Faith-Based Support For SLS/Orion In Huntsville
Lots of wishful thinking at #VonBraun symposium about future of @NASA_SLS in a world of flat budgets – as costs rise and schedules slip pic.twitter.com/ffVWs2Ygc0
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) October 25, 2017
Don’t be so sure. At one point ULA appeared set for life.
But things change. Wired for instance has a piece about how attractive SX looks is to the US military https://www.wired.com/story…
The times they are a-changin’.
Translation: Money talks.
It should be pointed out, however, that the DOD was dragged kicking and screaming over the last decade to get to this point. They ‘conspired’ with Boeing/LockMart to create an uncompetitive monopoly; then tried to throw roadblocks in the way of anyone trying to do better. A true ‘military-industrial’ complex reaction to new entrants and innovation, that was NOT in America’s interests. If it wasn’t for one African immigrant- along with a NASA Administrator 10 years ago who was convinced by his arguments – none of the massive improvements in space access happening today, would be happening, at all.
It is kind of tough to miss those neato fiery landings! Back when we had Shuttles, people always paid attention to the launch. They were exciting…every time… and won NASA plenty of good will. Space X is now enjoying exactly the same effect.
Point taken.
But I’d also point out that all Mr. Musk did (!) was piece together available technology. He hasn’t invented anything new, really; this has been discussed countless times here, and elsewhere. Propulsive landings and methane engines, for instance, aren’t new.
Mr. Musk brought two things: a new idea, and the ability to merge existing tech.
It’s probable that someone else would have done the same.
None of these comments, penned by a guy who never invented a damn thing, should be seen as serious 🙂
Musk brought something else, guts, money and strategic vision. The DC-X made propulsive landings years ago from low speed and altitude, but no one had the nerve to try landing an operational booster; it was a very high risk venture. Most of the other startups are gone. NASA will not even let SpaceX take the trivial risk of man-rating propulsive landing of the Dragon by testing it on the landings of unmanned ISS supply missions.
Don’t get me wrong, Musk has his negatives to be sure. I’ve met people who never want to work for him again. Same with Bezos. But we went five years without a single non-government satellite launch from US soil, and Musk won back the market when no one else could, not with propulsive landing, but with recognition that cost was critical and determination to win back commerical space launch and high tech manufacturing. His ventures with Paypal, Solar City and Tesla simarly involved pushing existing people and technology to do what was needed to create a new industry.
K Street Money.
Good point. I see that SX spent $1.3 Million, and ULA $900k, lobbying Congress in 2015 (according to SpaceNews). Dunno exactly where the focus was, nor if they also lobbied the Pentagon.
I’d like to think that performance has something to do with the military switch.
It gets worse. SLS and Orion won’t settle for flat budgets. Leadership there, if it can be called that, will continue to indirectly justify getting budget increases higher than any small top line NASA budget increases. This is the lingo of “NASA needs to focus” meaning SLS Orion needs some other programs money. This will diminish further growing the kind of support that makes an exploration program sustainable.
Then to show how out of touch SLS Orion is, the day the new committee suggests the programs be canceled, and they will be, so many there will act hurt and surprised.
Who says NASA is in a world of flat budgets?
This is not 2010 when the stupid term “flat is the new up” was used to justify the Obama Administration giving NASA the same budget two years in a row. In fact, NASA’s budget is up by $3B over the last five years and while that is partially offset by inflation, with a strong champion in the White House (VP Pence) and agreement to support a lunar exploration goal in Congress and the Executive Branch, its likely to go even higher.
And having spent billions on SLS and Orion, why would we throw that away? To use SpaceX’ latest viewgraph? Let’s build a Falcon Heavy! – no a Mars Colonial Transporter!, no, a BFR – which will also replace long distance airlines! -No, lets do (Insert new idea from next year’s IAC speech). Its just ridiculous that so many here are so blinded with hatred of SLS and Orion that they don’t see that these programs are making real progress with real hardware.
I disagree.
The current Congress and Administration are trying to cut “discretionary” budgets so they can increase defense spending and hand out huge tax cuts to the wealthy (and perhaps the middle class). NASA’s budget isn’t going up in any meaningful way anytime soon.
If NASA went up by $1 or $2B a year it would be huge for exploration but have an infinitesimal impact of the deficit; that’s no guarantee it will happen but, combined with the ramp down in Orion development costs and the eventual end of the ISS in 2024 or 2028 and that is quite a lot of money for an exploration program. Now we will just have to see if the White House & Congress are serious!
If ISS is cancelled we will not be stuck in LEO. We will be stuck on the ground.
It’s not a matter of blind hatred. I know SLS is making progress with real hardware. But that’s true of the Falcon Heavy as well. My problem with SLS is that I (and other planetary scientists) would like a heavy lift launch vehicle for unmanned planetary missions. The price of a Falcon Heavy, at the amount they quote and have already signed contracts for, is on par with what NASA would pay for a typical Discovery or New Horizons launch. For SLS, the launch cost, alone, is the price of two Discovery missions. Heavy lift is great, but if it costs so much that we can’t afford a spacecraft to launch, it’s not too useful.
Just a set of four new RS-25s for the core stage will cost $280 million.
I do not feel it’s productive to brand people who disagree with you as being motivated by hate. I am motivated by a love of efficient design and practical value. I loved Shuttle for its audacious combination of power and elegance. But I understood that it was impractical and unaffordable, because its design incorporated cost drivers that were frozen into the design before OFT-1. Specifically, the solid fuel boosters were cheap to develop but hazardous and heavy from the moment they were manufactured. They required massive facilities, the VAB, mobile launch platforms, crawlers, rotating service structure, RPSF, and SRB retrieval ships. Stacking the boosters was labor intensive, time consuming, and hazardous. There was no way the Shuttle could be redesigned to reduce cost significantly. Yet when SLS was built, the lessons of Shuttle were forgotten and the same cost drivers frozen into the design. The only real change is that the RS-25 engines, designed to be reusable, are being thrown away. It will cost $70M apiece to build more and there is no funded program to do so, so at the moment there is no way to continue beyond four flights.
Unfortunately we have come to take so much pride in the massive structures, vehicles, and rockets that we have lost track of how much money it takes just to maintain the VAB roof. I have met many of the people who sailed the retrieval ships, maintained the crawlers, and did many other challanging tasks. They are amazing people. But the whole effort was in vain, because there was no way to reduce the cost to a sustainable level. I am not against the SLS because I hate it. I am against it because it is clear that the program will be cancelled, after having consumed billions of precious tax dollars.
As a critic of SLS I’ve said basically the same thing: that SLS is a helluva machine. It is a stunning piece of kit for sure.
In some ways, though, it’s like (as someone once said) a bit like breeding a bigger horse.
Still, as a Florida resident I plant to be as close as possible to the launch — as I a sure you are as well. I was able to watch several of the moon launches. It is something one never forgets.