The "Real Aerospace" Thread

[Krulle]

Let's hope the power supply lasts that long!

[Arioch]

Let's hope the power supply lasts that long!

New Horizons is powered by a plutonium thermoelectric generator, so it should have power until about 2065.

[StarCruiser]

^ Yep - they don't produce much power but, they last a VERY long time (ask Voyager 1 & 2).

[Arioch]

The Dragon 2 capsule has successfully re-entered and splashed down. Ripley is home!



Apparently the Russians are being super salty about it. I guess that shouldn't be surprising, since the success of a modern, more capable, less expensive manned vehicle essentially spells the doom of the Soyuz program.

[Zorg56]

Not hard to be faster then dead horse.

[SVlad]

Rogozin "The Trampoline" is well known corrupted state executive and schemer, his words shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Werra]

How does one get a name like "The Trampoline"?

[GeoModder]

How does one get a name like "The Trampoline"?

Read the article. Its explained there.

[Krulle]

Okay, that was a very interesting article.
Indeed, astonishing a Russian was this open with his critique of the implementation of the program....

Well... We'll see how it'll play out.

[SVlad]

How does one get a name like "The Trampoline"?

It's like saying:

I suggest that the USA bring their astronauts to the International Space Station using a trampoline.

while your space industry failing spectacularly.

[dragoongfa]

So the US is back in the space race? Finally, perhaps this time greed will bring some progress because the lack of nationalistic spacepenis envy has caused things to stall.

[GeoModder]

So the US is back in the space race? Finally, perhaps this time greed will bring some progress because the lack of nationalistic spacepenis envy has caused things to stall.

CNSA begs to differ...

[dragoongfa]

So the US is back in the space race? Finally, perhaps this time greed will bring some progress because the lack of nationalistic spacepenis envy has caused things to stall.

CNSA begs to differ...

Not much of a progress on that front, they have sent a Rover to the dark side of the moon but NASA actually sent humans there more than 50 years ago. Then again they are Chinese; they have a monetary angle into it as well, we just have to find it .

Come on Elon, do something neater next.

[GeoModder]

Dark side of the Moon? I assume you meant far side?
And nobody had landed on farside before, so I'd say it is an accomplishment.
CNSA is catching up, and does sofar a good job on it.

[danuis]

There's some bad mojo going around the SLS, the current administration is putting up cuts for the SLS, NASA is pushing expanded upper stage to the 4th mission - if it ever flies that many - and all booster upgrades have fallen into historical silence. Orion is being mused to being put onto a commercial launch as well.

Thoughts?

[Arioch]

There's some bad mojo going around the SLS, the current administration is putting up cuts for the SLS, NASA is pushing expanded upper stage to the 4th mission - if it ever flies that many - and all booster upgrades have fallen into historical silence. Orion is being mused to being put onto a commercial launch as well.

Thoughts?

While I think there's value to having redundant systems, I'm sure the administration is getting hounded by people asking why we're spending so much to complete an over-budget, oft-delayed full-expendable heavy launch vehicle when SpaceX has a cheaper reusable heavy launch system available right now that can do most of what SLS is supposed to do. But Congress' pork barrel committee has saved SLS before over the President's objections; I expect they'll do it again. That said, I'm beginning to doubt it will ever actually fly. I wouldn't be surprised if the BFR will be operational before SLS even makes its first test flight.

CNSA is catching up, and does sofar a good job on it.

I'm perfectly happy to see everyone getting into the space race, and in particular we need a Chinese space station so that Sandra Bullock has an emergency sleepover spot when the satellite apocalypse happens. But "catching up"? I think you're being generous.

[icekatze]

hi hi

Unless we get some government power trying to monopolize space and keep everyone else out, there's enough space out there for everyone.

[Mjolnir]

There's some bad mojo going around the SLS, the current administration is putting up cuts for the SLS, NASA is pushing expanded upper stage to the 4th mission - if it ever flies that many - and all booster upgrades have fallen into historical silence. Orion is being mused to being put onto a commercial launch as well.

Thoughts?

While I think there's value to having redundant systems, I'm sure the administration is getting hounded by people asking why we're spending so much to complete an over-budget, oft-delayed full-expendable heavy launch vehicle when SpaceX has a cheaper reusable heavy launch system available right now that can do most of what SLS is supposed to do. But Congress' pork barrel committee has saved SLS before over the President's objections; I expect they'll do it again. That said, I'm beginning to doubt it will ever actually fly. I wouldn't be surprised if the BFR will be operational before SLS even makes its first test flight.

Moving Europa Clipper to a commercial launch, deferring Block 1B and moving formerly co-manifested payloads to commercial launches meant the only purpose left for SLS was Orion launches. And if they're already doing Orion launches with commercial launchers for $700M cheaper without the SLS...well, that purpose kind of evaporates. Of course, it never really existed, but it's going to be hard to go back to pretending it's there after admitting the alternatives exist.

It doesn't end there. The whole Gateway/Orion/SLS setup was contrived so each part justified the others:

• Orion needed SLS to get launched direct to TLI. The idea of doing multiple launches and doing rendezvous in LEO was taboo.
• SLS couldn't launch Orion, a co-manifested payload, and a service module big enough to reach low lunar orbit, so the Gateway was created to give it somewhere to go in an orbit it could reach, NRHO.
• Building Gateway needed the capabilities of SLS Block 1B to get an Orion with a Gateway component as co-manifested payload to NRHO. Again, combining propulsion and payload launches in LEO was taboo, so was just launching Gateway components without an Orion.

They are now talking about combining multiple launches in LEO. But that means you are no longer limited to the TLI performance of SLS, and you can assemble the vehicle you need from much larger parts in LEO and then go straight to the actual moon. No need to limit your architecture to components massing 10 metric tons or less, no need to detour to some "Gateway" station along the way. Develop a reusable lander and you can operate it from a surface base and rendezvous with transports in LLO, and actually be working on the moon instead of talking about someday doing it while you piece together an intermittently-occupied space station.

I had expected a token Block 1 launch to get "the SLS" flying (Block 1 really being basically half a SLS, with a Delta IV second stage), followed by years more development with the status as an "operational" system to protect it from cancellation. It's starting to look like they delayed too much for things to work out this way, though.

CNSA is catching up, and does sofar a good job on it.

I'm perfectly happy to see everyone getting into the space race, and in particular we need a Chinese space station so that Sandra Bullock has an emergency sleepover spot when the satellite apocalypse happens. But "catching up"? I think you're being generous.

Well...they're making progress, at least. They've substantially improved on the Soyuz with their Shenzhou, which the slowly-disintegrating Russian space program has failed to do. At least they're not complaining that they wouldn't be able to spend as much money on rockets if they built reusable vehicles and making nutty accusations of subsidies that don't even come close to working mathematically, or pretending that salvaging dropped engines with a helicopter would be a competitive approach.

[Arioch]

Moving Europa Clipper to a commercial launch, deferring Block 1B and moving formerly co-manifested payloads to commercial launches meant the only purpose left for SLS was Orion launches. And if they're already doing Orion launches with commercial launchers for $700M cheaper without the SLS...well, that purpose kind of evaporates. Of course, it never really existed, but it's going to be hard to go back to pretending it's there after admitting the alternatives exist.

It doesn't end there. The whole Gateway/Orion/SLS setup was contrived so each part justified the others:

• Orion needed SLS to get launched direct to TLI. The idea of doing multiple launches and doing rendezvous in LEO was taboo.
• SLS couldn't launch Orion, a co-manifested payload, and a service module big enough to reach low lunar orbit, so the Gateway was created to give it somewhere to go in an orbit it could reach, NRHO.
• Building Gateway needed the capabilities of SLS Block 1B to get an Orion with a Gateway component as co-manifested payload to NRHO. Again, combining propulsion and payload launches in LEO was taboo, so was just launching Gateway components without an Orion.

They are now talking about combining multiple launches in LEO. But that means you are no longer limited to the TLI performance of SLS, and you can assemble the vehicle you need from much larger parts in LEO and then go straight to the actual moon. No need to limit your architecture to components massing 10 metric tons or less, no need to detour to some "Gateway" station along the way. Develop a reusable lander and you can operate it from a surface base and rendezvous with transports in LLO, and actually be working on the moon instead of talking about someday doing it while you piece together an intermittently-occupied space station.

I had expected a token Block 1 launch to get "the SLS" flying (Block 1 really being basically half a SLS, with a Delta IV second stage), followed by years more development with the status as an "operational" system to protect it from cancellation. It's starting to look like they delayed too much for things to work out this way, though.

I was a fan of Ares and SLS because I like space hardware and I'll gladly fork over the appropriate portion of my paycheck to pay for it, but I'm really starting to think that this is all for the best. I kind of lost confidence in the concept of government-led space programs when they canceled the SSTO. In hindsight, Ares/Constellation was kind of dead on arrival... it failed to inspire anyone. It was a rehash of a 45 year old Apollo system reusing 33 year old Space Shuttle parts. There was nothing in it that was new or innovative or inspiring. SLS/Orion is really more of the same.

Meanwhile SpaceX lights people's imaginations on fire with new technologies and new approaches, and launches sports cars on cis-Martian orbits and mans its capsules with dummies named Ripley. Propulsive landing of conventional-looking Falcon boosters isn't quite as sexy as a single-stage Delta Clipper doing the same thing, but the economics work better, and it totally changes the game for practical spaceflight.

I suspect that SLS will live on in some form until the progress made by private space companies will make it literally irrelevant... but not before we've spent billions more on it.

Well...they're making progress, at least. They've substantially improved on the Soyuz with their Shenzhou, which the slowly-disintegrating Russian space program has failed to do. At least they're not complaining that they wouldn't be able to spend as much money on rockets if they built reusable vehicles and making nutty accusations of subsidies that don't even come close to working mathematically, or pretending that salvaging dropped engines with a helicopter would be a competitive approach.

Sure, they're making progress. The Chinese space program is impressive, especially compared to Roscosmos who seems content to feed off the rotting 28-year-old carcass of the Soviet space program (I say that without meaning to offend any of our Russian readers... NASA was not in a much better state before the shift in focus to private commercial spaceflight). I think that anyone who can land a craft on the Moon has accomplished an impressive feat, but let's not pretend that the Chinese are breathing down our necks just because they accomplished something that Soviet Luna and US Surveyor craft did in 1966. I'm sure that the Chinese selected the far side of the Moon so that they could say they did something that no one has ever done, but no one ever did it because there was no compelling reason to. Aside from the need to establish relay satellites for communication, there's nothing particularly hard or special about landing on the far side of the Moon.

[GeoModder]

Well...they're making progress, at least. They've substantially improved on the Soyuz with their Shenzhou, which the slowly-disintegrating Russian space program has failed to do. At least they're not complaining that they wouldn't be able to spend as much money on rockets if they built reusable vehicles and making nutty accusations of subsidies that don't even come close to working mathematically, or pretending that salvaging dropped engines with a helicopter would be a competitive approach.

Sure, they're making progress. The Chinese space program is impressive, especially compared to Roscosmos who seems content to feed off the rotting 28-year-old carcass of the Soviet space program (I say that without meaning to offend any of our Russian readers... NASA was not in a much better state before the shift in focus to private commercial spaceflight). I think that anyone who can land a craft on the Moon has accomplished an impressive feat, but let's not pretend that the Chinese are breathing down our necks just because they accomplished something that Soviet Luna and US Surveyor craft did in 1966. I'm sure that the Chinese selected the far side of the Moon so that they could say they did something that no one has ever done, but no one ever did it because there was no compelling reason to. Aside from the need to establish relay satellites for communication, there's nothing particularly hard or special about landing on the far side of the Moon.

Making progress is reason enough for being generous. As least as long as it lasts.
And there are rarely compelling reasons to do something like the Luna and Surveyor craft did. If it wasn't for the space race in the sixties, it remains to be seen if the US and USSR space programs ever would have come as far as they did. CNSA is regretably enough another player in the same type of alley, and a late one at that, but at least they try.