This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Budget

NASA Tries To Make You Think They Did Something Extra Speedy

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
July 31, 2012
Filed under ,

NASA’S Space Launch System Passes Major Agency Review, Moves to Preliminary Design
“SLS reached this major milestone less than 10 months after the program’s inception. The combination of the two assessments represents a fundamentally different way of conducting NASA program reviews. The SLS team is streamlining processes to provide the nation with a safe, affordable and sustainable heavy-lift launch vehicle capability. The next major program milestone is the preliminary design review, targeted for late next year.”
Keith’s note: Of course no mention is made by NASA of all the previous work (and considerable expense) that was put into Ares 1 and Ares V – which supposedly supported much of the current SLS design. NASA never mentions these “other” programs – and what they cost – and yet tries to make it sound like they just pulled off a neat low-cost/high speed trick – the same way the advertised “low” cost of Mars Phoenix never took actual Mars Polar Lander development costs into account.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

44 responses to “NASA Tries To Make You Think They Did Something Extra Speedy”

  1. John Kavanagh says:
    0
    0

    SLS is “affordable and sustainable” compared to what?

  2. Steve Whitfield says:
    0
    0

    SLS is ready to move from concept development to preliminary design

    The next major program milestone is the preliminary design review, targeted for late next year

    Let’s be generous and give them all of next year. That’s 17 months to do the SLS Preliminary Design.

    • Preliminary Design
    • 17 Months
    • NASA

    To borrow from Sesame Street: Which of these things is not like the other ones?

    I wish I hadn’t been taking a sip when I read that; I lost 5 minutes cleaning off my monitor.

     On another topic, unless I’ve completely misunderstood what I read last week, the proposed concepts for SLS booster upgrades have already been evaluated and a half-dozen different contracts for those upgrades are being awarded, and then, this week, we’re told that SLS concept development has just been finished.

    Ready, Fire, Aim!

    They can put all of the positive spin on this that they like, but they’ll never convince me that SLS isn’t a complete screw-up, from start to (improbable) finish. A hopeless waste of time, money, people’s careers, and a country’s future.

    Ready, Men? To the rear… March!

    Steve

  3. guapoman2000 says:
    0
    0

    Dear Keith,

    Considering that the previous Programs as you state were indeed cancelled then, yes, I do believe that NASA did a speedy thing as many of the records from previous programs get wiped out when those computer servers get decommissioned and scrapped.  Perhaps a few NASA Engineers had some drawings and presentations on their NASA Government computer to help out things.  Nevertheless, one has to give credit when credit is due and again, I do believe in this instance credit should be given instead of your continued posturing to knock the entire team just because you thrive in knocking.  Good day Sir.

  4. guapoman2000 says:
    0
    0

     Keep wiping yourself off….seems like another NASA hater…;(

    • Anonymous says:
      0
      0

      No, he’s being on point.  There is nothing new here.  While this “review” may have happened on some short time scale as defined by NASA, the fact remains that the PDR is still a long way off and likely on a typical NASA pace, i.e. similar to a glacial pace but slower and more convoluted.

  5. bobhudson54 says:
    0
    0

    The preliminary design review’s not scheduled until next year? What’s the excuse for the delay this time? Talk about mismanagement.

    • F3Victor7 says:
      0
      0

      it takes time to design something as complex as a heavy lifter. It’s not a delay, or mismanagement. They need time to actually design stuff. 

    • thebigMoose says:
      0
      0

      I think they are working on straightening the curvature of the spiral development trajectory!  🙂

  6. Stuart J. Gray says:
    0
    0

    ” The next major program milestone is the preliminary design review”

    Last time I checked the PRELIMINARY design review is the first milestone of any program unless you count the proposal.
    So when they complete the PDR, are they going to count the design finished while waiting for the Critical Design Review?

    • F3Victor7 says:
      0
      0

      They completed their combined SRR and SDR; likely possible in a combined review because of previous work on Ares V. Now they go to PDR in a year and half or so. The design CANT be finished by PDR;  no one is that good and by definition the design is preliminary; it’s not ready to be built yet, nor should it be. Most of the good rocket detail engineering stuff happens between PDR and CDR! 

    • whatagy says:
      0
      0

      The PDR is not the first program milestone for a manned vehicle.
      The first milestone in a manned program is the mission concept review followed by the system requirements review, then the system definition review, then comes the preliminary design review. 

      • DTARS says:
        0
        0

        What’s the mission for Spacex’s grasshopper. Don’t you think we need to go through a few years of planning reviews to figure out what they are up to there???

        • whatagy says:
          0
          0

          I don’t work for SpaceX so I know nothing about any of their projects or how they do their systems engineering.  I do know that anyone who actually believes that they have done everything on their own is naive.

          • DTARS says:
            0
            0

            I don’t give a rats how they are doing it!!!!

            SOMEBODIES FINALLY DOING IT!!!!!!!!!!!

            Mr. Naive lololol

            Grass hopper

            Goal Make man a multi planet species

            Mission build a cheaper vehicle to Leo using proven simple tech. Then designing it in a whole new way to create game changing lower launch prices.lolol

            How is that!!!!

  7. F3Victor7 says:
    0
    0

    Practically EVERY program draws on the experience (and as
    implied, funding spent) on previous programs. That they did not mention previous
    Constellation work is neither unusual nor a deliberate attempt (as you imply)
    to fool the public. Also, there is usually a system concept review (SCR) and
    likely a myriad of intermediate requirements reviews prior to PDR. To go from
    kickoff to PDR in 10 months for a program of this scope is actually remarkable.

    • Steve Pemberton says:
      0
      0

      “To go from kickoff to PDR in 10 months for a program of this scope is actually remarkable.”

      I assume from reading your other post that you meant SRR and SDR as the PDR is scheduled for late next year.

      • F3Victor7 says:
        0
        0

        Steve, my post is actually in error. i should have said “SRR to PDR in 10 months or so” instead of “kickoff to PDR in 10 months or so”

        • Steve Pemberton says:
          0
          0

          “i should have said “SRR to PDR in 10 months or so”
           
          I just hope for his monitor’s sake that Steve Whitfield isn’t sipping another drink when he reads this.

          • Steve Whitfield says:
            0
            0

            Fortunately, this time it went just to the left.  It did leave spots on my P-51 cap, though.

            Unlike others, I won’t assume that my personal program experiences are the standard everywhere.  I’d just like to say that for NASA to go from any DR to any other DR in a mere 10 months is fantasy.  If anyone would care to recall Mr. Cook’s “completed” Cpx PDR from not that long ago — it happened in record time, and it’s content was approximately zero.

            Perhaps we could start a pool on whether SLS PDR will go long or empty.  I’m wagering it’ll be both.

            Steve

  8. twammen says:
    0
    0

    NASA has no choice. SLS is mandated, a law NASA has to follow. I guess they might as well make it look as good as they can so it doesnt get canceled like every other program they have had.

  9. kapzen says:
    0
    0

    That still does not solve the biggest problem of them all: What are they going to launch with that thing…?

    • Gonzo_Skeptic says:
      0
      0

      What are they going to launch with that thing…?

      At the rate of one launch a year, by the point they have enough safe launches to show SLS is safe for a manned launch (like NASA is demanding for SpaceX), they will have had plenty of time to figure out what to do with this thing (other than deliver pork to certain Congressional districts).

  10. Marswx says:
    0
    0

    Don’t forget that Jay Barbaree keeps telling us that ATK’s Liberty launch vehicle has been developed without a cent of government funding!  Nevermind that $1.8B for Ares-I and how many billions for Shuttle’s SRBs. 

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      Yes indeed. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. These are not the droids you are looking for, etc.

  11. Doug Booker says:
    0
    0

    And to think that Sally ride had a plan to keep flying the shuttles until 2014 as part of the Columbia accident review.  And they could have put a little more money into commercial crew and it we would probably be flying manned Dragons and CST-100s by then.

    Imagine spending money on a Manned Space Program and actually being able to launch people instead of forever designing the next great rocket.  What a novel thought.

    • Anonymous says:
      0
      0

      Speaking of Sally Ride, she said during one of the Augustine II commission meetings in 2009 that we had this big system Apollo that we threw away for the next big thing [Shuttle]. And now we are going to throw away this [Shuttle] for the next big thing. My impression was Sally expressing in “non-verbal” ways that ending the Shuttle is probably not a good idea.

  12. Fred says:
    0
    0

    To be fair Keith SpaceX and all the other “Commercial” companies didn’t start from scratch, they leveraged all the previous rocket and spacecraft work that had come before them as well.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      SpaceX started from scratch. They did not have cancelled programs with billion of design work ready to reuse.

      • F3Victor7 says:
        0
        0

        SpaceX did indeed have that experience to draw from; they raided the industry for the top people (who learned their stuff using those billions) when they got started, and were able to clean sheet their designs using the industrial knowledge of those folks.

        • DTARS says:
          0
          0

          Thank God Mr. Musk created a place for a few minds to do something productive. I hope he makes a place for more people, after SLS gets canceled too.

          What if

          Ex SLS employees got to work on a version of tinkers recoverable lifter soon and we really did get to go to the moon, mars and settle space.

        • Paul451 says:
          0
          0

          And yet somehow no one else seems to be able to draw on the same experience and research.

      • Fred says:
        0
        0

         Really Keith? No they didn’t have canceled programs to leverage off of they had successful taxpayer programs to leverage off of. So you think Space X did not benefit one bit from all of the investments this nation and Russians have made toward rocket and spacecraft development and operations over the last 50+ years? So you are saying that if we would have been blessed to have had Elon born 50 years earlier he would have beaten the US and Soviets to space independent of any knowledge and development these 2 nations have made over these 50 years for the same amount (adjusted for inflation of course) of money as Space X is developing their current systems?

        • kcowing says:
          0
          0

          Ares V was cancelled. Guess you missed that. Look at the Ares V and SLS.  Look again. Look at the organizations, contractors, etc.  Please tell me that NASA used the some of the design and analysis (already paid for) during ESAS and Constellation and that they did not throw it out and start from scratch. As for you goof arm waving about Elon Musk – I get the impression you do this quite a lot.

          • NonPublius says:
            0
            0

            Keith – Your petty name calling and insulting responses to people who raise legitimate questions or disagree with your opinion is bush league.

          • kcowing says:
            0
            0

            Why do you read NASA Watch then?

        • Steve Whitfield says:
          0
          0

          Fred,

          Have you ever worked for an aerospace engineering company?  Your own company’s records, notes and experience can be gold; they’re what puts you in the game.  The competition’s records, notes and experience are of little more use to you as an engineer than are press releases.  And generally, the same is true of historical accomplishments.  It’s all very competetive.  You can’t Google! and see what the other guy did to solve a problem.  It makes no difference what anyone else is doing or has done, you have only your own team’s first-hand experience to work from, and that comes solely from your own company’s programs.  Whether or not taxpayer money was involved in a program doesn’t change this one bit.  You talk as if you believe that taxpayer paid programs automatically lead to public domain designs and experience.  It doesn’t  work that way.

          Steve

  13. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Here we discuss the progress of a project.

    Why are we doing the project???

    Because congress ordered it to have a heavy lifter to do cool things like go to mars.

    Neat!!!

    What is this thing like??

    We had a saturn V. What happened to that???

    Oh they canceled it!!!

    Why??? 

    Ohhh it was too expensive !!!

    Why was it too expensive????

    Ohhhh it was a completely throw away rocket!!!

    Sooo

    If they do get this thing completed we will not be able to operate it because it is an old fashion completely disposable rocket????

    The other night I watched a cool program called the other side of the moon on PBS. It was made about 20 years after we flew to the moon and discontinued building the SATURN V HLV.

    One of the astronauts fathers was interviewed because he was old enough to remember when the wright brothers first flew. He also recalled his first ride in a plane and he recalled linghbergs first flight across the Atlantic.

    It was about 65 years from the beginning  of human flight till his son sat 360 feet up in the air on the gaint Saturn V, yet another 45 years has gone by and we are still trying to build the same unaffordable rocket. And being told this is progress.

    Lolol

    I may not be a rocket scientist, but I sure can tell when the is jokes on me!!!!!!!

    Hey!!! 1800 people are trying to turn throw away rockets into affordable sky liners, working for my future. Why should I have any interest in NASAs unaffordable SLS program that only waste money trying to recreate the past.

    Progress building a bad idea is NOT progress!!! 

    I feel sorry for those having to work on SLS. 

     

    • Gonzo_Skeptic says:
      0
      0

      Because congress ordered it to have a heavy lifter to do cool things like go to mars get votes.

      Fixed.

  14. Launch1 says:
    0
    0

    I heard that SLS PDR is Dec 2012

  15. disqus_9GPy9GolN6 says:
    0
    0

    SLS has nothing to do with the Aries program, Heavy Lift is a Lockheed/Martin Design ,giving to Boeing because of politics, which will cost taxpayers much more.

  16. Nassau Goi says:
    0
    0

    Sigh.