is going to end up being able to do a Starship/Super Heavy launch for less that the cost of one of those engines NASA would dump in the ocean. Maybe a lot less. the market price of a flacon heavy launch is the same as a single SLS engine... his target is 2 million a launch... if he is off by a factor of 100... it will be barely more then a SLS engine. A complete starship superheavy pair will probably have a build cost of less then a SLS engine... even if it doesnt land... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:30:01 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What the fuck? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:48:09 PM EDT
[#30]
https://www.space.com/nasa-sls-megarocket-engine-test-shutdown-cause
after analyzing data from the test, NASA has determined that the problem was not with the engines or other hardware, which remain "in excellent condition," agency officials wrote in an update today (Jan. 19). Rather, the shutdown "was triggered by test parameters that were intentionally conservative to ensure the safety of the core stage during the test." uhhh dont you usually test things to exceed max actual flight parameters? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:55:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Laughs in B1051's eight launch 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 8:56:57 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.space.com/nasa-sls-megarocket-engine-test-shutdown-cause after analyzing data from the test, NASA has determined that the problem was not with the engines or other hardware, which remain "in excellent condition," agency officials wrote in an update today (Jan. 19). Rather, the shutdown "was triggered by test parameters that were intentionally conservative to ensure the safety of the core stage during the test." uhhh dont you usually test things to exceed max actual flight parameters? I’d hope they would at least be mission specs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 9:14:08 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Laughs in B1051's eight launch Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted:
Laughs in B1051's eight launch with static fires too |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 9:49:26 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: with static fires too Yep, will have a minimum of 17 tankings on it counting Mcgregor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 10:03:09 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.space.com/nasa-sls-megarocket-engine-test-shutdown-cause after analyzing data from the test, NASA has determined that the problem was not with the engines or other hardware, which remain "in excellent condition," agency officials wrote in an update today (Jan. 19). Rather, the shutdown "was triggered by test parameters that were intentionally conservative to ensure the safety of the core stage during the test." uhhh dont you usually test things to exceed max actual flight parameters? yes. so unless they exceeded the normal level of safety, then they're blaming their faults on the testing requirements. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 10:10:48 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Had these limitations on shuttle ET too. They've written waivers for that before. I don't think they are at 3 cycles yet but I'm not sure what they are considering a cycle either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 10:15:44 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.space.com/nasa-sls-megarocket-engine-test-shutdown-cause after analyzing data from the test, NASA has determined that the problem was not with the engines or other hardware, which remain "in excellent condition," agency officials wrote in an update today (Jan. 19). Rather, the shutdown "was triggered by test parameters that were intentionally conservative to ensure the safety of the core stage during the test." uhhh dont you usually test things to exceed max actual flight parameters? So weird, what you quoted from the article. That's pretty much what I posted 2 days ago on page 3 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 10:19:21 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So weird, what you quoted from the article. That's pretty much what I posted 2 days ago on page 3 Think they would waive unstacking the SRBs if the core stage gets held up at Stennis? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2021 10:36:24 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Think they would waive unstacking the SRBs if the core stage gets held up at Stennis? IM sent |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2021 12:09:46 AM EDT
[#40]
It's amazing how certain people have nothing to say now about this national embarassment.
SN9's time to shine... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 11:30:53 PM EDT
[#41]
None of the engines broke. They were simply too conservative with shutdown trigger parameters. Met goals for a portion of the checklist too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 12:10:57 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Going to say this just one more time. Those engines should be in museums. Are we going to have to get Harrison Ford to steal them from NASA? Didn’t they essentially get them from museums? Are they operating any new RS-25s, or all of them legacy engines so far? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 12:16:15 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn’t they essentially get them from museums? Are they operating any new RS-25s, or all of them legacy engines so far? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Going to say this just one more time. Those engines should be in museums. Are we going to have to get Harrison Ford to steal them from NASA? Didn’t they essentially get them from museums? Are they operating any new RS-25s, or all of them legacy engines so far? They are currently legacy engines. I think the first four planned launches of SLS are supposed to be with the old used shuttle engines. Then, they will run out of engines - because they throw four of them into the ocean with each launch. I think an order has been placed for a bunch of new ones - at around $125 million per engine. Compare that to a Space X Raptor that costs somewhere around 2 million, and will soon cost around 1 million.  Most likely, SLS will not fly enough times to actually USE any of the new production RS-25 engines, so once the SLS debacle ends, we will end up with a NEW batch of super-expensive worthless engines sitting in a warehouse. Good job, NASA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 12:22:51 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: None of the engines broke. They were simply too conservative with shutdown trigger parameters. Met goals for a portion of the checklist too. Great, outstanding, be happy then! No need for another test...right? There's going to be another green run. Period. And it won't be for another month or two, and will push the actual NET all the way into Q1 2022, if not Q2. All at the cost of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. This is like taking your car to the local oil change shop, waiting three weeks, and finding out that they only removed one quart and added one quart. "But don't worry, they put the cap back on after!" And it only cost $3500 plus tax for the "servicing". The American public should be exactly as pissed about SLS and ULA as they would be if that were their car's oil change they were getting fucked over on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 9:13:03 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Great, outstanding, be happy then! No need for another test...right? There's going to be another green run. Period. And it won't be for another month or two, and will push the actual NET all the way into Q1 2022, if not Q2. All at the cost of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. This is like taking your car to the local oil change shop, waiting three weeks, and finding out that they only removed one quart and added one quart. "But don't worry, they put the cap back on after!" And it only cost $3500 plus tax for the "servicing". The American public should be exactly as pissed about SLS and ULA as they would be if that were their car's oil change they were getting fucked over on. Yes, Wes, building a super heavy lifter (over 100 tons to LEO) with more take off thrust than the Saturn V first stage is exactly like a car getting a tune up  . The test wouldve gone fine and you still would have bitched.ULA is launching Vulcan Centaur later this year and will likely be upgrading the lifter for smart reuse in the future. It will also likely be getting a manned rating per Tory Bruno. Repeat after me: Redundant dissimilar architecture. Fairly soon we will have Vulcan Centaur, New Glenn, SLS, Starship/Superheavy, Atlas V, and Falcon Heavy. With ISS taxis of Starliner (I know..lol), Dragon 2, and Dreamchaser. Then Dragon XL to supply Gateway, companies already building modules for it among other things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 9:54:01 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, Wes, building a super heavy lifter (over 100 tons to LEO) with more take off thrust than the Saturn V first stage is exactly like a car getting a tune up . The test wouldve gone fine and you still would have bitched.ULA is launching Vulcan Centaur later this year and will likely be upgrading the lifter for smart reuse in the future. It will also likely be getting a manned rating per Tory Bruno. Repeat after me: Redundant dissimilar architecture. Fairly soon we will have Vulcan Centaur, New Glenn, SLS, Starship/Superheavy, Atlas V, and Falcon Heavy. With ISS taxis of Starliner (I know..lol), Dragon 2, and Dreamchaser. Then Dragon XL to supply Gateway, companies already building modules for it among other things. Have you ever read Seveneves by Stephenson? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2021 10:16:21 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Have you ever read Seveneves by Stephenson? Great book, but just haven’t finished after the time jump. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2021 6:16:57 PM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2021 8:30:10 PM EDT
[#49]
Well they got their 8 minute run in, with one engine
 NASA SLS megarocket engine fired up for over 8 minutes in test |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
