NASA Still Thinks Fuel Depots Are A Good Idea (But Won't Say So)
NASA JSC Briefing: Propellant Depot Alternate DRM 34B – Mission Risk, Reliability, and Availability Analysis
“From the standpoint of S&MA’s role in technology assessment and prioritization, it seems depot technologies should be a high priority for investment due to their potential to achieve Agency goals to achieve “Low Cost Reliable Access To Space”, if the technology can be successfully developed, demonstrated, matured, infused, evolved, and applied in future architectures so as to fully realize its benefit.”
Transcript Regarding Fuel Depots, Hearing on “A Review of NASA’s Space Launch System”
“ADMINISTRATOR BOLDEN: I don’t have the answer, and I’ll get it for the record. But I will tell you in the ongoing evaluation that I asked in coming to the conclusion that I did on the SLS, we looked at multiple scenarios, one of which was, you know, flight to Earth orbit or what we call an “Earth orbit rendezvous,” and it turned out that that was not as economical nor as reliable as the single flight beyond Earth orbit rendezvous, the way that we envision it now.”
– NASA Studies Show Cheaper Alternatives to SLS, earlier post
– NASA’s Ongoing (But Closely Held) Interest In SLS Alternatives, earlier post
– Update on NASA’s Hidden Fuel Depot Studies, earlier post
Keith,
Thanks for the great article! I’m glad that it seems like people are starting to realize that depots would be a much better deal for JSC than SLS would be. It still cracks me up that NASA has been using a 1.5% chance of catastrophic AR&D failure–glad they gave some numbers for what ISS experience actually indicates. The 1.5% rate is like 1000x riskier than an aircraft carrier landing, and always struck me as intentionally pessimistic.
~Jon
So we are looking at this after we burn up all the Shuttle fuel tanks in the atmosphere? If NASA is to survive it has to get a vision and a president to fight for that vision.
Lolol hope you liked my ET city post! lolol
Any success of logistical/resource technologies make all of them more viable.
Again,Bolden never gives a straight answer to questions,it’s always,”I’ll have to check and get back with you”.This is a typical Obama administration reaction and chances are he won’t answer the question but offer a “spin” on it.
I found Bolden’s remarks disingenuous. Faced with a positive report on fuel depots, he restates the need for an SLS-class booster — which, frankly, is apt to be cancelled at great cost. The contrast between the depot report and Bolden’s apparent position is stark. If this is a realistic example, there is a dangerous disconnect between NASA’s management and its engineers.
No, this is part of the DC game. Bolden is frequently skewered by members of the Hill for lukewarm support of SLS. He cannot do anything but back SLS no matter no how.
Otherwise he’ll get some nasty calls.
Depots threaten the basis of SLS. You get them running well, and the argument for SLS takes a big hit.
Add orbital assembly / EML station / ISRU / SEP, and you’ll never ever build a big rocket again, even for Mars.
Many don’t want to slip down that slippery slope.
Propellant is likely to be taken from the LEO depot to the EML-1/2 depot by SEP tug. The EML-1/2 depot would fuel the lunar landers and Mars Transfer Vehicles.
The Sidemount Shuttle was also determined by NASA to be cheaper to develop than the SLS. But cheap is not always better. And Congress wanted to restore NASA’s heavy lift capability after it was lost during the Nixon administration. Plus the SLS does not preclude the use of fuel depots, it actually enhances their use.
But the best fuel depot would be on the lunar surface at the lunar poles where reusable lunar shuttles could be refueled with lunar resources for round trips from the lunar surface to lunar orbit and the Earth-Moon Lagrange points.
Marcel F. Williams
The best fuel depot would be the center core of Tinkers 7 core falcon heavy. Two falcon heavies on either side of the central core of your choice of fuel type. The center core is a deep space upper stage, no wait it’s a fuel depot! Two functions for one piece of hardware. Faster cheaper provider space supported. Lifts more than SLS too.
The vision is there… some people on the 9th floor refuse to accept it as it destroys their fife domes. Politicians cannot cover this up forever.
Fiefdoms. A fife dome is a large pile of small flutes.
Sorry to post off subject but think the following are reasons to hurry with fuel depots too.
Ever since tinker first talked about making an x-37? into a space-liner I have been baffled as to why it hasn’t or won’t happen. In another thread I left a silly post about Spacex adding wings and landing gear to a falcon to maybe make a better reusable LV/ space-liner or 2nd 3rd generation dragon/falcon and pushing it on a track to the speed of sound before launch.
I have always thought an x-37 space- liner on a recoverable falcon heavy is the way to go to start the tourist space liner age!
Sadly for us to have that space-liner. commercial/provider space will have to reinvent it from near scratch I think.
In the 1950s or early 60s I recall that pictures of early staged rockets had little wings on them like Von Bueron was thinking x-37 like recoverable design all along.
If public space Nasa/congress wanted the public to have access to space NASA would all ready be building the x-37 D or E
I just watched
Lester Brown on climate change.
I believe all his thoughts on global warming are correct.
Global food shortages do to climate change.
Past civilizations collapsed do to food shortages.
Our civilization will collapse too.
Glaciers melt rivers dry up, food can’t feed the people, the s$&@ hits the fan (no brainer!!!!) That small window of opportunity to get into space, Elon talked about may close.
Other countries are leading the way to power the planet in a sustainable way, as our country argues like children. Again we can’t even agree on the problem yet alone plan a solution. As I feel it is urgent that we reinvent the way we power this planet and control our population. It is just as urgent that we learn to get ourselves affordably into space to get any and all resources in our reach.
The clock is ticking USA !!!!!!!
Don’t become irrelevant!!!!!!
As others have said, as much as we learned flying the space shuttle the one most important thing we failed to do was figure out how to fly rockets and innovate at the same time. Maybe Spacex will figure that out in the near future without congress!!!
After 236 years maybe the USA needs to reinvent our form of government? How’s the Canadian model doing Steve??????
I could be wrong here but I believe at least Obama understands the need to reinvent how we get power and the importance of Lester’s message, does Romney??
I didn’t speak up in the Global warming thread partly because I feel there is know debate, it’s a no brainer. I have a kid moving to the charleston South carolina coast and I’m wondering how safe he is should a large chunk of ice slide off Greenland in the next 25 years. Anyone want to take bets on that disaster not happening!!!!
Lol thinking of Keith’s picture of a man with his head stuck in the sand. Lol that man is uncle Sam!!!!
Sorry for the long rambling post. But to me it’s all relevant to our reason that we most start to settle space now and stop playing my rocket is bigger than your rocket pork games.
Joe Q scared public/tax payer
All of you at NASA WATCH should watch Mat Damons Journey to planet earth about Lester Brown and think about it!!!
http://www.pbs.org/journeyt…
I’m not an overly bright guy like many of you, but I believe that most of the time when I see truth I can recognize it.
Doesn’t take a rocket scientistt
Fellow earthling
Out!!!!!