NASA Working To Repair Fuel Leak On Moon Rocket, Plans To Launch Artemis Mission...
source link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/22/09/09/2237252/nasa-working-to-repair-fuel-leak-on-moon-rocket-plans-to-launch-artemis-mission-later-this-month
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
NASA Working To Repair Fuel Leak On Moon Rocket, Plans To Launch Artemis Mission Later This Month
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
binspamdupenotthebestofftopicslownewsdaystalestupid freshfunnyinsightfulinterestingmaybe offtopicflamebaittrollredundantoverrated insightfulinterestinginformativefunnyunderrated descriptive typodupeerror
During a press conference on Thursday, NASA officials said work at the launchpad is ongoing, with the agency's team aiming to complete the replacement of seals on the fueling system by the end of the day. NASA then hopes to conduct a tanking demonstration on Sept. 17 to verify the replacement work was successful. Assuming the work and testing are completed by then, NASA has requested new launch dates from the U.S. Space Force's Eastern Range -- which reviews and approves all missions that liftoff from Cape Canaveral region. The agency has asked to make launch attempts on Sept. 23 and Sept. 27.
-
›
Scrap that boondoggle-
Not yet. Despite the terrible politics and waste of money, the doomed SLS is still a thing of beauty. Like the Soviet Buran/Energia, let it complete one demonstration in honour of the thousands of people who devoted years of effort to it. Maybe even a second, manned SLS mission.
Meanwhile, the Block 1B should be immediately cancelled, along with the disastrous mobile launch platform it requires.
https://arstechnica.com/scienc... [arstechnica.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]-
The people who devoted years of their lives to such an obvious waste of tax dollars deserve no honor. The SLS program should have been killed long ago.
SpaceX StarShip costs $2M per launch with a 150-tonne payload.
SLS costs $1B per launch with a 70-tonne payload. That is a THOUSAND TIMES as expensive per tonne.
The only good thing about the SLS is that it is a perfect example of government mismanagement, incompetence, bureaucratic inertia, and complete inability to comprehend the sunk-cost fallacy. Advocates
-
Ok, now let's compare orbits achieved. Becausae I can transport way, way more stuff way, way cheaper from the grocery to home than any plane in existence from Sydney to London.
-
Let's get the fucking hooptie off the launch pad first
-
-
Aspirationally!
It looks like they are now building a disposable upper stage, to get starlink 2 in orbit ASAP. Even if $100B per launch, it will be a lot better than SLS.
Lunar starship will have to wait for reusable Starship tankers, and orbital refuelling though. But worth it. I'm hoping for a 2030 unmanned lunar landing attempt. -
The thing is the SLS project has been something that Congressional members have change direction, then changed again, then changed once more, only to then change again followed by changing it once more. Because the SLS contract jobs equals money for the people that will vote for them. This isn't government mismanagement it's how democracy works, you're literally pointing out a flaw of how our entire government works at every level Federal, State, and Local. And more so a problem of just everyday citizens
-
-
What? It's a fucking pointy can. The only thing worse than spending all this money on it as a jobs program which also hands shitpots of money to fuckfaces (there's always intentional graft) is spending more money on it when we don't actually need it.
SLS was a shit plan from the beginning. It would have made more sense just to pay the people it employed without doing anything, and spend the rest of the money making the world better somehow, which SLS won't do. It's going to fly once or twice, and waste a bun
-
Why should the taxpayers pay for this? They built a white elephant. This thing is a waste of billions of dollars.
-
Yes, it's awful. The government corruption stinks. You need electoral reform for a start, e.g. optional preferential voting.
But the money is spent.
-
-
-
After spacex and blue origin, this is just pathetic.
-
IIRC Obama tried, and for a short time, succeeded.
-
SLS is exactly what Obama used to proudly call a "shovel-ready project."
-
-
We may end up doing exactly that, but this particular launch is a sunk cost. Let's learn from it what we can, even if that is nothing but "Pulling old Shuttle parts out of storage is not the way to save money on launches."
-
And we are sinking more everyday
-
-
-
-
It's a challenging engineering problem, not just for NASA. When you're the size of a hydrogen molecule most matter looks like fishnet to you. Ars Technica had something good recently about how hard it is to make a quick-disconnect both able to disconnect quickly and tight enough to contain hydrogen.
-
NASA suffered problems with hydrogen in the Shuttle for years and never quite solved it.
It is no accident that all designs since have avoided hydrogen, despite the higher efficiency (Isp).Sadly, SLS is stuck in the past for political (pork barrel) reasons.
-
My guess is that the Engineers were stuck with a 40 year old design and could only make trivial changes.
They probably have a good new design that is reliable, but... management just thinks about how much $$$ they are going to save by recycling old crap.
-
It isn't about saving money. It is about providing jobs for key districts. The overall parts list was spelled out by congress and NASA was left to fill in the details.
-
True, but also incomplete.
NASA, on purpose, spread out the production of those components to as many states as possible, to make sure that any talk about canceling things would affect as many Senators as possible.
-
-
Nah. This started the moment they sent anything into space:P It's not something as recent as the ULA. They just continued the practice.
-
-
-
-
That is the case. They had to use the same shuttle parts. This whole thing is a dumb idea. Literally they had to build it with in the scope given to them by politicians.
-
The idea was to avoid making new mistakes by repeating old mistakes instead.
-
Well, it's a little worse than that. Management and Engineering didn't make the decisions; Congress did. Yup, when they provided money for SLS they wrote into law that it would be based on the Shuttle engines and solid rocket boosters. By doing so, they forced the choice of Hydrogen as a fuel because that's what the engines wanted to see.
Of course, that doesn't explain why, 60 years later, a moon landing is going to require TWO rockets larger than the Saturn-V, and anywhere between half-a-dozen and a d -
There is no money to be saved by management. If itâ(TM)s more expensive then the government will pay more, which means more profit.
-
-
-
-
Yeah, they should switch from seals to walrusses. They are way more reliable and less prone to clubbing.
-
If they donâ(TM)t redesign it, how do they expect it to ever work?
-
-
Seems to be the launch is cursed, and/or extremely unlucky... First attempt scrubbed because engine chill supposedly wasn't working but may have just been a faulty temperature reading, second attempt had human error in the loading procedure with pressure being applied too high for a few minutes. Now requesting a range extension for their FTS batteries; how long can the batteries last past their certified date without a recharge?
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK