jadebenn Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 (edited) No concrete reasoning yet. Some speculation that Gerst's defense of Gateway didn't resonate with the current administration, but that's not proven. Edited July 11, 2019 by jadebenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 37 minutes ago, jadebenn said: Could. OMB's apparently been gunning for it (moreso than they usually gun for human spaceflight programs, that is). That would beg the question of how you'd work around its absence though. We can't do an Apollo-style mission with our current resources. While the ousting of Gerst was almost certainly a policy thing, we don't yet know what policy thing it was. If the goal is getting back to the lunar surface, Gateway doesn't actually help at all. It adds dv, and all the parts have to be sent there (at non-trivial cost). Any lander they might build can be sent to LLO easier than it can be sent to Gateway, THEN LLO. The least parts mission architecture is likely sending a 2-3 crew lander in 2 parts that could self-assemble via docking (already the plan with Gateway). That could be sent ahead with 2 FH launches (or something similar like NG). They could then also send a small tug, or the Ascent stage could have a tug with it, since it need not be as massive as the Descent stage. That tug stays with Orion in LLO, and has a few hundred extra m/s of dv while pushing the Orion CSM. Orion does it's TEI burn in 2 parts, first the OMS on the SM, then it flips, and uses the tug for the final small amount, and any midcourse correction. The tug only needs to provide something like 100m/s, so any eyeballs out discomfort would be short lived (and it could be designed for lower thrust). 33 minutes ago, jadebenn said: No concrete reasoning yet. Some speculation that Gerst's defense of Gateway didn't resonate with the current administration, but that's not proven. Yeah, I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Spoiler 1 hour ago, tater said: The tug only needs to provide something like 100m/s, so any eyeballs out discomfort would be short lived (and it could be designed for lower thrust). Also nobody nobody dismissed traditional measures. Spoiler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 1 hour ago, tater said: If the goal is getting back to the lunar surface, Gateway doesn't actually help at all. It adds dv, and all the parts have to be sent there (at non-trivial cost). Any lander they might build can be sent to LLO easier than it can be sent to Gateway, THEN LLO. Yer, but there’s an emphasis on creating some kind of semipermanent presence there too. I don’t really like gateway for that but some kind of logistic focal point to consolidate resources and capability would be nice. I haven’t had a look to see if the objectives and experiments planned for the first manned mission are stated anywhere. Anyone know if that’s been announced yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 A tug doesn't necessarily have to be a pusher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wjolcz Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 1 hour ago, RCgothic said: A tug doesn't necessarily have to be a pusher. It doesn't. But you save a lot of weight and engineering team's head scratching making it a pusher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Dale Christopher said: I haven’t had a look to see if the objectives and experiments planned for the first manned mission are stated anywhere. Anyone know if that’s been announced yet? There really isn't a good reason for an orbiting Moon station except that it's where Orion can go. Edited July 11, 2019 by tater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 (note that there is not even a chance of launch in less than a year---NET end of 2020) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 4 hours ago, tater said: There really isn't a good reason for an orbiting Moon station except that it's where Orion can go. Where is a place having a good reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadebenn Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 (edited) We now have pretty good confirmation that, despite rumors that the OMB's been gunning for Gateway, it was not the reason behind Gerst's demotion. NASA administrator on recent personnel shakeup: ‘There’s no turmoil at all’ Quote So given all of these changes, does that mean that we can expect some large structural changes to the Artemis architecture moving forward? No, not for the Artemis architecture. All of the elements are in place. We’ve got SLS and Orion. We’re going to build the Gateway, and we’re going to build a lander, and that architecture is not changing. Edited July 13, 2019 by jadebenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 http://nasawatch.com/archives/2019/07/nasa-admits-tha-1.html Quote "[NASA SLS Core Stage Manufacturing Manager Chad] BRYANT: Think of it as a jobs program. So we're taking - all of the funding that is given us to build this rocket, we're creating jobs everywhere. And not only that, we're all coming together to build a product that is going to make us proud to be Americans." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinimumSky5 Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 Somehow, and this is only supposition, I get the feeling the feeling that those Americans would be much happier knowing that their jobs weren't just makework, and were actually advancing spaceflight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 4 hours ago, MinimumSky5 said: Somehow, and this is only supposition, I get the feeling the feeling that those Americans would be much happier knowing that their jobs weren't just makework, and were actually advancing spaceflight. You do realize a lot of them are young and new to the industry right? Supervisors are likely swamped by dozens of rookie personnel because NASA is the one giving the newer hands in spaceflight a chance to work on rockets and spacecraft before they’re hired by more practical companies like ULA, SpaceX or Blue Origin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadebenn Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, tater said: http://nasawatch.com/archives/2019/07/nasa-admits-tha-1.html "[NASA SLS Core Stage Manufacturing Manager Chad] BRYANT: Think of it as a jobs program. So we're taking - all of the funding that is given us to build this rocket, we're creating jobs everywhere. And not only that, we're all coming together to build a product that is going to make us proud to be Americans." Oh boy, I'm gonna have fun seeing this quote on every space site for the next few months. Thanks, Chad. Talk about a "foot-in-mouth" incident. 4 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said: You do realize a lot of them are young and new to the industry right? Supervisors are likely swamped by dozens of rookie personnel because NASA is the one giving the newer hands in spaceflight a chance to work on rockets and spacecraft before they’re hired by more practical companies like ULA, SpaceX or Blue Origin. It's true. From what I can tell, the Shuttle people still are in management (for the most part), but the SLS is otherwise mainly being made by the next generation of NASA workers. I suppose many of the shuttle people decided The Gap was as good as time as any to retire. Edited July 16, 2019 by jadebenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 21 minutes ago, jadebenn said: 10 hours ago, tater said: http://nasawatch.com/archives/2019/07/nasa-admits-tha-1.html Quote "[NASA SLS Core Stage Manufacturing Manager Chad] BRYANT: Think of it as a jobs program. So we're taking - all of the funding that is given us to build this rocket, we're creating jobs everywhere. And not only that, we're all coming together to build a product that is going to make us proud to be Americans." Oh boy, I'm gonna have fun seeing this quote on every space site for the next few months. Thanks, Chad O say does that star-spangled banner yet waaaaaave. o7 XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 5 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said: You do realize a lot of them are young and new to the industry right? Supervisors are likely swamped by dozens of rookie personnel because NASA is the one giving the newer hands in spaceflight a chance to work on rockets and spacecraft before they’re hired by more practical companies like ULA, SpaceX or Blue Origin. I know a few people who were hired by Blue Origin. They were (relatively to me, anyway) young and new to the industry. Of course, that's just anecdotal. It could be that every other person at Blue Origin is a grizzled veteran steely-eyed missile man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted July 16, 2019 Share Posted July 16, 2019 I believe most of the senior personnel at SpX, BO, and the other startups are NASA veterans.with the rank and file filled with aspiring kerbonauts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 On 7/10/2019 at 9:35 PM, ZooNamedGames said: SLS is less than a year away from LAUNCH day, not from a major development milestone- from leaving the ground with all of its equipment (minus LSS and that isn’t even NASA’s problem, that’s ESA’s for being slow). Um, nope... So a year is mid-2020, 2 years is mid 2021, so we're 2.5 years (earliest) from SLS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barzon Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 (edited) being reliable and trustworthy about SLS and being Eric Berger are mutually exclusive. Edited July 17, 2019 by Barzon Kerman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 Bridenstine's comments were made before the Senate. It's public record: Quote Twice during testimony before the US Senate Committee Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Bridenstine referenced 2021 as the expected launch date for Artemis-1. "I think 2021 is definitely achievable for the Artemis-1 launch vehicle," Bridenstine said in response to a question from Sen. Roger Wicker, the Mississippi Republican who chairs the committee. He thinks 2021 is achievable. That means it's not 2020 at all, and that 2022 is possible as well. Under oath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barzon Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 2020 is definitely possible. keep in mind, this is old. more progress has been made Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said: 2020 is definitely possible. The NASA Administrator literally just testified that 2020 is NOT possible. Saying a launch MIGHT be achievable in 2021 without question means 2020 is off the table, otherwise he would have said they might be able to make 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 1 minute ago, tater said: The NASA Administrator literally just testified that 2020 is NOT possible. Saying a launch MIGHT be achievable in 2021 without question means 2020 is off the table, otherwise he would have said they might be able to make 2020. He also didn’t say 2020 wasn’t possible. He said that 2021 was. He’s likely covering his tail so if something goes wrong, no one can say he was wrong. Plus, he can set himself up to be “ahead of schedule” by intentionally listing it as later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barzon Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 Bridenstine is very good at navigating the political oceans of human BEO exploration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts