NASA Space Launch System (SLS)

[publiusr]

This is why I mentioned SLS extant cores being used for (more strongly built) ice giant probes...a Pluto orbiter.. interstellar precursor.

Super-probes are as infrequent as SLS cores--thus a perfect match. Titan III and IV launches were expensive and rare--but they gave us Voyagers and Cassini. Let SLS go out with dignity.

You know what is a bigger waste than a rocket that is thrown away after a single flight?

Throwing an expendable away before it flies.

Even Paul Allen's sister let the workers see their craft aloft...even though Roc's survival looked bleak at the time...workers need meaning to their lives as much as any paycheck...

Instead of killing SLS to save Artemis just to repeat Apollo 8--I want the opposite... maybe an NTR for the very last SLS being the Interstellar probe.

Let's support outer planet probes--and leave manned spaceflight to Elon and China.

 

[NMaude]

Phillip Sloss has uploaded a video about the informal nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA and how it may effect the SLS and Artemis programmes:

NASA's Orion heatshield investigation concluded on December 5th, and the space agency announced in a press conference that they accepted the recommendation to fly the Artemis II Orion heatshield as-is. The launch was pushed back to April 2026 for other reasons and Artemis III was delayed until mid-2027; however, President Trump nominated Jared Isaacman to be the next NASA Administrator, which continues the narrative that an Artemis shake-up could be coming in January.

There were a lot of details in the press conference about the status of Artemis II preparations and planning for the next milestones stacking the SLS vehicle for that, but not so much on Artemis III, which depends on not just Orion and SLS, but also Starship HLS and Axiom Space lunar surface spacesuits. The commercial providers are developing private products with proprietary technology, so NASA leadership can't speak for them. The outlook for the public and private programs participating in Artemis III will remain a storyline for future videos.

That is, if the plans for Artemis II and III are continued next year. There are a few takeaways in this video from the early nomination, and the obvious implication of orphaning Orion if SLS is cancelled by Isaacman and Elon Musk next year. Orion is still a unique, crew-rated spacecraft, so sticking it on top of another launch vehicle won't be as easy or as inexpensive as it is to do virtually or hypothetically. In this video, I'll take a first look at the cost and schedule questions and implications of a theoretical Orion launch vehicle move.

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

00:00 Intro
00:34 Overview of findings from the completed Orion base heatshield investigation
03:03 Initial thoughts, takeaways from the December 5 Artemis press conference
13:38 Jared Isaacman is the new NASA Administrator nominee
15:03 The devil is in the details about a new launch vehicle for Orion
19:51 A post-heatshield decision look at the big picture
23:26 Thanks for watching!

 

[Byeman]

This is why I mentioned SLS extant cores being used for (more strongly built) ice giant probes...a Pluto orbiter.. interstellar precursor.

wrong. SLS is too expensive for probes.

Super-probes are as infrequent as SLS cores--thus a perfect match. Titan III and IV launches were expensive and rare--but they gave us Voyagers and Cassini. Let SLS go out with dignity.

Wrong again. Infrequent flights of launch vehicle is a perfect match for high costs and low reliability. Basically paying people to do nothing.

Titan III and IV launches were expensive and rare-

They weren't rare. Titans were still flying other missions. Titan IIIE was cheaper than Saturn IB Centaur. Titan IV was still cheaper than costs for Shuttle launched probes.

Let SLS go out with dignity.

It doesn't deserve it. Better just end it and not waste anymore money

You know what is a bigger waste than a rocket that is thrown away after a single flight?

Throwing an expendable away before it flies.

Wrong again. Sunk cost fallacy. Throwing good money at bad money. No need to continue development of new RS-25s, new SRBs and EUS.

Even Paul Allen's sister let the workers see their craft aloft...even though Roc's survival looked bleak at the time...workers need meaning to their lives as much as any paycheck...

Meh and unrelated to SLS. Anyways, The taxpayers don't owe the workers .

Instead of killing SLS to save Artemis just to repeat Apollo 8--I want the opposite... maybe an NTR for the very last SLS being the Interstellar probe.

Too risky to put NTR on SLS. just fly the next one and be done.

Let's support outer planet probes--and leave manned spaceflight to Elon and China.

No. Flying cargo and probes is best done by commercial launch vehicles like the last 30.

 

[Wyvern]

This is why I mentioned SLS extant cores being used for (more strongly built) ice giant probes...a Pluto orbiter.. interstellar precursor.

Super-probes are as infrequent as SLS cores--thus a perfect match. Titan III and IV launches were expensive and rare--but they gave us Voyagers and Cassini. Let SLS go out with dignity.

You know what is a bigger waste than a rocket that is thrown away after a single flight?

Throwing an expendable away before it flies.

Even Paul Allen's sister let the workers see their craft aloft...even though Roc's survival looked bleak at the time...workers need meaning to their lives as much as any paycheck...

Instead of killing SLS to save Artemis just to repeat Apollo 8--I want the opposite... maybe an NTR for the very last SLS being the Interstellar probe.

Let's support outer planet probes--and leave manned spaceflight to Elon and China.

I suppose it comes down to the cost of finishing and flying the current SLS rocket. If the price isn't too high then it probably won't hurt too much to just fly the thing even if the programme is cancelled. The only problem is finding a mission and payload that makes sense for SLS. It's not so much that it can't happen, more that it will take years and probably billions to finish the payload never mind the rocket.

I'd like to see SLS do some good and make use of the money and work that went into it but I really don't trust NASA, the gov or their contractors these days. There's a pretty big chance that this hypothetical mission will end up as just another millstone.

 

[publiusr]

Maybe Bezos could use MAF for New Armstrong.

 

[Byeman]

Maybe Bezos could use MAF for New Armstrong.

It is already at KSC. And anyways, he would want his people in it and not former SLS workers.

 

[publiusr]

It still would give him political capital.

 

[Byeman]

It still would give him political capital.

Doesn't need it. He has money, doesn't need to ask for it.

 

[NMaude]

New update on the status of Artemis-II and considerations for new Orion LV:

There's more to cover from last week's NASA press conference about Artemis II decisions and plans. The space agency decided to fly Orion's heatshield as-is and continue launch preparations, while also announcing that extra Orion processing work pushed the target date out to April 2026.

In this video, I'll go over how NASA plans to fly the existing heatshield on Artemis II, given the char loss/spalling issues seen with the same design on Artemis I. I'll also cover that extra processing work and what a new re-entry trajectory means for Artemis II launch windows.

In the meantime, the SLS Core Stage for Artemis II was moved into a new processing cell in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center, and I'll go over that process and what work is planned in parallel with the resumption of Solid Rocket Booster stacking in another cell in the VAB.

There's also a little more to say about the devil in the details of moving Orion to another launch vehicle, if the new administration terminates SLS.

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

00:00 Intro
00:37 Artemis II-related takeaways from last week's heatshield decision press conference
06:11 Second round of Orion vacuum testing complete, modified batteries reinstalled
07:37 The modified Orion re-entry trajectory plan for Artemis II
15:27 SLS hardware activity picks up in the Vehicle Assembly Building
18:15 EGS launch team continues countdown simulation training
18:37 The Artemis II big picture
19:45 More IRL considerations for Orion launch vehicle match-making from the last time NASA considered it.
26:16 Thanks for watching!

Edited to add: Many of the pad-tests could've been expedited if the SLS/Artemis programme planners had planned for and funded its equivalent of the Apollo programme's SA-500F Facilities Integration Vehicle.

 

[publiusr]

I am surprised this much got done with flat budgets

 

[martinbayer]

I am surprised this much got done with flat budgets

Not everything needs to get inflated.

 

[NMaude]

I am surprised this much got done with flat budgets

Having an SA-500F equivalent facility integration vehicle shouldn't have added much to the cost and no doubt such a vehicle once it has served its purpose could be refurbished to make it flightworthy.

 

[Byeman]

Having an SA-500F equivalent facility integration vehicle shouldn't have added much to the cost and no doubt such a vehicle once it has served its purpose could be refurbished to make it flightworthy.

Yes, it would. It would be like 1/4 of the VAB. And the vehicle would not be flight worthy, just like the shuttle one wasn't either.

 

[Byeman]

I am surprised this much got done with flat budgets

Was large flat budgets and many years of them

 

[NMaude]

Phillip Sloss has an end of the year report for the Artemis programme:

NASA provided a late-year Artemis update at a Kennedy Space Center media event this past week and in this video, I'll review what we saw and heard. The space agency recently made the decision to fly Artemis II with the existing base heatshield on the Orion spacecraft, while delaying the launch date until April 2026.

That decision to continue was made only a couple of weeks ago, and so NASA still has some work to do to figure out the roadmap from the end of this year until Artemis II is ready to fly. Orion is the critical path for the launch date and with plans in flux, there wasn't much news to share about that yet.

Coupled with few updates or events throughout 2024, the timing and remaining uncertainty gave the event a weird vibe. There wasn't much news and with the Artemis II Orion and SLS being actively worked on, we saw more Artemis III and IV Orion hardware than anything else. Most of the uncertainty about the future of Artemis remains heading into 2025, with the possibility that Elon Musk and the incoming Trump administration have big changes planned when they take over in a month. That's why it felt a little like the media event was more about that uncertainty about the political future.

Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.

00:00 Intro
00:55 Overview of the media event
03:33 NASA views April 2026 as a no later than date for Artemis II
04:22 Orion status from the media event
13:25 SLS and EGS integrated operations status from the media event
25:21 A short update on the Cell N foam spray facility at Michoud in New Orleans
25:47 The weird vibe(s) for this media event...why now?
28:30 Other news and notes
31:19 Thanks for watching!