T-10a Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Always nice to hear progress in near-future spaceflight, even if it's little things like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) http://spacenews.com/nasa-receives-20-7-billion-in-omnibus-appropriations-bill/ Important here is the possibilty of a second launch pad. Edited March 23, 2018 by Canopus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-10a Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 So, so much better than before let's hope it goes through. It may have some elements axed, but if it's been pushed this far, it may end up going through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Note they up'ed the funding for SLS to 2.15 + 0.35 billion. The 3rd of billion is for SLS launchpad, that makes 2 . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Augustus_ Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 10 hours ago, Canopus said: http://spacenews.com/nasa-receives-20-7-billion-in-omnibus-appropriations-bill/ Important here is the possibilty of a second launch pad. 5 hours ago, PB666 said: Note they up'ed the funding for SLS to 2.15 + 0.35 billion. The 3rd of billion is for SLS launchpad, that makes 2 . . . Pointless if Block I only flies once apart from speeding up EM-1 to EC gap. I think Block I will end up being used for all Orion flights though, just sayin'..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Does ICPS have the dv to do the proposed DSG orbits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, tater said: Does ICPS have the dv to do the proposed DSG orbits? Since the Exploration upper stage only performs TLI, exactly like the ICPS, it should allow a block 1 SLS to send an Orion to LOP/G. So a second launch pad would make a difference and allow block 1 to keep flying even after block1b. They could assemble LOP/G with the crewed block1b, and after that send crew on block1 and maybe a Hydrolox lander on a block 1b without crew. Edited March 23, 2018 by Canopus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 So presumably the only point of EUS is that there is a comanifested cargo component. SLS/Orion is a pretty expensive ride, well, anyplace. I'm not sure what the benefit is of Block 1. Also, while they might have 2 MLS rigs, doesn't the VAB also have to be particularly configured for each block? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, tater said: So presumably the only point of EUS is that there is a comanifested cargo component. SLS/Orion is a pretty expensive ride, well, anyplace. I'm not sure what the benefit is of Block 1. Also, while they might have 2 MLS rigs, doesn't the VAB also have to be particularly configured for each block? Yeah Crewed Block 1b is only needed for ISS style habitation modules without independant propulsion systems relying on Orion to maneuver them to LOP/G. I don‘t know about the VAB but it doesn‘t strike me as impossible to have different cranes for different upper stages. Edited March 23, 2018 by Canopus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 They have platforms at multiple levels that come up pretty close to the vehicle while stacked. It's not a crane thing. All those semi-circles move inwards so people can walk on them right next to the vehicle. Each cutout at each height is unique to the block, and it's supposedly part of the 33 months between block 1 and 1b flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 14 minutes ago, tater said: So presumably the only point of EUS is that there is a comanifested cargo component. SLS/Orion is a pretty expensive ride, well, anyplace. I'm not sure what the benefit is of Block 1. Also, while they might have 2 MLS rigs, doesn't the VAB also have to be particularly configured for each block? They can send Orion to the LOP-G without an SLS. Other than pure politics, I don't understand why they wouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 41 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said: Pointless if Block I only flies once apart from speeding up EM-1 to EC gap. I think Block I will end up being used for all Orion flights though, just sayin'..... I know, I wonder if they will contract it out to other providers. [pulling hair and cursing congress] [Rolls eyes] wonder if in the next appropriations ill we can provide the site funding for the pad a boca-chica . . lol. Edited March 23, 2018 by PB666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: They can send Orion to the LOP-G without an SLS. Other than pure politics, I don't understand why they wouldn't. How exactly? The only way i see is distributed lift. And that is also years away. 14 minutes ago, tater said: All those semi-circles move inwards so people can walk on them right next to the vehicle. Each cutout at each height is unique to the block, and it's supposedly part of the 33 months between block 1 and 1b flying. only ever read of the tower as the problem but i‘ll look into it. Edited March 23, 2018 by Canopus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Canopus said: How exactly? Now? Without its service module, of course, which right now is somewhere in Ohio. http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/space-centers/glenn-research-center/orion-service-module-completes-testing-nasa-plum-brook-station/ And also Lockheed Martin is trying to build two service module adaptors for the module (hopefully they will work better than those fitted on Zuma) [Some cursing coming from a bald-headed LM engineer fiddling around the back of a large white cylinder in Ohio, 'damn, this just isn't going to work, who designed this module anyway?'] Wouldn't be hilarious if they (EM-1 mission) send the launch around the moon and just drifts off into interplanetary orbit. [If you wanted to get the 'completed' version into space here is a cheapway, get an electron to do your bidding] https://www.etsy.com/listing/576805706/sls-orion-service-module-and-icps-175 Edited March 23, 2018 by PB666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 27 minutes ago, Canopus said: How exactly? The only way i see is distributed lift. And that is also years away. only ever read of the tower as the problem but i‘ll look into it. Well, Orion's service module isn't done yet. By the time it is done, we'll be flying Commercial Crew with both Dragon 2 and Starliner. Send Orion to LEO on Falcon Heavy, then send crew to Orion on Starliner via Atlas V, then send a single International Docking Adapter into LEO on Falcon Heavy, and use Falcon Heavy's restart capability to perform an eyeballs-out TLI burn. You could also do it all with SpaceX, but that seems unfair and would run into cadence problems since SpaceX only has one pad for FH and it's the same pad for CC. You could send Orion to LEO on Delta IV Heavy, but that seems unnecessarily expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Augustus_ Posted March 25, 2018 Author Share Posted March 25, 2018 Hey, look! ICPS is real hardware now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 11 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said: Hey, look! ICPS is real hardware now! It kinda already was though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said: Hey, look! ICPS is real hardware now! There must be an engine tucked back there somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 Just now, PB666 said: There must be an engine tucked back there somewhere? We might not see it because of the extendable nozzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Canopus said: We might not see it because of the extendable nozzle. RL10b-2 then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 Just now, PB666 said: RL10b-2 then. I guess since this is basically a Delta Cryogenic Second Stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 On 23.3.2018 at 7:49 PM, tater said: They have platforms at multiple levels that come up pretty close to the vehicle while stacked. It's not a crane thing. All those semi-circles move inwards so people can walk on them right next to the vehicle. Each cutout at each height is unique to the block, and it's supposedly part of the 33 months between block 1 and 1b flying. So i looked around and found that the VAB has four so called "High Bays" one of which will be used for SLS and is currently configured for block 1. One bay may go to Orbital ATK for their upcoming Launcher. That leaves two. So if they build a second platform for block 1b, they would theoretically have room in the VAB to build a separate integration facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 Part of the issue I think is that the stack height changes a lot for 1b since EUS is substantially larger than ICPS. So the lower diameters are larger, and then the top of the stack moves up from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Augustus_ Posted March 25, 2018 Author Share Posted March 25, 2018 On 3/23/2018 at 2:49 PM, tater said: They have platforms at multiple levels that come up pretty close to the vehicle while stacked. It's not a crane thing. All those semi-circles move inwards so people can walk on them right next to the vehicle. Each cutout at each height is unique to the block, and it's supposedly part of the 33 months between block 1 and 1b flying. Since the second MLP is funded, it's been mentioned that EM-2 and Europa Clipper may fly on Block I while the IB pad/VAB area are built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 I thought NASA wanted the 33 month delay because they cannot support a higher cadence anyway. They'll be lucky to get the SM in time as it is, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts