_Augustus_

NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

Recommended Posts

What are some good websites to keep up with the status of testing?  I'm primarily interested in the "Orion" vehicle.  I was under the impression that they were going to do an Ascent Abort test this fall but I can't find anything on whether it happened, was canceled, was delayed, etc.; and, confusingly, I see references to an AA-2 second ascent abort test scheduled for next year.

What resources have you found useful to follow along?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MaxwellsDemon said:

What are some good websites to keep up with the status of testing?  I'm primarily interested in the "Orion" vehicle.  I was under the impression that they were going to do an Ascent Abort test this fall but I can't find anything on whether it happened, was canceled, was delayed, etc.; and, confusingly, I see references to an AA-2 second ascent abort test scheduled for next year.

What resources have you found useful to follow along?

The Ascent Abort is going to use the returned EM-1 capsule I think. So it won't happen until after EM-1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

The Ascent Abort is going to use the returned EM-1 capsule I think. So it won't happen until after EM-1.

I think they will use the Capsule flown on EFT-1 for the ascent abort. 

Correction: It seems the plan was to use EFT-1 Orion but is now to use A „boilerplate“ stand in without parachutes and will take place after EM-1.

Edited by Canopus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Brotoro said:

Without parachutes? What kind of abort test is that?

Well i guess its a test of the Launch escape tower. They may have testet the parachute landung often enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the conditions following an abort (dynamic pressure, altitude, possibility of tumbling, etc.) are not the same as those encountered during a normal descent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have the latest images of the C.M? I have looked around but can not find anything more recent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, RAJ JAR said:

Anyone have the latest images of the C.M? I have looked around but can not find anything more recent. 

The design hasn't changed lately. It's silver now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

The design hasn't changed lately. It's silver now.

Here is a list of what we know has changed from Orion EFT-1 to Orion EM-1

1) The pressure vessel will be made from 7 welded parts instead of 18 welded parts. 

2) The pressure vessel is lighter in Orion EM-1 than Orion EFT-1, 1497 kg (3300 lb)  to 1225 kg (2700 lb).

3) The heat shield has changed from a monolithic ablative heat shield to a block ablative heat shield. 

4) A metallic-based thermal control coating will be bonded to the crew module’s thermal protection system back shell tiles, which will reduce heat loss during phases when Orion is pointed to space and therefore experiencing cold temperatures, as well as limit the high temperatures the crew module will be subjected to when the spacecraft faces the sun. The coating will also help Orion’s back shell maintain a temperature range from approximately -101 degrees C to 288 degrees C (-150 to 550 degrees Fahrenheit) prior to entry and also will protect against electrical surface charges in space and during re-entry.  

More details on Orion EFT-1 and Orion EM-1 here:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/07/orion-processing-em-1-planning-missions/ 

More details on metallic-based thermal control coating here: 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/engineers-refine-thermal-protection-system-for-orion-s-next-mission 

 

Anything else to add to the list? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RAJ JAR said:

I am surprised Bigelow Aerospace is not on the list. 

Since this is about the Propulsion module i can see why they weren‘t considered. For a Habitat module though, that would be more in their area of expertise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Canopus said:

Since this is about the Propulsion module i can see why they weren‘t considered. For a Habitat module though, that would be more in their area of expertise.

For habitats, I hope Bigelow will be mentioned. I was meant to say, for propulsion I am surprised Ad Astra is not mentioned. They are working on plasma electric propulsion, V.A.S.I.M.R. Also NASA's X3 hall effect thruster is not shown.   

Edited by RAJ JAR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RAJ JAR said:

For habitats, I hope Bigelow will be mentioned. I was meant to say, for propulsion I am surprised Ad Astra is not mentioned. They are working on plasma electric propulsion, V.A.S.I.M.R. Also NASA's X3 hall effect thruster is not shown.   

VASIMR's upsides have been repeatedly put into doubt (especially without a nuclear reactor), I wouldn't be surprised if NASA has already chosen its own Hall effect propulsion and will have private contractors working around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VASIMR's disadvantages quite literally outweighs its advantages, as the weight of the reactor is so much.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2017 at 3:45 PM, DAL59 said:

VASIMR's disadvantages quite literally outweighs its advantages, as the weight of the reactor is so much.  

Perhaps that's why NASA is looking at using solar power arrays to power VASIMR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just that they haven't updated their scheduling yet (delivery must always be 2-3 years in the future) or are they expecting a lot more budget to get this out ahead of schedule?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, sjbuggs said:

Perhaps that's why NASA is looking at using solar power arrays to power VASIMR?

The solar and radiators are a mass issue as well for the required power levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tater said:

 

Please, Congress, put SLS out of its misery.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, _Augustus_ said:

Please, Congress, put SLS out of its misery.......

Getting delayed happens all the time. Apollo was delayed two years or so, they originally planned for a landing in 67 or thereabouts. Sure, it's not a perfect rocket, but its purpose is to spend money, not be an amazing rocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

Please, Congress, put SLS out of its misery.......

SLS is the creature of Congress, why would they kill it? The longer it takes, the longer the voters in districts that work on it get paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.