Space Stuff and Launch Info

[Oldman too]

About eight years in the making but it looks like China will be next in line to reach the Moon.
https://www.virtualtelescope.eu/202...lcon-9-is-going-to-hit-the-moon-next-4-march/

 

[mfb]

For more deliberate (and hopefully softer) landings, Nova-C should be the next one, with a launch in March or soon after, followed by OMOTENASHI in April or whenever Artemis 1 will actually fly. The latter has a wild landing maneuver: Enter an "orbit" that intersects with the surface at a shallow angle. Just ~10 seconds before an impact, at an altitude of maybe 2 kilometers and still at orbital velocity, fire the solid fuel retrorocket. Its burn should end ~100 meters above the surface with almost no speed. Drop the rocket motor, deploy an airbag and hope for the best while falling towards the surface. The lander has a mass of less than a kilogram so it can't have complex landing systems.

 

[Oldman too]

This came to mind.
https://www.space.com/russia-ukraine-invasion-us-space-partnership-impacts

 

[mfb]

NASA official says U.S.-Russian partnership continues on space station

------

We finally have overall cost estimates for the Artemis program, and they are as bad as expected or even worse. Tweet chain and article.

$4.1 billion per Artemis launch - only rocket, capsule and ground systems for that launch, no development or other infrastructure.
$93 billion total spending from 2012 to 2025. For a program that was claimed to be cheap because it would largely reuse Space Shuttle hardware.

"Part of it goes to the efficiencies of the underlying contractors, like Boeing," Martin said. "One of the problems we saw in development of the SLS and Orion—it's a challenging development of course—but we did notice very poor contractor performance on Boeing's part, poor planning, and poor execution."
[...]
"We saw that the cost-plus contracts that NASA had been using to develop that combined SLS-Orion system worked to the contractors' rather than NASA's advantage," Martin said.

Compare that to the $2.7 billion SpaceX gets for developing Starship HLS and landing on the Moon and returning to orbit twice, once with astronauts. A system that does all the hard parts of the program. The other $90 billion, 30 times as much money, are spent launching astronauts to space and returning them back from Moon orbit to Earth.

 

[sophiecentaur]

We finally have overall cost estimates for the Artemis program, and they are as bad as expected or even worse.

This sort of thing happens with governments of all persuasions. So much money disappears into black holes that there just has to be corruption involved. Boeing is a bad boy but not the only one. Once a company starts to have a cosy relationship with a government, standards drop, costs go up and they maintain their privileged position by paying those in power to ignore the problem.

It's such a shame but I guess it's just human nature.

 

[hutchphd]

It's such a shame but I guess it's just human nature.

Its good that the present leader of NASA boondoggled his way on to a Shuttle flight when he was a US Congressman. At least he understands the system.

[A sentence has been redacted from this post by the Mentors]
Rephrase: At least he understands the system and in a way that Christa McAuliffe likely did not.

 

[anorlunda]

But there's some good news here. A significant segment of NASA, the unmanned space program seems to have escaped from the death spiral that the manned space segment suffers from. How they escaped, I don't know.

For our manned space future, watch SpaceX. Not NASA. Not ESA.

 

[hutchphd]

And NASA did produce Cassini/Huyghens among other unmanned success..!

 

[Oldman too]

Bureaucracies aside, there are worse things that delay missions.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00608-3

 

[gleem]

Compare that to the $2.7 billion SpaceX gets for developing Starship HLS and landing on the Moon and returning to orbit twice, once with astronauts. A system that does all the hard parts of the program. The other $90 billion, 30 times as much money, are spent launching astronauts to space and returning them back from Moon orbit to Earth.

When a project's concept and execution is led by the originator then things get done ASAP. Boeing is not in the business of launching people into space it is building airplanes.

 

[hutchphd]

Boeing is not in the business of launching people into space it is building airplanes.

Boeing was the prime contractor for the S-1C for the Saturn V back when they did engineering and I believe they did a good job. Elon musk also makes cars. I don't see your point.

 

[gleem]

Boeing was the prime contractor for the S-1C for the Saturn V back when they did engineering and I believe they did a good job.

When they did engineering so they don't now? The S-1C used the veteran F-1 engine by Rocketdyne so nothing needed to be done there.

I don't see your point.

Boeing's priorities are divided. Musk is CTO of SpaceX and in charge of development, (priorities are focused) his rocket fits the needs of NASA and will cost less. Do you think Boeing could compete in the cost of development of an SLS comparable to Starship?

 

[hutchphd]

When they did engineering so they don't now? The S-1C used the veteran F-1 engine by Rocketdyne so nothing needed to be done there.

The engineering comment was a derogatory comment on the new management style.
The F-1 engine had never been previously flown but was indeed developed by Rocketdyne. It flew only on the S-1C.

.

 

[sophiecentaur]

How they escaped, I don't know.

The decision makers may share my thoughts about this - that unmanned is far better value than manned. IMO, manned expeditions are basically useful for getting votes when finances allow. Stopping all space work would be throwing the unmanned baby out with the manned bathwater and the cost of the baby is much lower than the cost of the bathwater, in this case. So keep the baby.

 

[Oldman too]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00727-x

Collateral fallout?

 

[mfb]

The first SLS rocket should roll out and to the launch pad in a few hours (nominally 21:00 UTC, that's in 4 hours). The process itself will take several hours, too. The same crawler also transported the Saturn V rockets ~50 years ago.
After arrival at the launch pad NASA will prepare a wet dress rehearsal - simulate all aspects of the launch until the point where the engines would be ignited, then abort. The launch won't happen before May, and June or later looks more likely.

How to watch (make sure to not miss any second!):


or
https://www.space.com/artemis-1-moon-megarocket-rollout-webcast

----

Astra's most recent launch was successful (now 2 out of 6, or 2 out of 7 if we include a launch pad accident). Let's hope they solved all the initial issues and can go to routine flights. The next launch is planned for April or May.

----

SpaceX wanted to launch once per week this year. So far they are on track. 11 weeks in, 10 rockets launched and another one on the launch pad for a Saturday launch. That launch will see a booster make its 12th flight, a reuse record.

 

[anorlunda]

We have a live broadcast of the crawler rollout down here. I watched for a while, but a video of paint drying progresses faster.

 

[mfb]

Russia launched a new crew to the ISS. The color scheme of their outfits is remarkable. It was likely selected months in advance, but there is no way they didn't see the connection to Ukraine:

 

[berkeman]

The color scheme of their outfits is remarkable. It was likely selected months in advance, but there is no way they didn't see the connection to Ukraine:

Wow. So Putin is not happy right now about this?

 

[hutchphd]

NASA feed:


Thats pretty interesting

 

[berkeman]

Wow, nice. Thanks. BTW, why does the Soyuz vehicle need to deploy solar panels for such a short rendezvous trip?

 

[Oldman too]

Wow, nice. Thanks. BTW, why does the Soyuz vehicle need to deploy solar panels for such a short rendezvous trip?

Hi, I'll be a bit fishing up citations on that question, it's not a mainstream search parameter so wish me luck.
There are at least two reasons that I'm aware of. First reason is the ISS will tap into the power produced by the Soyuz panels to supplement battery charging etc. while its docked. The 2nd reason is that they occasionally use the Soyuz for boosting the ISS orbit as needed and it's probably considered "good poker" to keep the craft ready to go in case of emergencies. They will also reenter the spacecraft if a "debris situation" threatens the ISS, the spacecraft having much better shielding than ISS.

There are likely other reasons that I haven't heard but the answers I've given were mentioned to me by a fellow who works at ISS mission control in Houston.
Cheers, Scott

 

[sophiecentaur]

A fascinating docking video. It is amazing that they seemed to spend so much time fooling around with bits of cord and straps to secure the hatch open. The sort of procedure that happens all the time on a sailing boat to tidy up spars, lines and sails. They did seem to be making a bit of a meal about doing that stuff; no waves, wind or rain to distract them and I'm sure they will have practiced a lot. The problem of where is 'down'. is something you frequently get below decks in a choppy sea.
It's good to see that knots and string still have a part to play up there.

 

[Oldman too]

NASA feed:


Thats pretty interesting

Interesting indeed, the color scheme seems to be somewhat controversial.
https://futurism.com/the-byte/russian-cosmonauts-iss-ukraine

 

[mfb]

NASA to Discuss Artemis Strategy for Astronaut Moon Landers
Wednesday 3:30 pm EDT, that's in 11.5 hours.

The panel of four doesn't include anyone from SpaceX, the company chosen to fly the first of these missions. Maybe they'll focus on the long-term strategy and discuss how to proceed after the first landing.

 

[mfb]

NASA Provides Update to Astronaut Moon Lander Plans Under Artemis
NASA uses a (previously unknown?) option in the existing contract to buy another crewed Moon landing from SpaceX. The second crew mission should be ready for "sustainable missions" (can't be that sustainable with a $4 billion per launch SLS...). NASA had already mentioned that the proposal for the first mission won't need major changes to achieve this.

In parallel they are trying to find a second lander to have more competition and redundancy in the future.

 

[Oldman too]

SN 20 test up and coming.
https://www.universetoday.com/15517...ady-for-an-orbital-flight-in-may/#more-155174

First Starship orbital flight will be with Raptor 2 engines, as they are much more capable & reliable. 230 ton or ~500k lb thrust at sea level.

We’ll have 39 flightworthy engines built by next month, then another month to integrate, so hopefully May for orbital flight test.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 21, 2022

 

[mfb]

SN20 has Raptor 1 engines, it might see additional tests but it won't fly. SN24 and booster 7 are now likely candidates for the orbital flight. Booster 7 has been moved to the launch site.

 

[mfb]

Amazon bought 83 rocket launches for its Kuiper constellation. Probably at least $10 billion, the largest commercial launch deal ever.

18 Ariane 6 launches
12 to 27 New Glenn launches
38 Vulcan launches

Amazon previously bought 9 Atlas V launches.

No Falcon, no Starship - these would be cheaper and have more launch capacity, but apparently Amazon doesn't want to rely on a direct competitor.

----

Busy times at Kennedy Space Center: The wet dress rehearsal for Artemis 1 got delayed, which then delayed Axiom-1 (now April 8). Any additional delay will likely also shift Crew-4 (April 19), as both missions use the same launch pad and Axiom-1 needs to leave the ISS to free the docking port for Crew-4.
That's three crew-rated capsules in preparation for launch at the same time, two of them will fly crew.

Edit: Artemis 1 WDR delayed more, no time estimate this time. We might see some shuffling.

Edit2: WDR now after Axiom-1

 

[anorlunda]

Army Corps of Engineers closes SpaceX Starbase permit application citing lack of information​

SpaceX can re-open the application simply by providing the information requested
https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/6/2...rship-army-corps-engineers-permit-application
IMO, Elon Musk and governments will never be friends. Some people suggested that SpaceX should go offshore. That may be wise.