News NASA's Future: The News and Updates Thread

[Mader Levap]

I think NASA is stuck on making giant hydrolox core stages because of the 30 years they had with the Shuttle. Everything must be Shuttle-derived! (to reduce development costs, I guess)

As history of previous failed grandious plans teach us, it does opposite, ironically enough.
Real reason is to maintain jobs. In other words, pork. It is one of reasons why those grandiose plans failed in first place.

 

[Urwumpe]

It is also one elemental truth that big, static, long timescale projects fail more often than small, agile, short term projects to meet their budget and time constraints.

Apollo for example met its time constraints, but failed its budget constraints epically.

That is not an argumentation against having a masterplan, a big, long term plan what you want to achieve. But such plans must be constantly revised and improved with the reality and be measured against the goals of the long-term plan.

 

[T.Neo]

As history of previous failed grandious plans teach us, it does opposite, ironically enough.

To be fair, SLS is probably the best way to execute the LV-specific requirements set forth for it. The problem is that those requirements don't make sense.

 

[Urwumpe]

To be fair, SLS is probably the best way to execute the LV-specific requirements set forth for it. The problem is that those requirements don't make sense.

Not if you use 70 million USD SSMEs for dumping them into the North Atlantic. Just to reiterate: One SLS launch is alone 350 million for the first stage engines. Even if you expect a HLV, this is a lot of money.

 

[Pipcard]

Not if you use 70 million USD SSMEs for dumping them into the North Atlantic. Just to reiterate: One SLS launch is alone 350 million for the first stage engines. Even if you expect a HLV, this is a lot of money.

Ah, using reusable engines for an expendable launch vehicle.

 

[T.Neo]

Not if you use 70 million USD SSMEs for dumping them into the North Atlantic. Just to reiterate: One SLS launch is alone 350 million for the first stage engines. Even if you expect a HLV, this is a lot of money.

That pretty much comes with the territory. From what I can gather, the general consensus is that the least challenging development path for an SDLV is to use SSMEs. The only other existing hydrolox engine in that sort of thrust range is the RS-68, but if you use those engines you'll have issues with lowered efficiency compared to the SSME, as well as survival of the ablative nozzle in regard to the base heating environment on an SDLV. A regenerative RS-68 is possible (and would have a slightly higher ISP), but this would need to be developed and the USAF probably wouldn't take kindly to the idea.

I suppose you could switch to a kerolox core, but this introduces yet other problems.

The plan is also to use an SSME designed specifically for expendability (after the stockpile pulled from the shuttles runs out). How much lower than $70 million those will cost, especially at the low forseeable production rates, is another issue entirely...

SDLV development can be a fun game, but the only way to win is not to play.

 

[asmi]

Well as far as I understand, SLS is not about having something that can (and will) actually fly, but instead is mostly about keeping certain people employed... There is next to nothing "Shuttle-derived" that would actually be beneficial to use in EELV.

 

[RGClark]

NASASpaceflight: Exploration Alternatives: From Propellant Depots to Commercial Lunar Base

I liked the part near the end that discussed manned lander flights to the Moon, including a possible commercial plan to land commercial passengers there by 2020. I discuss this further in the thread "A return to the Moon by the 50th Apollo anniversary".

Bob Clark

 

[orb]

NASA: SLS Model 'Flies' Through Langley Wind Tunnel Testing

{colsp=2}

Click on images for details​

| NASA's Space Launch System buffet model in NASA's Langley Researcher Center's Transonic Dynamics Tunnel. The SLS is America's next heavy-lift launch vehicle that will provide an entirely new capability for science and human exploration beyond Earth's orbit.

(NASA/LaRC)​

| Members of the Aeroelasticity Branch of NASA's Langley Research Center who tested the ten-foot-long buffet model of the Space Launch System in Langley's Transonic Dynamics Tunnel.

(NASA/LaRC)​

NewScientist:

• Humans head for moon's orbit – and beyond
  
  
• Europe has right stuff to take NASA back to moon

Space Politics: Is Bolden’s number up?



NASAMarshallTV:

A J-2X power pack assembly burns brightly during a hot fire test Nov. 27 at NASA's Stennis Space Center in Mississippi:

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: Congressmen Seek to Rename NASA Dryden After Neil Armstrong

collectSPACE: Lawmakers seek to honor Neil Armstrong with NASA center renaming

Aviation Week: NASA Urged To Use EVM To Predict Overruns

 

[orb]

NASASpaceflight: NASA interest in 2024 Mars Sample Return Mission using SLS and Orion:

The Mars Program Planning Group (MPPG) have added meat to the bones of a proposal that would result in the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion and a Mars spacecraft making up the key elements of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. With large support already communicated to lawmakers, the notional mission aims to utilize a secondary payload opportunity as early as SLS-5 in 2024.

{...}

 

[orb]

Space Politics: Space policy challenges and strategies to be discussed this week

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: NASA's Deep-Space Station Idea Lacks White House Approval

 

[orb]

Space Politics: Space policy issues for the next four years

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: NASA Needs Stronger Direction to Lead In Space: Report

 

[orb]

NASAtelevision:

NASA JPL:
New NASA Mars Rover to Launch in 2020

December 04, 2012

WASHINGTON -- Building on the success of Curiosity's Red Planet landing, NASA has announced plans for a robust multi-year Mars program, including a new robotic science rover set to launch in 2020. This announcement affirms the agency's commitment to a bold exploration program that meets our nation's scientific and human exploration objectives.

"The Obama administration is committed to a robust Mars exploration program," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said. "With this next mission, we're ensuring America remains the world leader in the exploration of the Red Planet, while taking another significant step toward sending humans there in the 2030s."

The planned portfolio includes the Curiosity and Opportunity rovers; two NASA spacecraft and contributions to one European spacecraft currently orbiting Mars; the 2013 launch of the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN) orbiter to study the Martian upper atmosphere; the Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) mission, which will take the first look into the deep interior of Mars; and participation in ESA's 2016 and 2018 ExoMars missions, including providing "Electra" telecommunication radios to ESA's 2016 mission and a critical element of the premier astrobiology instrument on the 2018 ExoMars rover.

The plan to design and build a new Mars robotic science rover with a launch in 2020 comes only months after the agency announced InSight, which will launch in 2016, bringing a total of seven NASA missions operating or being planned to study and explore our Earth-like neighbor.

The 2020 mission will constitute another step toward being responsive to high-priority science goals and the president's challenge of sending humans to Mars orbit in the 2030s.

The future rover development and design will be based on the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) architecture that successfully carried the Curiosity rover to the Martian surface this summer. This will ensure mission costs and risks are as low as possible, while still delivering a highly capable rover with a proven landing system. The mission will constitute a vital component of a broad portfolio of Mars exploration missions in development for the coming decade.

The mission will advance the science priorities of the National Research Council's 2011 Planetary Science Decadal Survey and responds to the findings of the Mars Program Planning Group established earlier this year to assist NASA in restructuring its Mars Exploration Program.

"The challenge to restructure the Mars Exploration Program has turned from the seven minutes of terror for the Curiosity landing to the start of seven years of innovation," said John Grunsfeld, associate administrator for NASA's Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "This mission concept fits within the current and projected Mars exploration budget, builds on the exciting discoveries of Curiosity, and takes advantage of a favorable launch opportunity."

The specific payload and science instruments for the 2020 mission will be openly competed, following the Science Mission Directorate's established processes for instrument selection. This process will begin with the establishment of a science definition team that will be tasked to outline the scientific objectives for the mission.

This mission fits within the five-year budget plan in the president's Fiscal Year 2013 budget request, and is contingent on future appropriations.

Plans also will include opportunities for infusing new capabilities developed through investments by NASA's Space Technology Program, Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, and contributions from international partners.

{...}



Aviation Week: NASA Planning A New Mars Rover

NASA News Release: RELEASE : 12-420 - NASA Announces Robust Multi-Year Mars Program; New Rover to Close Out Decade of New Missions

Universe Today: NASA Reveals Plans for New Mars Rover

Space News: NASA To Launch Curiosity-sized Mars Rover in 2020

SPACE.com: NASA to Launch New Mars Rover in 2020

SpaceRef: NASA's Revised Mars Program

Discovery News: NASA Plans 'Curiosity Twin' Rover Mission in 2020

Spaceflight Now: NASA unveils new Mars rover mission for 2020

Parabolic Arc: NASA Plans Mars Rover for 2020, No Mission in 2018

Mars Daily: NASA Announces Multi-Year Mars Program With New Rover In 2020

Science Daily: New NASA Mars Rover to Launch in 2020

Florida Today:

• NASA: New Mars rover launches in 2020
  
  
• New NASA rover targeting 2020 landing on Mars

CBS News Space: NASA announces new Mars rover

SPACE.com: NASA's Next Mars Rover Should Collect Samples, Experts Say

The Planetary Society Blog:

• The 2020 Rover in Context
  
  
• Planetary Society Statement on the 2020 Mars Rover Mission Announcement

NASASpaceflight: NASA announce another Mars Rover mission to the Red Planet in 2020

AmericaSpace: NASA's Getting Ready for an Exciting Decade on Mars

Space News: NASA’s 2020 Mars Rover will Reprise Curiosity’s Design

 

[orb]

Florida Today: Report urges NASA to focus on spacefaring

Space Politics: A call for a “pioneering” NASA

 

[orb]

Florida Today:

• Report: NASA workers not on board with manned asteroid mission
  
  
• Is NASA lost in space?
  
  
• Panel suggests NASA look at downsizing centers
  
  
• Political peril follows downsizing talk

Science Daily: National Disagreement Over NASA's Goals and Objectives Detrimental to Agency Planning

Parabolic Arc: NRC Study Finds NASA Needs Clearer Goals

 

[RGClark]

NASASpaceflight: NASA interest in 2024 Mars Sample Return Mission using SLS and Orion:

Cool that they recognize it can be done by the SLS. But using the Orion would be way too grandiose. By using the smaller lander/rover of Mars Pathfinder/Sojourner size, it could be done by a single launch of the Falcon Heavy using Centaur-style upper stages.

Bob Clark

 

[T.Neo]

It does not seem like a particularly good justification for the necessity of SLS, if the mission can be launched on existing vehicles (but kudos to NASA for finding another way to show off their shiny new rocket). I suppose a necessity for in-space retrieval does present some challenges, but planetary protection is starting to be bandied about like a boogeyman.

From a standpoint of preserving scientific discoveries it is quite valid, but one must seriously consider the absurdity of postulations that Martian microbes might have harmful effects on the terrestrial biosphere. The concept that since said microbes live in an environment that we would consider harsh, they would proliferate greatly in our (generally considerably less harsh) environment is total nonsense if one considers that there is an astronomical wealth of microbial biodiversity on Earth- including that among extremophiles (some of which live in environments equated in several manners to Mars) and that they have not overrun the planet (yet). It's really grave misunderstanding of how organisms adapt to environments. Just because penguins, for example, survive in really cold environments doesn't mean they'd thrive in- and overrun- warmer ones.