News NASA's Future: The News and Updates Thread

[orb]

TransportationNation.org: NASA’s Historic Giant Crawler Gets a Tune Up for Modern Times (PICS)

Universe Today: NASA’s Colossal Crawler Gets Souped-Up for SLS:

{...}

According to an article posted Sept. 5 on TransportationNation.org, crawler 2 (CT-2) is getting a 6-million-pound upgrade, bringing its carrying capacity from 12 million pounds to 18 million. This will allow the vehicle to bear the weight of a new generation of heavy-lift rockets, including NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS).

{...}

 

[Kyle]

Obama's next stop on Florida tour: Brevard County

It's the first visit by the president to the Space Coast this election year.
The president is trying to capitalize on his space policy.
President Obama’s campaign said Gov. Mitt Romney has no plan for NASA.
Space Coast economic leaders have been concerned that Mitt Romney has yet to release a detailed space policy program.

Speech will be at 11am.

 

[orb]

NASASpaceflght: Vehicle Assembly Building High Bay 3 platform removal begins for SLS

 

[RGClark]

Former NASA administrator Mike Griffin gave a speech defending the Constellation program and in opposition to the "commercial space" program NASA is currently promoting:

Why Do We Want to Have a Space Program?
By Jim Hillhouse
AmericaSpace Note: The following remarks were delivered by former NASA Administrator Dr. Mike Griffin on 6 September 2012 for the inaugural lecture of Georgia Tech’s Gebhardt Lecture. It is used with permission by Dr. Griffin.
Michael D. Griffin
Chairman & CEO
Schafer Corporation
6 September 2012
http://www.americaspace.org/?p=25146


Bob Clark

 

[N_Molson]

SLS monthly highlights : August 2012

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: NASA's Huge New Rocket May Cost $500 Million Per Launch

 

[orb]

Space News: Sen. Hutchison Suggests Splitting Up NASA

 

[orb]

Aviation Week: Supply Chain Seen Slowing NASA Capsule, Rocket Development

NASA: Mobile Launcher Platforms Prepped for New Generation

 

[RGClark]

NASA plans Moon flights for the SLS.

Lori Garver in a speech at the recent AIAA meeting said the SLS will indeed be used to make manned flights to the Moon:

NASA's Garver lists moon as goal for astronauts against Obama space policy.
LORI GARVERSEPTEMBER 11, 2012BY: MARK WHITTINGTON

“The truth is, we have an ambitious series of deep space destinations we plan to explore, and are hard at work developing the hardware - and the technologies - to get us there.
“In fact, we just recently delivered a comprehensive report to Congress outlining our destinations which makes clear that SLS will go way beyond low Earth orbit to explore the expansive space around the Earth-moon system, near-Earth asteroids, the moon, and ultimately, Mars. Let me say that again: We're going back to the moon, attempting a first-ever mission to send humans to an asteroid and actively developing a plan to take Americans to Mars.“
http://www.examiner.com/article/nas...oal-for-astronauts-against-obama-space-policy

I've argued before that low cost manned lunar missions can be mounted using a single launch of the 53 mT payload capacity Falcon Heavy launcher:

SpaceX Dragon spacecraft for low cost trips to the Moon.
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/05/spacex-dragon-spacecraft-for-low-cost.html

However, for supporters of the SLS, I'll show in a follow up post a single launch of the interim 70 mT version of the SLS could carry the Orion capsule to a lunar landing and back using Centaur-style Earth departure and landing stages.
This is important because it means rather than the interim 70 mT SLS just making test flights, it can actually be used for manned flights to the Moon.
Then rather that waiting until 2030 when the full 130 mT version of the SLS will launch, it can be launched sometime after 2017 when the interim 70 mT version becomes available:

Space Launch System.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System#Program_costs


Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

Splitting NASA? Great way to kill the space programm silently...

 

[RGClark]

...
However, for supporters of the SLS, I'll show in a follow up post a single launch of the interim 70 mT version of the SLS could carry the Orion capsule to a lunar landing and back using Centaur-style Earth departure and landing stages.
This is important because it means rather than the interim 70 mT SLS just making test flights, it can actually be used for manned flights to the Moon.
Then rather that waiting until 2030 when the full 130 mT version of the SLS will launch, it can be launched sometime after 2017 when the interim 70 mT version becomes available:

Space Launch System.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System#Program_costs

Just saw this posted by Orb:

NASA Weighs Early Deep-Space Tests With Orion.
By Frank Morring, Jr.
September 13, 2012

Planners in NASA’s human exploration and operations (HEO) missions directorate are studying whether it would be possible and worthwhile to expand the first three planned tests of the Orion multipurpose crew vehicle, including the first flight with a crew, to evaluate the capsule’s performance beyond low Earth orbit.
Architecture studies of potential deep-space missions using Orion also are being used to consider ways to use the big capsule to collect data on how it would perform beyond low Earth orbit, in lunar flyaround like the Apollo 8 mission, and perhaps early flights to the Earth-Moon lagrangian points under discussion as destinations where human explorers could prepare for missions to asteroids and eventually Mars and its moons, according to HEO Associate Administrator William Gerstenmaier.
http://m.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_09_13_2012_p05-01-494215.xml&p=1

Even more than lunar flyby missions though, by carrying the 8.5 mT Orion capsule alone, not the service module, the interim 70 mT capacity SLS can do lunar landing missions.

Interestingly, then since the Falcon Heavy can also do such single launch Moon missions, the next Moon race may be between the commercial space providers and NASA.


Bob Clark

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: Sequestration Would Slice NASA’s Budget by $1.4 Billion:

The White House has submitted a report to Congress on $100 billion in budget cuts under the sequestration law., NASA would experience a $1.4 billion reduction from its current $17.7 billion budget to $16.3 billion.

{...}

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: NASA Faces Deep Budget Cuts Under Sequestration, Romney:

NASA’s budget is facing deep cuts in January from two sources: sequestration and Mitt Romney.

If President Obama and Congress cannot work out a deal, sequestration will cut NASA’s budget by 8 percent or $1.458 billion in early January, according to a new report issued by the White House.

Meanwhile, Romney has promised if elected to send a bill to Congress on his first day in office, Jan. 20, that would slash non-security discretionary spending across the board. If the measure approved, it would result in a reduction of nearly $900 million from the space agency’s budget.

It is not clear if Romney would go ahead with the 5 percent reduction on top of sequestration cuts. Romney also has promised to cap non-discretionary spending below 2008 budget levels.

The table below shows potential cuts using NASA’s FY 2012 budget, which expires on September 30. It looks unlikely that Congress will pass an FY 2013 budget before that date. The government will run on a continuing resolution, which will keep spending at FY 2012 levels.

POTENTIAL NASA BUDGET REDUCTIONS, JANUARY 2012​

Reduction​

|

NASA FY 2012 Budget

---

(Millions)​

|

Percentage Cut​

|

Amount Cut

---

(Millions)​

|

Reduced Budget

---

(Millions)​

Sequestration|

$17 770.0​

|

8.2​

|

$1 458.0​

|

$16 312.0​

Mitt Romney Budget Cut|

$17 770.0​

|

5.0​

|

$888.5​

|

$16 881.5​

Under either scenario, NASA’s spending would be well below the $17.318 billion the space agency spent in 2008.

{...}

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: House Members Propose Radical NASA Overhaul:

WASHINGTON, DC (Press Release) – Today, Reps. John Culberson (TX-07), Frank Wolf (VA-10), Bill Posey (FL-15), Pete Olson (TX-22), James Sensenbrenner (WI-05) and Lamar Smith (TX-21), introduced the Space Leadership Preservation Act, legislation that will change business as usual at NASA and result in a more stable and accountable space program. The bill would create a 10-year term for the NASA Administrator to provide crucial stability of the leadership structure at NASA so that decisions are made based on science and are removed from the politics of changing administrations.

{...}

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: Congress’ Misleading Human Spaceflight Development Chart

Florida Today: Posey aims to insulate NASA from DC politics

 

[orb]

Space News: Lawmakers Propose Restructuring NASA Management

 

[orb]

Orlando Sentinel: Sentinel Exclusive: NASA wants to send astronauts beyond the moon:

{...}

Documents obtained by the Orlando Sentinel show that NASA wants to build a small outpost — likely with parts left over from the $100 billion International Space Station — at what's known as the Earth-Moon Lagrange Point 2, a spot about 38,000 miles from the moon and 277,000 miles from Earth.

At that location, the combined gravities of the Earth and moon reach equilibrium, making it possible to "stick" an outpost there with minimal power required to keep it in place.

To get there, NASA would use the massive rocket and space capsule that it is developing as a successor to the retired space shuttle. A first flight of that rocket is planned for 2017, and construction of the outpost would begin two years later, according to NASA planning documents.

Potential missions include the study of nearby asteroids or dispatching robotic trips to the moon that would gather moon rocks and bring them back to astronauts at the outpost. The outpost also would lay the groundwork for more-ambitious trips to Mars' moons and even Mars itself, about 140 million miles away on average.

Placing a "spacecraft at the Earth-Moon Lagrange point beyond the moon as a test area for human access to deep space is the best near-term option to develop required flight experience and mitigate risk," concluded the NASA report.

{...}

 

[Urwumpe]

Interesting...but why not L1? At L2, you have no direct communications to Earth...

 

[SiberianTiger]

Interesting...but why not L1? At L2, you have no direct communications to Earth...

Maybe it's cheaper to reach in Delta-V terms than L1?

 

[N_Molson]

I remember I read in NASA projects documents that L2 is more interesting because the Moon would shield the outpost from the massive radio emissions we merrily broadcast everyday. So L2 is more interesting for all kinds of scientific work that relies in radiowaves (notably, in astronomy).