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.
SLS and Orion

Bridenstine May Not Be Drinking That SLS Koolaid

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
August 2, 2018
Filed under ,
Bridenstine May Not Be Drinking That SLS Koolaid

How can NASA return to the Moon? By making everything reusable, chief says, Ars Technica
“However, the big rocket NASA has been developing since 2011, the Space Launch System, is entirely expendable. It will cost $1 to $2 billion per launch, in comparison to much less expensive (and moderately less capable) commercial vehicles. A senior NASA official sitting at the table, Johnson Space Center Director Mark Geyer, responded, “It’s a good question about the rocket.” What the SLS brings, he said, is an enormous Delta V capability that, combined with Orion’s tug capacity, was necessary to build the Deep Space Gateway. “Energy is a key part,” Geyer said. “So it’s a big rocket, with a large size. To date, that’s not something we’ve been able to reuse.” Bridenstine, however, would not be deterred from his interest in the potential of commercial companies to drive down the cost of spaceflight.”
Keith’s note: Instead of making Bridenstine available in a forum where space media from around the country can ask Bridenstine questions about broad areas of NASA policy, NASA PAO limits his access to small groups of media. While Bridenstine is rather open and engaging in these settings, this does limit the ability of the news media around the country to ask Bridenstine questions on a regular basis. And important news tends to dribble out instead. Of course, there is a simple solution invented back in the Apollo days – but apparently NASA does not have enough speakerphones to go around right now.
As for Bridenstine’s comments on SLS, it should not go unnoticed that he does not reflexively hop on the SLS propaganda bandwagon as being the answer to all things that NASA may want to be doing in space – forever. Let’s see how this stance evolves as SLS delays and costs continue to mount while private sector solutions – even if they are delayed – start to eat SLS’s lunch when it comes to cost per unit weight of cargo launched.

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

14 responses to “Bridenstine May Not Be Drinking That SLS Koolaid”

  1. Nick K says:
    0
    0

    Bridenstine spoke at length today invoking the 3 Presidential space policies, the first of which is to build for reusability and sustainability. In fact he seemed to be saying that if it was not reuable and sustainable then there is no place for it. The second policy is to raise capital to build sustainability by going outside of government, for the purpose of developing US space commerce, and the third policy is to establish a regulatory framework for space commerce, probably in the Department of Commerce. He was also very pro-international. He did not come out against SLS or Orion but he did say that NASA’s vision is not the same as the Senate’s. He said he expects a serious revolution in access to LEO in the next few years, and also that the goal of the Gateway is to test technologies for future long duration missions into the solar system as well as provide a location from which to access the lunar surface. I did not follow his rationale on either of those, since most technologies could be tested more easily closer to Earth and since the lunar halo orbit is neither ideal for access to the lunar surface or anywhere else.

    • ThomasLMatula says:
      0
      0

      Yep, it’s called moving beyond NASA and it’s the key to moving forward in space.

  2. Bill Housley says:
    0
    0

    Also, compare this remark to those of his predecessor who said that SLS is “real” and it’s Commercial Space alternatives aren’t.
    One of those alternatives just tossed a 2008 Tesla Roadster toward the near-edge of the astroid belt while SLS is still in assembly and fighting software bugs.

    Can’t remind folks of that enough times. 😉

    But when I show non-space folks the FH launch, the thing that makes them take a breath and stare, open-mouthed, at the screen, is the synchronized landing of the side boosters. True, sustainable reusability is the game changer, and not only financially as Bridenstine pointed out. It is a game changer in national pride and excitement in our country’s space program…and it wasn’t done by government but by an Industry disruptor. THAT is the American Way.

    • Daniel Woodard says:
      0
      0

      Even Musk said he was surprised by that spectacular double landing. Of course the core stage came within a few feet of hitting OCISLY at several hundred miles per hour. But it was flying, and the SLS is not.

      • ThomasLMatula says:
        0
        0

        Because it was the very first test flight. So he expected things to go wrong instead of it being a huge success. Remember, that is why he had to launch the Tesla, no one would trust it with a payload.

        • Daniel Woodard says:
          0
          0

          Hey, we are talking about a classic car here, one of a kind. Now that’s trust.

        • Jeff2Space says:
          0
          0

          And yet the very first flight of SLS will also be an uncrewed test flight of Orion. Of course with SLS this is out of necessity since it can only launch once per year at best (recent RFI for new RS-25E engines specifies a delivery rate of four engines per year).

      • Bill Housley says:
        0
        0

        Exactly! And from what Bridenstine said it sounds like NASA might start giving F9 and FH and maybe even Blue Origin any missions that come up.

  3. Steve Pemberton says:
    0
    0

    “What the SLS brings, he said, is an enormous Delta V capability that, combined with Orion’s tug capacity, was necessary to build the Deep Space Gateway.”

    I’m still holding onto my theory that NASA wants out of SLS and that is why they now seem to keep justification for SLS tied to DSG, I don’t hear as much anymore of the broader expected uses for it. They probably expect that DSG has even less chance of surviving than asteroid retrieval did. Thus when DSG is eventually cancelled, very conveniently SLS is no longer needed. Of course timing is important since there will be political backlash, they might wait until Falcon Heavy has carried a couple of payloads, or maybe BFR has made test flights.

    • Bill Housley says:
      0
      0

      Ya. There are still individuals at NASA who are holding out for that cushy, high-paying, pseudo-parttime gulfing job that Boeing or some such promised them for after they retire.
      I’m sure the rest of them are on our side on the issue of SLS. 😉

      Don’t get me wrong…I’m sure it’s a wonderful rocket. We’ll even get to see it fly at least once some day.

  4. Vladislaw says:
    0
    0

    Any person who claims to be a hard core pro space and wants America to open that frontier is not in favor of that boondoggle as far as I have seen from blogging and commenting for the last decade or two ..

  5. ThomasLMatula says:
    0
    0

    Oh, Oh! Looks like the worst fears of the Old Space monopoly about Administrator Bridenstine may be true. Since he is not an engineer or Shuttle astronaut so he doesn’t understand why the SLS/Orion is a better system for returning to the Moon to stay.