• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

NASA Space Launch System (SLS)

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
1,144
“SLS will go away," he said. "It could go away during a Biden administration or a next Trump administration… because at some point commercial entities are going to catch up. They are really going to build a heavy lift launch vehicle sort of like SLS that they will be able to fly for a much cheaper price than NASA can do SLS. That’s just the way it works.”
Charlie Bolden, a four-time astronaut, served as NASA administrator from mid-2009 through early 2017.
 

merriman

David Douglass Merriman lll
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
503
Reaction score
686
Catch up with what? The Saturn-5? Another big piece of disposable ammunition that has yet to fly?

NASA: lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.

NASA should do the basic research and development. Let the private sector pick and chose what findings have utility and are worthy of exploitation.

David
uninformed Navy type, and Tax Frig'n Payer!
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
1,144
If that is a solid booster, that's not how combustion takes place.

A better simulation would be scratching a matches and holding it upside down b/w your fingers...
 

Byeman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
804
Reaction score
22
Has anyone already pointed out that Lockheed's "Orion" capsule is after all the capsule that Boeing proposed for the "Orbital Space Plane" program, which Lockheed won with their innovative hypersonic-lifting body design that required parachutes to land because it became unstable at low speed.

No.
A. Lockheed did not win OSP. Both Boeing and Lockheed were still in competition. Downselect to one contractor hadn't occurred at the time of cancelation.
B. Lockheed's current design at the time of OSP cancellation was a capsule and not a lifting body. The change to capsules occurred early in the OSP project.
c. Starliner is basically Boeing's OSP design at the point of cancelation.
 
Last edited:

Byeman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
804
Reaction score
22
Catch up with what? The Saturn-5? Another big piece of disposable ammunition that has yet to fly?

David
uninformed Navy type, and Tax Frig'n Payer!

Just stop with it. Falcon 9 and New Glenn are still disposable rockets.
 

Moose

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
312
If that is a solid booster, that's not how combustion takes place.

A better simulation would be scratching a matches and holding it upside down b/w your fingers...
It's a decent enough sim, the big SRBs uses by STS/SLS are ignited from the top and burn down through the hollow core.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
1,144
I do admit that it is confusing but:

The fire 2 commands cause the redundant NSDs to fire through a thin barrier seal down a flame tunnel. This ignites a pyro. booster charge, which is retained in the safe and arm device behind a perforated plate. The booster charge ignites the propellant in the igniter initiator; and combustion products of this propellant ignite the solid rocket motor initiator, which fires down the entire vertical length of the solid rocket motor igniting the solid rocket motor propellant along its entire surface area instantaneously.



 

RanulfC

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
926
Reaction score
374
Has anyone already pointed out that Lockheed's "Orion" capsule is after all the capsule that Boeing proposed for the "Orbital Space Plane" program, which Lockheed won with their innovative hypersonic-lifting body design that required parachutes to land because it became unstable at low speed.

No.
A. Lockheed did not win OSP. Both Boeing and Lockheed were still in competition. Downselect to one contractor hadn't occurred at the time of cancelation.

Quite right actually :) I let my self be draw in by LM's hype near the end.

B. Lockheed's current design at the time of OSP cancellation was a capsule and not a lifting body. The change to capsules occurred early in the OSP project.

Actually near the end of OSP LM had a 'winged' body:
1602620374809.png
... configuration, (they did in fact state in an official report that a capsule was actually what fit the NASA requirements, better than any lifting or winged body would) that morphed into a hypersonic lifting body design seen here:
1602619959079.png
At that point Boeing was the only company pushing a capsule and to meet the "Spaceplane" requirement they still offered an "X-37-ish" concept:
1602620080985.png
that I can't find was every pushed as hard as the capsule design. The LM change to a capsule didn't come till CEV evolved quite a bit.
1602620200602.png

c. Starliner is basically Boeing's OSP design at the point of cancelation.[/QUOTE]

This being the what essentially both were offering when OSP transitioned into CEV program.
 

Byeman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
804
Reaction score
22

B. Lockheed's current design at the time of OSP cancellation was a capsule and not a lifting body. The change to capsules occurred early in the OSP project.

Actually near the end of OSP LM had a 'winged' body:

... configuration, (they did in fact state in an official report that a capsule was actually what fit the NASA requirements, better than any lifting or winged body would) that morphed into a hypersonic lifting body design seen here:

At that point Boeing was the only company pushing a capsule and to meet the "Spaceplane" requirement they still offered an "X-37-ish" concept:

that I can't find was every pushed as hard as the capsule design. The LM change to a capsule didn't come till CEV evolved quite a bit.
[/QUOTE]

No, capsules were proposed by both Boeing and LM in the summer of 2003, long before there was a CEV program or the end of OSP. I was working OSP launch vehicle integration. I have documents, just can't share them. The requirement that drove the designs to capsule was passive entry. Lifting bodies need active guidance, a ballistic capsule doesn't.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
175
Reaction score
105
Don't now whether to laugh or cry, the project officer for that was a fellow captain in EELV we worked the project as risk reduction should the RD-180 go away (he was the PO and I owned the RM process), nothing like a government program that continues after the user chose the BE-4...
 

Moose

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
312
ULA's rocket is not the last ever to be built, having another high-performance kerolox engine out there ready for use isn't the worst thing in the world.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,568
Reaction score
1,583
Don't now whether to laugh or cry, the project officer for that was a fellow captain in EELV we worked the project as risk reduction should the RD-180 go away (he was the PO and I owned the RM process), nothing like a government program that continues after the user chose the BE-4...
Government efficiency.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
175
Reaction score
105
ULA's rocket is not the last ever to be built, having another high-performance kerolox engine out there ready for use isn't the worst thing in the world.
Perhaps, wonder what the SLS throw weight becomes with 4 AR-1's?
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
175
Reaction score
105
Don't now whether to laugh or cry, the project officer for that was a fellow captain in EELV we worked the project as risk reduction should the RD-180 go away (he was the PO and I owned the RM process), nothing like a government program that continues after the user chose the BE-4...
Government efficiency.
Self licking ice cream cones?
 

Moose

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
312
ULA's rocket is not the last ever to be built, having another high-performance kerolox engine out there ready for use isn't the worst thing in the world.
Perhaps, wonder what the SLS throw weight becomes with 4 AR-1's?
Studies of SLS withhigh-performance liquid boosters in place of the solids have pointed to something like 10-20t improvement to LEO depending upon the details of the booster. Thats maybe more politically doable with Lockheed backing the engine following their purchase of AJR, maybe.

But I was thinking of the on-again, off-again DARPA and USAF (presumably Space Force going forward) efforts to build a winged fly-back booster. AR-1 would be a great fit for a Lockheed bid on such a vehicle.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
175
Reaction score
105
But I was thinking of the on-again, off-again DARPA and USAF (presumably Space Force going forward) efforts to build a winged fly-back booster. AR-1 would be a great fit for a Lockheed bid on such a vehicle.
Back in 2011 my commander gave me the news that project was my next job, the next week it went through the off-again phase. IIRC AR-1 was supposed to be used on it.
 

sean hunter

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jan 14, 2021
Messages
96
Reaction score
11
i guess the joint venture with nasa was them saying they needed spacex's help. i mean the retunable/landable first stage is kinda cool though.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
1,144
UPDATE #2 – Jan. 16th at 9:25 pm EST
In a post-test briefing, NASA and Boeing officials confirmed that an investigation into the cause of the Major Component Failure on Engine 4 that stopped the hot fire test at 67.7 seconds after ignition is underway, but stated that no further information was known at the time.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine stated that not enough information was known about the abort to determine whether the test can be classed as a success.
If another hot fire test is scheduled, it will take a minimum of 21-30 days to refurbish the engines to fire again.
Administrator Bridenstine also stated that despite not accomplishing major test objectives and the outstanding questions and investigations that now must take place, the agency is not ruling out signing off on the test and sending the Core Stage to Florida for flight this year to “stay on schedule.”

 

Similar threads

Top