House Appropriators Just Made Doing Artemis Landing More Difficult
Appropriations Committee Releases Fiscal Year 2021 Commerce-Justice-Science Funding Bill
Full Bill
“That the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall use the Space Launch System, if available, as the launch vehicles for the Jupiter Europa missions, plan for an orbiter launch no later than 2025 and a lander launch no later than 2027, and include in the fiscal year 2022 budget the 5-year funding profile necessary to achieve these goals.”
“Provided, That not less than $1,400,500,000 shall be for the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle: Provided further, That not less than $2,600,000,000 shall be for the Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle, which shall have a lift capability not less than 130 metric tons and which shall have core elements and an Exploration Upper Stage developed simultaneously to be used to the maximum extent practicable, including for Earth to Moon missions and Moon landings: Provided further, That of the amounts provided for SLS, not less than $400,000,000 shall be for SLS Block 1B development including the Exploration Upper Stage and associated systems including related facilitization: Provided further, That $459,700,000 shall be for Exploration Ground Systems including infrastructure in support of SLS Block 1B missions: Provided further, That the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, concurrent with the annual budget submission, a 5-year budget profile for an inte11 grated system that includes the SLS, the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, and associated ground systems that will ensure a crewed launch as early as possible, as well as a system-based funding profile for a sustained launch cadence that contemplates the use of an SLS Block 1B cargo variant and associated ground systems: Provided further, That $1,557,400,000 shall be for exploration research and development.”
Keith’s note: The $22.63 billion requested for NASA in FY 2021 is the same as it was for FY 2020. However the request for FY 2021 was for $25.2 billion – so thats $2.5 billion that is missing. Also, $1.57 billion is set aside for exploration research and development – but $4.72 billion was requested. How NASA is supposed to do the accelerated Artemis program such that they land humans on the Moon by 2024 is hard to fathom. Maybe the Senate will be more generous. As for the Europa missions on SLS – planing orbital mechanics to meet political direction using a Congressionally-designed rocket that has not yet flown is always a bad idea. But Congress still does it anyway. Meanwhile Jim Bridenstine is putting on a brave face. But this is an election year – one marked by racial, societal, and political strife amidst a pandemic that is increasingly out of control. So who knows.
My statement on the House fiscal year 2021 Commerce-Justice-Science funding bill: pic.twitter.com/Nra1ILJGWK
— Jim Bridenstine (@JimBridenstine) July 7, 2020
Remember, Project Artemis is about sending American astronauts to the Moon as Vice-President Pence has stated. America astronauts does not require they get their paycheck from NASA. They could be employed by SpaceX and still be counted as American.
I wonder how much SpaceX will charge NASA to put an Artemis decal on the side of their rocket. 🙂
Probably the same as they would charge any private group for naming rights.
Artemis doesn’t really need a lander. The NASA astronauts will probably be met in Lunar orbit by a crew flying up from the SpaceX Lunar base! The only thing is whether NASA and Congress will be willing to pay SpaceX to land its people somewhere. Taxi!
Yes, the Starship lander that is designed for the Moon would have more than enough capability to deliver the Orion to the lunar surface, then launch it again when the NASA astronauts are ready to go home. Then the Starship lander could just return to its spaceport on Earth with its crew, and reporters, while releasing the Orion with its NASA astronauts enroute to be recovered at sea by the U.S. Navy.
“planing orbital mechanics to meet political direction using a
Congressionally-designed rocket that has not yet flown is always a bad
idea” is my new favorite quote.
So sad that we are at that point.
It’s a good statement, but I’m not sure if it applies. For Europa Clipper, it’s a choice between a direct trip on SLS (one launch widow every 13 months) or Falcon Heavy, with a kick stage and one Earth gravity assist (also one window every 13 months.) The schedule issue is which one would be available and how soon. That’s also something that isn’t amenable to political direction.
Yes, the program is now officially being held hostage to ensure continue support for SLS. BTW, given the time frame there is another option no one is talking about, the cargo Starship. Bet you could put a really big kick stage on it. Then refuel it so the Starship could give it a lunar assist before even before it releases the kick stage, with the Starship then firing its engines to return to Earth.
Or, thinking out of the box. since SpaceX does have plans to produce a large quantity of Starships, just buy one and refuel it in LEO, then expend the Starship doing a gravity assist. You could put some instruments for observing the Sun on the Starship itself and leave it in Solar Orbit. Buying a Starship to expend it will still likely cost less than a FH, and a lot less than a SLS.
We’re talking about getting the current Europa Clipper mission to Jupiter. They are within four years (actually three, I think) of being able to launch. That means they need an existing launch vehicle. So Starship with a TBD kick stage won’t do. I know that’s ironic since SLS is considered the baseline option, but NASA has its own ideas about what an existing launch vehicle means…
Options for a more energetic launch (e.g. a refueled Starship giving it an extra kick) aren’t helpful for Clipper. It has to get into orbit on its own once it gets to Jupiter, and Clipper is basically built already (or so close to built that a redesign is not possible.) A more energetic launch than the direct Hohmann trajectory would mean it would get to Jupiter going too fast for it to enter orbit. The ideas you suggest are good ones, but for future missions and once Starship is flying. For Clipper, it’s too late for that and those options don’t make sense.
So just what are the options for Europa Clipper surviving of the SLS gets scrapped and FH goes out of production? Especially given it no longer has a power champion in Congress to protect it?
There is always the NGSS OmegA Heavy with 6 SRBs. Or the Blue New Glenn in the expendable mode.
The offerings from SpaceX for this mission could be the Falcon Heavy or the Starkicker (expendable Starship).
The Falcon Heavy will not be retired by 2025. Since there are national security missions in that time period that only the Falcon Heavy is qualified to bid on.
You are assuming that the Europa Clipper will stay on schedule.
It is on schedule. According to the presentation at the last OPAG meeting, they’re on track for a July, 2023 launch. Which almost certainly means they will ready to launch before a SLS is available, and that, even if they launch on a Falcon Heavy, they might end up waiting on a launch. (How much lead time does it take to book a Falcon Heavy flight?)
Amazing, a NASA project that is on schedule! Now that should be headline news?
Since the boosters of the FH are reusable probably not that long. All you need is a new second stage and that would probably determine how long you would have to wait.
If Falcon Heavy going out of production? I thought the plan was to phase the Falcons out gradually, once Starship was available and customers decided to use it rather than a Falcon. That means SpaceX plans to keep flying Falcons as long as NASA and the DoD are buying them. Actually, I think that’s required for the national security launch contract SpaceX bid on (and will probably get.)
Yes, but as with his other software based strategies for SpaceX I imagine he will encourage users to update to the newest launch vehicle release and start dropping support for the older versions of spacelift offered. ?
In theory the expendable Starship could retain enough propellants for orbital insertion at Jupiter. There is only 1200 tonnes of propellants aboard the reusable version of the Starship after all.
Of course presuming SpaceX can get a Starship stacked on a Super Heavy for a test flight in 2021.
House gives $600M to lander program is a good sign, remember they tried to give $0 last year, for a new program $600M in the 2nd year is not bad at all, Commercial Crew didn’t get to this level of funding until the 4th year.
Also Senate will try to increase the funding somewhat, so it wouldn’t be limited to $600M, as Bridenstine said it’s a good start.
On other space forums, it is reported that SpaceX bid $2.2B in HLS, Dynetics $5.2B, Blue Origin $10.2B. So if NASA picks SpaceX and Dynetics, the funding need for HLS would be a lot lower than they originally expected, even $1B per year would be enough to make significant progress.