jadebenn

Members
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

62 Excellent

About jadebenn

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. jadebenn

    Russian Launch and Mission Thread

    Roscosmos has seemed like they weren't happy with their role in Gateway for a while now. I wonder if this was just the excuse they were waiting for so they could do it without offending NASA (who they want to preserve a good relationship with).
  2. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    The honest answer is that if there's a LOV event, the 2024 timeline goes out the window. There's no redundancy built into the aggressive timeline; anything going kaput delays the landing. I guess there might be a way to jerry-rig an approach depending on the failure mode (i.e. if the PPE just stops accepting signals instead of literally blowing up), but NASA's already cutting it close as-is. It's likely any major issues would push a manned landing out to 2025+. I can't answer any specific questions about the PPE itself, but from what I've read it seems pretty integral to the functioning of the Gateway. Again, depends on the specific failure. Loss of PPE on launch means large, unavoidable delay. Loss of PPE in transit means large, unavoidable delay. Loss of PPE in lunar orbit means large, possibly salvageable delay (assuming it doesn't explode and there's a way to get it working again before it's flung out of NRHO into cis-lunar space). Basically, the PPE is very much on the critical path to a 2024 Moon landing. Incidentally, I'd imagine this is why NASA chose Maxar for the PPE. They have a lot of experience with high-powered electric propulsion systems, so their schedule and technical risks were (relatively) minimal compared to the other bidders.
  3. I've been making some adjustments to the mod files for my personal use, and I figured out some info that may be useful to those of you still running a KSO install. If anyone is using the old community patch and wants to get the engine FX working again, there's an easy fix. Open all of the KSO engine configuration files and change MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE_PERSIST to MODEL_MULTI_SHURIKEN_PERSIST and the engine fx should be working next time you fire up the game.
  4. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    Let's just agree to disagree on that front. Anyways, here's a neat little comparison of the changes in plan required by the switch from the initial goal of a manned landing by 2028 to the current goal of 2024: Basically confirming that NASA wants to keep the critical path under their sole control as much as humanly possible.
  5. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    To quote a user on reddit: "If the bar for "jobs program" is "a public official said it created jobs", then I have bad news for you about literally everything publicly funded."
  6. jadebenn

    NASA Artemis mission architecture leaked

    I'd say this is easily more credible than Constellation ever was, and Constellation itself was more credible than anything that came before it (excepting Apollo, of course). Very promising information.
  7. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    This is not coherent and I have no idea what you're trying to say.
  8. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    From what I've heard, it's a combined software/hardware issue. They're having trouble getting the docking software to play nice with the various sensor and propulsion subsystems onboard the Orion.
  9. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    Orion is designed to dock, but the system won't be ready in time for EM-1, so it will be flying without it.
  10. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    SRB reuse was, at-best, an economic wash anyways, and the 5-segments are going to seperate much further downrange than the 4-segments did. Plus, they need to phase out the old shuttle-derived SRBs anyways if they want to meet their 130 t payload target for Block 2, so it sort of makes sense to use them expendably. OmegA's got a nice bit of synergy with the SLS. NGIS (aka Orbital ATK aka whatever they were called during the shuttle era) has been developing improved SRBs for it, and they've had the SLS in mind since day one, so the designs ought to be pretty transferable. According to them, the new boosters would be 4-segment, but each segment would be bigger, so that the new 4-segment SRBs would be more powerful than the 5-segment modified shuttle SRBs the SLS will initially be flying with. Still don't think they'd be enough to boost the SLS's payload capacity to 130 t without a 5th RS-25 on the core, so it wouldn't be a "true" Block 2, but it'd probably be close. Gotta admit though, if that switch ever happens, it's gonna make the SLS look like one hell of a mismatched rocket from an aesthetic point of view. White and orange work pretty well as far as color combinations go. White and orange and black... really doesn't.
  11. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    For the Houston one at least, the building was literally built around it. I'd imagine the same is true of the one in Florida.
  12. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    I can tell you exactly where those three remaining flight-ready Saturn Vs went when Apollo was cancelled. One launched Skylab. The other two? This one's made of completely flight-ready hardware and is displayed at JSC in Houston. However, its parts are in rough shape because it was stored outdoors for several decades. They almost certainly only did an aesthetic restoration when they moved it indoors. This one's mostly made of flight-ready hardware and is displayed at KSC in Florida. It was also outdoors for some time, but it seems to be in better condition than the Houston one. I'd speculate that between these two leftovers, and with enough elbow grease, you could theoretically assemble a working Saturn V from the parts. Not that that'll ever happen, but it's neat to think about!
  13. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    Entirely true, but it still doesn't change the political reality. This is speculation, but I'm expecting a ~$4B ask, with the likely components of the plan being: Moving up to bi-annual SLS launches (aka telling Boeing to start building core stages 3 and 4 ASAP) Taking EUS off the backburner Accelerating development of the Z2 spacesuit design De-prioritizing the non-essential Gateway segments (basically everything but the habitation and PPE modules) Depending on reserves of shuttle components and number of flights - possible prioritization of BOLE program Finally: developing the lander design Points 1 and 6 are likely the most expensive, point 4 will likely save some money compared to the current plan, and points 2, 3, 5, and 6 are likely to be the most time-consuming elements. Really, I feel like the human lunar lander is the big risk here. Unlike just about everything else on the list, no serious preliminary engineering work has been done on it yet. You're practically starting from scratch. In that regard, I suppose LM's design has a leg-up over the competition: at least parts of it exist today, in the Orion capsule.
  14. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    I highly, highly doubt it was meant to be read that way. He used to work in Congress. He knows $8B/yr is already more than they'd ever be willing to approve.
  15. jadebenn

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    Ah, the budget debate's getting interesting! We're finally getting an estimate of how much Bridenstine's moon ask will be. First, Eric Berger posts an article claiming to have a source that states the accelerated landing date will require $8B per year. Then, during a congressional budget hearing, Bridenstine refutes that estimate: https://www.twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1123658099632607237 So we know the Moon by 2024 ask is going to be less than $8B. Not a lot of information, but it narrows down the possibilities significantly.