That #MadeInAmerica Spacecraft Thing Had A Few Flaws
Orion Spacecraft at the White House for the Made in America Showcase
“NASA’s Orion spacecraft that flew Exploration Flight Test-1 on Dec. 5, 2014 is seen on the South Lawn of the White House, Sunday, July 22, 2018 in Washington, DC. Lockheed Martin, NASA’s prime contractor for Orion, began manufacturing the Orion crew module in 2011 and delivered it in July 2012 to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center where final assembly, integration and testing was completed. More than 1,000 companies across the country manufactured or contributed elements to the spacecraft.”
Coalition for Deep Space Exploration Participates in White House “Made in America” Showcase
“NASA’s Orion spacecraft is built by Lockheed Martin; the SLS rocket is built by Boeing, Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman; and the rocket’s Launch Platform/ Exploration Ground Systems is supported by Jacobs.”
Keith’s note: And the eager #MadeInAmerica fans left out a paragraph “The Service Module is being built by Airbus Defence and Space.” which is, of course, a European company using lots of European subcontractors. The European Service Module (ESM) is a rather crucial part of the overall system. How odd that the Coalition – and NASA – seem to forget to mention this fact in the furry of trying to hop on the latest White House slogan bandwagon.
Its also odd, that in the rush to tow piece of space hardware inside the White House gate that no one mentions the wholly American spacecraft being built by the private sector by Boeing, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada, Virgin Galactic, and Blue Origin. That is the real #MadeInAmerica story. And why wasn’t the Commercial Spaceflight Federation invited to participate? Their members have more spacecraft and launch systems #MadeInAmerica than NASA does.
|
|
And showing off Orion as American-made isn’t entirely honest. The capsule is, so the statement is technically true. But the capsule is basically useless without the service module. The first two service modules are being built in Europe, and NASA has not announced any plans for building later service modules. That makes about as “made in America” as a Boeing airliner with Rolls-Royce engines.
The decision to go to the European SM was a political decision to allow the ESA to not fly two resupply missions to ISS. A big chunk of the SM is US made, however.
Honest accounting would probably find that the shift to an ESA SM has cost more than it was supposed to “save” originally.
Yea but that doesn’t compare to the Whiffle ball.
Given the expense and how far behind schedule Orion has gotten, not to mention the lack of any coherent plan for its use, Orion is an embarrassment. Progress on both Dragon and Starliner have been far more positive.
Perhaps SpaceX, Boeing, and Blue Origin are all too busy preparing their spacecraft for near-term flights to truck them out to DC for a photo-op?
The Orion capsule on the other hand has no urgent appointments…
After billions of dollars spent, the Orion still looks really rough, while the Dragon V2 looks far more polished.
yeah, you’d’ve thought they might have put some lipstick on it …
Well,that is a flown test article…..
The photo op is worth at least six months schedule slip and cost plus funding!
That’s the NASA way! thinking and talking about going to the moon is better than actually doing it.
Photo ops are good for promotions too. Getting promoted out just before missing a milestone comes in handy at times.
What are the odds that anyone passing by 1600 Pen Ave has a clue as to what that “capsule” thing even is or what its importance might even be?
Kind of embarrassing considering how the POTUS treated our NATO allies.
Both Bush and Obama brought up paying what they promised. PTrump cared enough to push the issue rather than spend the tax payers money out of expediency.
The amount paid by allies isn’t the issue here. There has been agreement on both sides for many years about apparent funding inequities. And indeed the Europeans who have been historically funding NATO at a lower than agreed rate have been on a regular and measured plan to increase contributions, year by year, until the magical amount is paid (temporary realities in the larger world that are translated into economic blips aside).
They’re scared and are lobbying hard.
Never let facts get in the way of a good headline !
Technically, the thing presented, the capsule, is American made; and probably nobody who doesn’t read this site would appreciate the subtle distinction (capsule vs capsule and SM).
besides the ambition of the design (ie SLS) is American, even if it (ie SLS) may be as useless as a capsule w/o its SM.
SLS Mafia is strong. Real Strong.
The King (SLS) wears no clothes.
To be fair, taking the Orion Service Module away from Lockheed-Martin and giving it to ESA was a relatively recent change in the history of the program. And it seems to have resulted in serious negative consequences too, because of technical delays with the first Service Module and questionable assurance of Service Module availability beyond the first few.
So why did NASA do it? I don’t recall ever seeing a plausible excuse for changing the Service Module supplier. Probably a decision more wrapped up in international politics than in any possible programmatic benefit to NASA.
The reason was that the ESA “owed” the ISS program two resupply flights. They didn’t want to do them and the agreement was made for them to provide two service modules in lieu of cash or the missions. It was supposed to save time and money.
Of course, the SMs they supply are only partial ones, IIRC the avionics bay, life support, and more are still US made. They are providing the propulsion, structure and the solar panels. From what I have heard, a LOT of time has been spent on redesign and negotiation of the interfaces.
Yes, I heard of that reason. I never considered it a plausible excuse for changing the supplier of such a critical module of the Orion at such a critical phase of development.
Why, it’s as if NASA considers the Orion project nothing more than pork to be carved up at whim!
What is Orion supposed to use as its service module for mission number three? Since ESA is only building two SM?
I think even leftover Space Shuttle OMS engines are being repurposed for the ESA built Orion Service Module! What happens when those parts run out?
Perhaps even NASA doesn’t think there will be more than two Orion missions.
How did they hold up the parachutes?
Keith ‘shopped them in.
The original photo is…
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/…
cut with the parachute test…
https://upload.wikimedia.or…