RCgothic Posted September 29, 2022 Share Posted September 29, 2022 (edited) This hurricane is now even more ridiculous: Direct hit on LC39. It's expected to strengthen as it goes out to sea, so KSC isn't out of the woods yet. Edited September 29, 2022 by RCgothic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted September 29, 2022 Share Posted September 29, 2022 Good thing they finally called for a rollback… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 30, 2022 Share Posted September 30, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunlitZelkova Posted September 30, 2022 Share Posted September 30, 2022 Fingers crossed the Artemis donut will return at Krispy Kreme! Oh, and I guess hopefully SLS launches successfully too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gargamel Posted October 5, 2022 Share Posted October 5, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intelliCom Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 1 hour ago, tater said: Bet: It won't launch in November. What are the stakes? Uhhhhh my soul I guess? IDK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 They have a lot of incentives to light this candle. Every month this stretches out and components that had time limits reach or exceed them. They tend to be allowed to continue, but the reputational risk should an out of spec part fail is... huge. Imagine if the SRBs are given an extension on the "use within 1 year of stacking" requirement, then they burn through an O-ring like the Shuttle, and lose the vehicle? It will be the fault of the guy who made that call (even if it would have failed anyway). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intelliCom Posted October 12, 2022 Share Posted October 12, 2022 13 minutes ago, tater said: They have a lot of incentives to light this candle. Every month this stretches out and components that had time limits reach or exceed them. They tend to be allowed to continue, but the reputational risk should an out of spec part fail is... huge. Imagine if the SRBs are given an extension on the "use within 1 year of stacking" requirement, then they burn through an O-ring like the Shuttle, and lose the vehicle? It will be the fault of the guy who made that call (even if it would have failed anyway). I know, but I got a feeling that things ain't gonna go as smoothly as the results of all those youtube polls keep saying it will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 If they roll out, they will go for some of the day in the list above. They'll have to roll back in 25 days for the FTS if they don't fly. If they roll back, they have 1 more try, then they need some sort of waiver for the rollback limitation I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted October 18, 2022 Share Posted October 18, 2022 This is a joke. Of course no one else can make SLS rockets. What they should be asking for is vehicles that can perform the mission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted October 19, 2022 Share Posted October 19, 2022 Interesting. The extension actually covers fewer vehicles than expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 Ouch: ಠ_ಠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngrybobH Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 14 hours ago, tater said: Ahead of schedule? Is that an anomaly? Do they need to roll it back now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuky Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 5 minutes ago, AngrybobH said: Ahead of schedule? Is that an anomaly? Do they need to roll it back now? It is hilarious to see them boasting about being "ahead of schedule" when they are at least 6 years late Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 They better get some results soon. Something to ponder: https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1588532546324860928?s=20&t=EidgCBYN-jF9kbsNbo9M0Q Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 In the unlikely (imo) case it misses the November window too, it's going to be interesting to see how NASA approaches the booster life issue. Doing another extension without even using the VAB to do additional checks on them would most definitely be a case of launch fever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minmus Taster Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 8 hours ago, RCgothic said: Ouch: ಠ_ಠ This rocket man, I'm not even gonna try holding it back. I hate that flying coffin so much. Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minmus Taster Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 1 hour ago, Beccab said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 On 10/18/2022 at 11:05 AM, RCgothic said: This is a joke. Of course no one else can make SLS rockets. What they should be asking for is vehicles that can perform the mission. Unfortunately, you have to go through such a procedure in procurement every single time. And if it wasn't NASA, they'd probably have GAO breathing down their necks precisely for the reason you enumerated... and so you'd be treated to an amusingly long-winded description of the SLS worded so that SpaceX couldn't troll them by applying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.