NASA Space Launch System (SLS)

It's useless without strap-ons, yes...but those didn't have to be solids. Of course, if Ted Cruz proposed Pyrios--you'd just be against that too.
Of course, I would be. There is no need for NASA to develop and manage its own launch vehicles anymore. NASA can go to the marketplace for any space launch needs. The government is now a user and not a supplier, even for its own needs.
NOAA doesn't own any shipyards. FAA doesn't own any airliner factories. Why should spaceflight be any different?

Please answer this intelligently and not use any references to any state residents or economic models of other countries.
 
AFAIK the proposed white house budget cuts work on Block 2 (and block 1B), Ted cruz is leading a congressional counterproposal but even it only includes work up to Artemis V: The development of Block 1B (needed for AIV) as well as the new RS-25 engines which are needed for AV, personally I don't see a whole lot of support for BOLE.

Of course contract cancellation can take time, the continuing budget resolution can continue funding full work, maybe the congress will vote for it at the last minute, and work on it may continue for some time, but idk, it seems the weakest part of SLS for now.

I feel quite confident saying no payload will ever launch on a BOLE-boosted SLS, which is no earlier than Artemis IX...
 
Seems that way--I wonder if Starship will be ready by then either....will some genius come up with a gravity mirror somewhere? Ugh....

Uh-oh

More bashing
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RBKlL5o9ZkQ
 
Last edited:
Starship will have an orbital flight and a successful recovery before SLS flies again.
Likely but not certain IMO, if Starship v3 has the same track record v2 so far, and if NASA is serious about April 2026 being a "no later than" (very much doubt no later than are a thing in astronautics...) and they actually have a shot at launching earlier in 2026, then I could see the other way around.
 
I don’t doubt that at all…getting my metal detector ready as we speak…Billy! I told you not to huff’ those tiles! Look what your brother did to that door!

(It’s horrible…he made a chair out of nozzle bits…can’t tell which ones)…

None from this test
 
Last edited:
Philip Sloss has uploaded his latest quarterly update video:


Reviewing the events, politics, and work reported by NASA and its partners during the second quarter of 2025 on preparations and planning for the Artemis II, III, IV missions and beyond.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
Jack Beyer's remote camera video of the SLS Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) demonstration motor test:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC9icOKGJ94

• World's Largest SRB Fails During Testinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC9icOKGJ94
00:00 Intro
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0ZGU_yn9So&t=51s

00:51 Two SLS ground static fire tests for Artemis V and beyond, one secret, one not
01:19 NASA secretly conducts RS-25 test
03:20 Nozzle anomaly at the end of the first test of next-gen SLS solid rocket motor
09:40 Artemis II status and outlook
15:28 Artemis III status and outlook
23:23 Review of the political drama of this quarter
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0ZGU_yn9So&t=1588s

26:28 Artemis IV status and outlook
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0ZGU_yn9So&t=1880s

31:20 Thanks for watching!
 
Last edited:
Philip Sloss has uploaded a video about whether or not NASA will carry secret production proof test-firings of the RS-25Es (Development tests have been completed):


As the thumbnail says, that's the question -- why is NASA now conducting tests in secrecy for something they made a big deal out of not long ago? Conducting RS-25 tests in secret seems to be the latest move by NASA and the White House to conceal work on the stuff that OMB wants terminated. Neither NASA nor the administration has explained what they're doing, and maybe that's part of the plan.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
McGregor Live (http://nsf.live/mcgregor) courtesy of NSF/NASASpaceflight, used with permission.
00:00 Intro
01:00 RS-25 test not even announced until three days after it was conducted
03:41 SpaceX is testing their engine hardware more transparently than NASA now
07:02 NASA's response to why the test was conducted in secret leaves the questions open
08:47 Full footage of the test finally released
09:31 How long will this secrecy continue?
10:27 Thanks for watching!
 
Starship will have an orbital flight and a successful recovery before SLS flies again.
SLS is nearly stacked and has a NET 8 months away. In the last 8 months, the Starship program has had 3 flight failures and lost a vehicle on the ground. They've yet to demonstrate satellite deployment or an effective TPS, or even completed a V2 flight without a major incident. I'll be very pleased if they complete an orbital flight and catch a starship in the next 3-4 flights, but it is by no means the assured outcome.
 
SLS is nearly stacked and has a NET 8 months away. In the last 8 months, the Starship program has had 3 flight failures and lost a vehicle on the ground. They've yet to demonstrate satellite deployment or an effective TPS, or even completed a V2 flight without a major incident. I'll be very pleased if they complete an orbital flight and catch a starship in the next 3-4 flights, but it is by no means the assured outcome.
Yeah, NET of 8 months. That shows how bad it is. Two launches in 4 years is an abomination.
Starship is trying reusability from the beginning. It could have flown a successful expendable mission long ago.
My prediction is still valid.
 
Puzzling that Mr. Merriman didn't know that you are the OG when it comes to opposition to SD-HLLVs...even before that became cool with NewSpace kids.

Staying below the conning tower for too long will do that :)

Sustained
 
Last edited:
Philip Sloss has new update video for the SLS:


It may not matter as much as if the White House has already decimated the NASA workforce by then, but Congress is starting to publish their plans for the Fiscal Year 2026 budget. The Senate was concerned about Artemis sustainability and affordability last year, before the circus came to town. (NASA Exploration is the generic name rather than the Artemis brand name.) The race to land the next people on the Moon is still the priority, but the Senate still wants to start preparing for what comes after that in the next decade.​
Instead of the White House plan to cancel lunar landing capabilities in two years whether or not a landing takes place, the Senate wants to sustain SLS and Orion until their replacement can fly astronauts back and forth to the Moon. They also want to increase funding to speed up the Starship and Blue Moon HLS plans now. Their plan would start investing in commercial lunar transportation development, but not at the expense of the capabilities they've already spent so much money on.​
I take a first look at that proposal in this video and also go over the latest news about Artemis II launch preparations, Artemis III development and assembly, and other Artemis news and notes.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
00:00 Intro
01:10 Update on Artemis II launch preparations
07:27 New interim NASA administrator starts his moonlighting job
07:55 House and Senate funding bills outline rejection of White House numbers and plans
10:05 Senate proposal considers a different Artemis transition
15:12 News and notes for the week, beginning with an Orion support equipment sighting in Kansas
17:32 Pictures (or renders) of EUS structural test article hardware assembly
20:40 Elon Musk forecasts Starship flight test 10 in early August
22:55 SLS Core Stage-3 LOX tank prepared for final assembly
25:54 Thanks for watching!
 
Funny when SLS has problems, we don't get those posts that make some idiotic comparisons.
Par for the course would be something like:
Artemis II will be no different than the last Concorde flight and have a flame follow it up like gunpowder chasing Yosemite Sam
That's because Elon isn't the director of NASA. ;)
 
Does anyone know why they haven't designed a more effective heat shield? so they're going to use the same one but changing the re-entry trajectory.
 
Does anyone know why they haven't designed a more effective heat shield? so they're going to use the same one but changing the re-entry trajectory.

IIRC the aft reentry shield for the Artemis III Orion CM is being remanufactured to new specifications based on the performance of the Artemis I heat shield during reentry.
 
Orion's first heat shield--that one was tested after flying atop D-IV

From what I recall the Orion CM in the EFT-1 mission didn't have the same velocity at the reentry interface as the Artemis I CM (Also I think it may've been flying a different reentry profile).
 
Centers that support research....I'd like to see more papers about Starship as there are about SLS.

Some strakes on SLS to even out flow

Hydrogen storage improvements coming
 
Last edited:
Modifications like I suggested to allow wet workshop conversion would also lend better access on the pad as well as orbit, with no MSS.

And if Starship depots have leaks in orbit…howse around equipment going to help there?

SLS is Marshall. That didn’t leak the first time.

The current leak is a Delta IV second stage.

Last I heard, a Falcon upper stage had problems too (always the bloody upper stages).

All Elon’s bunch did recently was some waterworks.

I can get that at Vegas

EUS
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbv_DCAv0nk

 
Last edited:
Modifications like I suggested to allow wet workshop conversion would also lend better access on the pad as well as orbit, with no MSS.

IMO one of the big mistakes when the SLS project went ahead was NASA not designing and building a MSS.
 
Philip Sloss has uploaded a video concerning the results of the Artemis II WDR2:


Everyone else has already moved on from the successful Artemis II Wet Dress Rehearsal on Thursday, February 19th, because less than a day later something broke on the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage and that means rollback and delays and an uncertain launch schedule. But before I move on, too, I'll run through my thoughts about NASA's coverage of the second WDR, which continues a pattern of obscuring or muting critical countdown events as they happen live.​
NASA may be of the opinion that technical events only matter on launch day or are more dramatic if you only show or acknowledge them on launch day, but we're once again seeing that things matter before then, whether or not it's during big pre-launch tests.​
Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.
Links to social media posts:
https://x.com/NASASpaceflight/status/...https://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...ight/status/2024662082709533165&v=X8KvXDLbuXY

https://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...://buymeacoffee.com/philipsloss&v=X8KvXDLbuXY
00:00 Intro
01:09 Overview of Wet Dress Rehearsal 2 and coverage
04:32 A short history of Artemis WDRs and WDR coverage
07:39 WDR 2, the good: more views, up-close views
12:36 The not quite as good: making it hard to tell what's happening
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom