[New] Space Launch System / Orion Discussion Thread

[ZooNamedGames]

12 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said:

If it’s a race to volume, SLS might win, but there are 2 high volume, reusable super heavies coming soon too don’t forget.

If soon is at least another decade. Until then- both vehicles are expendable just like SLS. Unlike SLS- they won’t be manrated and again- would be another 10 years before they are. So again- looking at 2030 for either vehicle to become available, reusable and or man rated by that point. SLS could be ready in 2 years alternatively. 

[Cheif Operations Director]

1 minute ago, jadebenn said:

Again: it's not just a demand problem. Let's say I'm wrong and that the market would explode to take advantage of such prices. Even then, you'd still need to wait for everything else to "catch up," so to speak. There aren't a whole lot of businesses capable of building useful payloads - it'd take them quite a bit of time to expand to meet the new demand.

If a Space company could launch for $100s for a small satellite then they would make sure that they can help people make their satlilllites to drive up sales.

[jadebenn]

12 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

If a Space company could launch for $100s for a small satellite then they would make sure that they can help people make their satlilllites to drive up sales.

Such as by building their own satellites to stimulate demand during the downturn? Hmm... I wonder where I've heard that before.

I'm not saying they're not pursuing their business plan smartly, I just don't think it's going to work. I also don't think they'd be so eager to ditch the Falcon series and move onto a new design if they were happy with the RoI they got from Falcon.

Edited August 9, 2019 by jadebenn

[tater]

25 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

If soon is at least another decade. Until then- both vehicles are expendable just like SLS. Unlike SLS- they won’t be manrated and again- would be another 10 years before they are. So again- looking at 2030 for either vehicle to become available, reusable and or man rated by that point. SLS could be ready in 2 years alternatively. 

This is simply nonsense. They don't need to be "manrated" per NASA, and nothing they do will take 20 years, they can't print money. Regardless, even partially expendable, it's vastly cheaper than SLS including SS/SH dev costs and NOT counting SLS/Orion dev costs (a pretty low bar, admittedly).

19 minutes ago, jadebenn said:

I also don't think they'd be so eager to ditch the Falcon series and move onto a new design if they were happy with the RoI they got from Falcon.

No. It takes a few years to develop a new LV (even at high speed, far longer for others). If they wait for Blue to hit their stride to start it will be too late (Blue is a legit competitor). By your reasoning, no company should innovate a new product until the current one is obsolete?

A clean sheet design makes loads of sense.

 

[KSK]

4 hours ago, jadebenn said:

I think it is entirely logical to suspect that reusability hasn't actually brought SpaceX costs down. Shuttle was reusable. Wasn't cheaper.

As for accusations towards profit, there is such a thing called "price dumping" and "increasing market share." Just because SpaceX charges lower rates than anyone else doesn't mean they're making profit on those rates. If anything, I suspect those are break-even/slight-loss prices. ULA suspects as much. The Russians suspect as much. We don't know enough financially to say whether or not that's true, but we do know enough financially to say they're currently not cash-flow positive.

Regardless, this discussion is off-topic for this thread.

What, two major competitors of a company looks at lower prices charged by that company, can't figure them out, suspects loss-leading? You'll excuse me if I don't pay that too much credence either.

And yes this is getting off topic. However if one wishes to prevent or reduce off-topic excursions, it might be an idea for the OP not to take speculative cheap shots in an off-topic direction. But yes - lets get back to SLS/Orion.

[jadebenn]

1 hour ago, KSK said:

But yes - lets get back to SLS/Orion.

Agreed.

NASA Administrator to Discuss Status of Rocket for First Artemis Lunar Mission

Sounds like the engine section and core stage are going to be in one piece by the 15th. I don't think Bridenstine would've just randomly decided to hold a big press conference in the MAF unless he wanted to show it off.

[Cheif Operations Director]

8 hours ago, jadebenn said:

Such as by building their own satellites to stimulate demand during the downturn? Hmm... I wonder where I've heard that before.

I'm not saying they're not pursuing their business plan smartly, I just don't think it's going to work. I also don't think they'd be so eager to ditch the Falcon series and move onto a new design if they were happy with the RoI they got from Falcon.

I mean if you have to pay me $100 dollars for a scientific experiment instead of launching them individually the company could put them all into one capsule then you do not need to do as much THUS driving up sales. If they are comm sats the launch provider could supply materials and an engineer to design said sat. If the materials and enginners labor are worth less than the final product then the business makes more profit

[ZooNamedGames]

with all the time spent sitting around, couldn't the Artemis-1 solid rocket boosters get that old concept of paint stripes? Or are they undergoing their own testing right now?

[Barzon]

IIRC, those were only for PR. Like the Saturn style paint scheme.

[ZooNamedGames]

5 hours ago, Barzon Kerman said:

IIRC, those were only for PR. Like the Saturn style paint scheme.

Nothing stopping that PR scheme from making it to reality since we have a year of them on the ground collecting dust. It can’t take that long to paint.

[Cheif Operations Director]

3 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Nothing stopping that PR scheme from making it to reality since we have a year of them on the ground collecting dust. It can’t take that long to paint.

Paint weight

[Ultimate Steve]

3 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Nothing stopping that PR scheme from making it to reality since we have a year of them on the ground collecting dust. It can’t take that long to paint.

Yeah, and I kinda like those stripes.

 

Just now, Cheif Operations Director said:

Paint weight

It's not that much, just 2 stripes per booster, especially when they were originally going to paint the whole thing white and black.

[Cheif Operations Director]

1 minute ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Yeah, and I kinda like those stripes.

 

It's not that much, just 2 stripes per booster, especially when they were originally going to paint the whole thing white and black.

True, I also like those stripes, plus orange paint is lighter that white paint I think so they get rocket performance out of it as well, I think.

[Ultimate Steve]

5 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

True, I also like those stripes, plus orange paint is lighter that white paint I think so they get rocket performance out of it as well, I think.

I am pretty sure that orange is the color of the insulation, not paint, but I may be wrong.

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, Ultimate Steve said:

I am pretty sure that orange is the color of the insulation, not paint, but I may be wrong.

The original ET was white, but I think you are right, still I think orange  paint is lighter than white paint.

[StrandedonEarth]

3 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

The original ET was white, but I think you are right, still I think orange  paint is lighter than white paint.

Yes, the tank insulation is orange, and painting the ET white added some 600 lbs, going practically all the way to orbit. A few stripes on the SRBs won't weigh as much and aren't getting hauled as high or fast. But the orange stripes would be painted on top of the white base coat.

 

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, StrandedonEarth said:

Yes, the tank insulation is orange, and painting the ET white added some 600 lbs, going practically all the way to orbit. A few stripes on the SRBs won't weigh as much and aren't getting hauled as high or fast. But the orange stripes would be painted on top of the white base coat.

 

So cant they just scrap it off? 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Cheif Operations Director

[StrandedonEarth]

Just now, Cheif Operations Director said:

So could’nt they just scrap it off? 

Well, sure, more work for someone....  But then you'd need more coats anyways to properly cover up the steel.

[Cheif Operations Director]

1 minute ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Well, sure, more work for someone....  But then you'd need more coats anyways to properly cover up the steel.

True 

[ZooNamedGames]

16 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Well, sure, more work for someone....  But then you'd need more coats anyways to properly cover up the steel.

We’ve got time. Plus this is an extra light SLS. The Orion isn’t fully built-  a dummy service module- is the LES even going to be functional or another dummy replacement- personally I think it would be ok to use a lighter dummy version for an unmanned flight anyway, the savings in weight could justify the extra paint weight. Plus this is using the ICPS and not the full EUS. So this will be as light as it gets and there’s plenty of ways to save weight to add the extra paint. 

29 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

I am pretty sure that orange is the color of the insulation, not paint, but I may be wrong.

Correct. It’s actually a foam dye that’s spray painted on (basically the stuff we see on it now, might have an all weather coating added layer for the darker orange) but it’s only orange because of the dyes chemical makeup. 

[StrandedonEarth]

2 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

We’ve got time. Plus this is an extra light SLS. The Orion isn’t fully built-  a dummy service module- is the LES even going to be functional or another dummy replacement- personally I think it would be ok to use a lighter dummy version for an unmanned flight anyway, the savings in weight could justify the extra paint weight. Plus this is using the ICPS and not the full EUS. So this will be as light as it gets and there’s plenty of ways to save weight to add the extra paint. 

Correct. It’s actually a foam dye that’s spray painted on (basically the stuff we see on it now, might have an all weather coating added layer for the darker orange) but it’s only orange because of the dyes chemical makeup. 

I think it just darkens naturally as it weathers. If you've seen some ETs that had extra work done, there are lighter-orange patches.

And no, I wasn't worried about the weight of stripes, in fact, I didn't see the point of trying to remove the white paint where orange would go.

[Cheif Operations Director]

27 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

I think it just darkens naturally as it weathers. If you've seen some ETs that had extra work done, there are lighter-orange patches.

That may be true, that tends to happen with lighter colored things

[tater]

Tank insulation is urethane foam. It starts out fairly light yellow, and quickly (in sunlight) oxidizes to darker, more orange color.

[ZooNamedGames]

47 minutes ago, tater said:

Tank insulation is urethane foam. It starts out fairly light yellow, and quickly (in sunlight) oxidizes to darker, more orange color.

Which I’m assuming has already been applied to the core stage already.

Edited August 14, 2019 by ZooNamedGames

[ArkaelDren]

I know this is a thread primarily about the SLS program, but I couldn't help after reading many of  ZooNamedGames comments.

After reading this entire thread, I am amazed at some of the "flame" sent Musks way as well as some super natural way of ignoring what SpaceX has achieved.  I come no way near the understanding or knowledge base of the material at hand, but maybe someone with a bit more vision (Yep Vision) could define the achievements made by SpaceX over the last decade.  What I have seen from Elon Musk, is a bit of an over zealous time schedule, but almost "EVERYTHING" that man has claimed they will do, they have.  You can take every technical spec, data sheet, test results based on real time testing, or virtual, and what I see is people forgetting the Human factor.  The desire to be inspirational exc. I love Nasa, and watched 2 shuttle launches, was sitting in my science teachers class during the loss of STS-41-D.  I believed getting rid of the shuttle was a mistake, due to the fact, we at least had an incredible functioning flight system getting people to and from the ISS.  Now I can easily profess to be a complete SpaceX/Tesla fan boy, and I don't think saying so is a bad thing.  Maybe this is because, no one company has done as much to disrupt and place a positive outlook on its field as much as "Tesla" or "SpaceX".  Just happens to be run by the same visionary.....  yeah both companies.  So maybe, the next time you think of slamming SpaceX, you might want to consider how much they have done for the advancement of the industry.  Again, I love Nasa, but if you go by SpaceX's track record alone, for their pure speed and performance record, the simple Human drive to change the world, then my money is on SpaceX.

Just 2 cents given here. I really don't care what people think of my comments, because at the end of the day,  my opinion means about as much as yours. Hell, in my case, yours probably has quite a bit more technical relevance.  But it has been a complete Joy watching a good guy win again for a change.  Side note, my favorite parts packs are with out a doubt, SLS variants. I used Bobcats for a couple years.