Space launch system « Thread Started on Sept 14, 2011, 11:31pm »
As I am sure youguys have heard by now,NASA is developing a launch system known as SLS or space launch system.When it is finally built(and hopefully it will be)It will be the most powerful rocket ever built.Can't wait to see it.Your comments please.
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
"On two occasions, I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Joined: May 2005 Gender: Male Posts: 1,845 Location: South East England
Re: Space launch system « Reply #2 on Sept 15, 2011, 5:02am »
Indeed. Sadly, without the motivation of an idealistically driven competiton, what's to stop someone cancelling it later? It'll most likely have its budget cut, be pushed back year after year, and finally fade away, leaving NASA once more open to accusation of waste because of all the money spent on a system that never materialised.
Or am I being too cynical?
Don't get me wrong, I think the concept is great and if it does come to fruition I'll be cheering it off the launchpad with the rest. Experience means I have my doubts, however.
The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: They don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views." The Doctor, Doctor Who: The Face of Evil.
Joined: May 2005 Gender: Male Posts: 3,122 Location: Space City, Texas
Re: Space launch system « Reply #3 on Sept 15, 2011, 9:39am »
The request seemed to be more of a political request for a reason to go on living. Without crewed flight, NASA is an agency without a mission. The science side that flies non-crewed missions has its own constituency and does not need all the overhead associated with the rest of NASA. Think of NASA as a conglomerate with one strong business (science) and one weak business (crewed exploration). Like most conglomerates, stakeholders would rather have the businesses separated so they can gain from the strong business while the weak one restructures without dragging done the whole.
If you want a business example, look at Kraft, of Mac and Cheese fame, which after buying up a huge position in selling snack foods to the world is splitting the company to separate its slow grocery operations from the fast growing snack businesses.
The success of the request to get a huge new rocket into is in doubt in my mind. Congress is in a furious scramble to cut the growth in spending while military hardware is getting used up fast in our pointless war. The decisions will, in part, be contingent on how strongly the contractors are willing to lobby for the program vs the prospects of offsetting some military contracts.
My bet is that the broader military equipment market will win and NASA's development efforts will focus more and more on non-crewed missions. Earth orbit and lunar capable rockets are not "rocket science" in the way they used to be, and crew launch vehicles will be better left to the private sector until NASA comes up with something revolutionary instead of recycled.
Re: Space launch system « Reply #4 on Sept 15, 2011, 2:37pm »
Youguys are the greatest!I agree with and take wisdom from all your opinions.As great a concept as the Space Launch system is,it will probably be canceled.Our bureaucrats are as clueless as anything.
Youguys are the greatest!I agree with and take wisdom from all your opinions.As great a concept as the Space Launch system is,it will probably be canceled.Our bureaucrats are as clueless as anything.
I would not say they are clueless. Proposals like this are made for a variety of reasons. Only one of which is the idea that they will be immediately funded. Another is what alluded to above, the need to claim a stake for the future. NASA has a large staff that could become entirely unnecessary if it goes out of the rocket business and that pool of knowledge would not be easily rebuilt. So NASA needs to work to stay in the game long enough get through the lean times until something revolutionary can be put on the table. Remember governments don't make decisions the same way that you and I do.
Youguys are the greatest!I agree with and take wisdom from all your opinions.As great a concept as the Space Launch system is,it will probably be canceled.Our bureaucrats are as clueless as anything.
I would not say they are clueless. Proposals like this are made for a variety of reasons. Only one of which is the idea that they will be immediately funded. Another is what alluded to above, the need to claim a stake for the future. NASA has a large staff that could become entirely unnecessary if it goes out of the rocket business and that pool of knowledge would not be easily rebuilt. So NASA needs to work to stay in the game long enough get through the lean times until something revolutionary can be put on the table. Remember governments don't make decisions the same way that you and I do.
Youguys are the greatest!I agree with and take wisdom from all your opinions.As great a concept as the Space Launch system is,it will probably be canceled.Our bureaucrats are as clueless as anything.
I would not say they are clueless. Proposals like this are made for a variety of reasons. Only one of which is the idea that they will be immediately funded. Another is what alluded to above, the need to claim a stake for the future. NASA has a large staff that could become entirely unnecessary if it goes out of the rocket business and that pool of knowledge would not be easily rebuilt. So NASA needs to work to stay in the game long enough get through the lean times until something revolutionary can be put on the table. Remember governments don't make decisions the same way that you and I do.
True.And I should be careful to show more respect around here so as to not get counseled on my behaviour.It's really not respectful to call anyone clueless Even if you disagree with them.It's just that other nations are taking the lead in space and we must retain our lead in all area's even in space and even with the budget deficit.
"Show us a photo of either the descent or the ascent rockets firing and the exhaust plume. And exactly how does a space craft fly when "The engine is NOT ON"" -Stelios at the DIF Google search this site
Re: Space launch system « Reply #11 on Sept 16, 2011, 5:13pm »
The SLS is the industry's answer to SpaceX's Falcon Heavy, which has yet to fly. I have mixed feelings about SpaceX -- they make too many elementary mistakes to be a credible contender. However, NASA's claims that the SLS leverages proven technology in order to reign in development costs and schedules is something we've heard before.
The usual suspects will complain that this is just corporate welfare for the outgoing United Space Alliance, and that we should be basing our decisions on market forces rather than keeping cherished companies in business. But "new ideas" mean a bumpy journey to production flight, and SpaceX isn't filling me with confidence just yet. Full disclosure: I'm a veteran of Boeing's launch-vehicle business.
Regardless of which design wins, the problem of waiting until 2015 to select a shuttle follow-on is that our knowledge will be stale by then. We won't be able to leverage any existing knowledge if we aren't building and flying heavy-lift vehicles in the meantime. This is what happens when politicians want to dilly-dally. Five years is the typical allowable fallow time, and we're already a year or so into that. We need a commitment for development funding by 2013 if not sooner.
Another problem is that engineering the superlative is always proportionally more expensive than engineering the Merely Adequate. This provides for Congress to become suitably shocked at the outrageous and wasteful practice of building the world's largest rocket.
Politics inevitably doom projects like this. One Congress can propose an ambitious plan to provide jobs for Americans, re-establish U.S. supremacy in launch-vehicle technology, and revitalize the American economy. Then another Congress (or sometimes even the same one) can later cut wasteful spending. Both reap a political reward, depending on the vicissitude of the voters at some point.
"Earth diameter is 7,900 miles, and Moon diameter is 2,160 miles. It takes on average 90 minutes to complete one Earth orbit, so one Moon orbit should take roughly 25 minutes." - Sam "NasaScam" Colby
"you data is still open for interpretation, after all a NASA employee might of wipe a booger or dropped a hair on it" - showtime
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
Logged![[avatar]](http://apollo-history-and-hoax.com/images/phantomwolf2a.gif "[avatar]")
![[icq]](http://images.proboards.com/icq.gif "[icq]")
![[yim]](http://images.proboards.com/yim.gif "[yim]")
![[msn]](http://images.proboards.com/msn.gif "[msn]")
![[aim]](http://images.proboards.com/aim.gif "[aim]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s37/b2220128/achnaten.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.evilscience.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/NeuAvatarHttpHandler.ashx.jpeg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz99/Chew64/Chew/me.jpg "[avatar]")
