Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 248

Thread: NASA's moon mission - ARTEMIS

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,423
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post
    Don’t know about that uncharted territory. Apparently one of the engines on the test flew on an STS mission in the late 1990s so....

    Manley says the failure may have been in the vector systems which are different than what was used on the STS. As always, stay tuned.

    ETA: or did you have the sarcasm light on and i missed it?
    I'm pretty sure it was sarcasm. Did notice Scott Manley being more than a little sarcastic pointing this is the first time anything on the SLS finished ahead of schedule.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,953
    Tongue was planted in cheek.

    That said, I'll be the first to admit that rocketry remains extremely complex and there will always be hickups when building a new center core design, even if some of its components are old. So I blame it for a big part on the nature of the game, not on sheer incompetence. It's just that SLS could do without another setback.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,034
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post
    Don’t know about that uncharted territory. Apparently one of the engines on the test flew on an STS mission in the late 1990s so....

    Manley says the failure may have been in the vector systems which are different than what was used on the STS. As always, stay tuned.

    ETA: or did you have the sarcasm light on and i missed it?
    They've never fired four of them at once before. Just three. They're breaking completely new ground here.

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,953
    But SpaceX went from 1 Merlin to 9 and then to 27. So a small step like 3 to 4 is mathematically proven to be a lot more simple. (tongue still in cheek)
    And if here's anyone breaking completely new ground, it's SpaceX. Their SN8 even broke completely new concrete. (tongue still hasn't moved)
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    16,542
    I just watched Scot Manley's video of the SLS -- um, how do I put this? -- non-success and then a NSF one from Boca Chica. The contrast could scarcely be more stark.
    NASA: We've been buiilding this thing for a couple of years, let's test fire it! Oops, not as expected. It'll be a few weeks.
    SpaceX: We've been building this thing for a few weeks, let's test fire it! Oops, not as expected! Let's do it again today. And again!
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
    I just watched Scot Manley's video of the SLS -- um, how do I put this? -- non-success and then a NSF one from Boca Chica. The contrast could scarcely be more stark.
    NASA: We've been buiilding this thing for a couple of years, let's test fire it! Oops, not as expected. It'll be a few weeks.
    SpaceX: We've been building this thing for a few weeks, let's test fire it! Oops, not as expected! Let's do it again today. And again!
    Agile vs. Waterfall development, plus a dedicated & focussed leadership. The leadership isn't just Musk, it's also SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell and her field generals. They've assembled a helluva team ranging from propulsion to production and operations.

    Ex: John Insprucker from the webcasts? A Detroiter & UofM grad he ran the Titan, Delta IV and Atlas V programs for the Air Force (still a reserve officer). He oversaw the development of Falcon 9, and now he's the Principal Integration Engineer at SpaceX.

    https://cliffberg.medium.com/spacexs...s-c63042178a33

    >
    SpaceX is an Agile company. That is one reason why they can do things faster, cheaper, and better. And crucially, they apply Agile ideas thoughtfully — not as a methodology to mindlessly follow, but as a set of ideas to inspire them. But another important reason for SpaceX’s success is that there is a visionary person at the helm who involves himself deeply in every product, while executing a form of leadership that gets the most from people. Let’s look at the Agile dimension first.
    >
    It is hard to find out what goes on inside of SpaceX, but I did get to see a video of Elon Musk conducting a discussion with technical staff about a particular technical problem. What struck me was that he walked around the room asking questions: How can we solve that? Will that work? Why or why not?

    It reminded me of a Socratic process, whereby the best idea wins. It was intellectual. It was goal driven. It was ego-less.
    >
    Last edited by docmordrid; 2021-Jan-19 at 06:22 AM.

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,691
    Yes, I think about what it would have been like if back in the sixties they had used SLS-like development practices. They went from Mercury to Gemini to Apollo, with both the Saturn 1B and 5 in about the time SLS has been in development, which is largely based on hardware already developed for the shuttle. And speaking of the shuttle, preliminary work started in about 1968, but the funding and the choice of design was in 1972, and it flew in 1981. At that, they got negative press for taking too long. This was to develop all new hardware as well. I have to wonder if the requirement to use shuttle and shuttle-derived hardware has actually slowed them down.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    >
    And speaking of the shuttle, preliminary work started in about 1968, but the funding and the choice of design was in 1972, and it flew in 1981. At that, they got negative press for taking too long. This was to develop all new hardware as well. I have to wonder if the requirement to use shuttle and shuttle-derived hardware has actually slowed them down.
    Shuttle had to make too many compromises to suit its two masters; NASA and DoD, then the DoD backed away leaving NASA with a seriously flawed design. This mistake was perpetuated after Challenger rather than being addressed. IMO this "addressing" should have been done by,

    1) cancelling Shuttle as soon as,

    2) HL-20 (crew) and HL-42 (larger crew/cargo) were ready to fly, and

    3) building the Shuttle C heavy lift cargo hardware, recycling the ET, boosters, and RS-25's.

    AIUI HL-20 and HL-42 were cancelled due to the Shuttle lobby's pressure.

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA blames moon rocket engine shutdown on hydraulic system software. Software in place to monitor hydraulic systems during a test firing of NASA's Space Launch System moon rocket was to blame for an early engine shutdown Saturday, not an actual problem with the booster's shuttle-heritage engines or its complex propulsion system, NASA said Tuesday. All four of the Aerojet Rocketdyne RS-25 engines operated normally throughout the test and while an instrumentation glitch with engine No. 4 was called out near the end of the run, it was unrelated to the shutdown. NASA said the huge rocket was not damaged and otherwise performed normally.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nasa-bl...stem-software/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,738
    It was ego-less.
    No comment.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA likely to redo hot-fire test of its Space Launch System core stage. Of 23 test objectives, full data was received for 15 of them. NASA is likely to conduct a second "Green Run" firing in February.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...em-core-stage/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  12. #222
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Halted rocket test could stall NASA moon shot, redo possible. NASA is considering a second firing of its moon rocket engines after a critical test came up short over the weekend, a move that could bump the first flight in the Artemis lunar-landing program into next year.

    https://phys.org/news/2021-01-halted...nasa-moon.html
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  13. #223
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Bridenstine, departing NASA, hopes Artemis continues. Bridenstine, born in 1975, is the first NASA administrator not to have been alive when people last walked on the moon. “I think it’s important that I be the last NASA administrator in history that wasn’t alive when we had people living and working on the moon,” he said.

    https://spacenews.com/bridenstine-de...mis-continues/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  14. #224
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,691
    I didn’t realize that Bridenstine was too young for the moon landings, but it makes sense, he looks fairly young. Without commenting on the rest of the Trump administration, I will miss him. I thought he was an excellent administrator, and he seemed to get along well with people of both major parties. He made a point of engaging the public, and even had time to talk with YouTube personalities. He was genuinely enthusiastic about space and commercial development, and seemed to do a good job.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  15. #225
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA set fire to its ISS spacecraft – all for Artemis astronaut safety. NASA intentionally lit a fire in one of its spacecraft, turning the Cygnus that had just delivered supplies to the International Space Station into a laboratory to see how future disasters might impact crewed missions to the Moon and, later on, Mars. While space itself lacks the oxygen for fire to be an issue, crewed spacecraft like those NASA intends to use for its Artemis missions need to provide a breathable atmosphere for the astronauts onboard.

    https://www.slashgear.com/nasa-set-f...arch-20656063/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  16. #226
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Welding Underway on Orion for First Artemis Mission Landing Astronauts on the Moon. At NASA’s Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, technicians from Orion prime contractor Lockheed Martin have welded together three cone-shaped panels on Orion’s crew module for the Artemis III mission that will land the first woman and next man on the Moon.

    https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/w...ts-on-the-moon
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  17. #227
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    NASA set fire to its ISS spacecraft – all for Artemis astronaut safety. NASA intentionally lit a fire in one of its spacecraft, turning the Cygnus that had just delivered supplies to the International Space Station into a laboratory to see how future disasters might impact crewed missions to the Moon and, later on, Mars. While space itself lacks the oxygen for fire to be an issue, crewed spacecraft like those NASA intends to use for its Artemis missions need to provide a breathable atmosphere for the astronauts onboard.

    https://www.slashgear.com/nasa-set-f...arch-20656063/
    MIR did quite some research in this field. Not very intentionally though.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  18. #228
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    The Trump administration left Biden with a rocket dilemma. "NASA needs to go back and look at what the options are to go to the Moon." The reality is that without extraordinary effort, the White House cannot corral a program like the SLS rocket, which enjoys broad support in Congress and supports jobs across the country. And the Trump administration never did.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...ocket-dilemma/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  19. #229
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA's Artemis Base Camp on the moon will need light, water, elevation. American astronauts in 2024 will take their first steps near the moon's south pole: the land of extreme light, extreme darkness, and frozen water that could fuel NASA's Artemis lunar base and the agency's leap into deep space. Scientists and engineers are helping NASA determine the precise location of the Artemis Base Camp concept. Among the many things NASA must take into account in choosing a specific location are two key features: The site must bask in near continuous sunlight to power the base and moderate extreme temperature swings, and it must offer easy access to areas of complete darkness that hold water ice.

    https://phys.org/news/2021-01-nasa-a...elevation.html
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  20. #230
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA will carry out a second hotfire test of the Space Launch System core stage, a move that makes it more likely the vehicle will miss its scheduled launch date of late this year. NASA announced late Jan. 29 that it will re-run the static-fire test of the core stage’s four RS-25 engines no earlier than the final week of February at the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.

    https://spacenews.com/nasa-to-perfor...reen-run-test/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  21. #231
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA asked university students around the country to help solve the pesky problem of lunar dust as the agency plans for sustainable human exploration of the Moon. Through the 2021 competitive Breakthrough, Innovative, and Game-changing (BIG) Idea Challenge and the Space Grant project, NASA has awarded nearly $1 million to seven university teams to develop their innovative lunar dust mitigation solutions.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/langley...with-moon-dust
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  22. #232
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,888
    NASA has delayed the Human Lander System downselect from February 28, 2021 to April 30, 2021.

    https://www.nasa.gov/nextstep/humanlander2

    The candidate systems are,

    "America's Team" (Blue Origin (prime), Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Draper), a larger re-do of Apollo with disposable elements.

    Dynetics. a smaller lander, disposable elements, and drop-tanks.

    SpaceX Starship HLS

    Image: Everyday Astronaut (Tim Dodd)
    Erday_Astro_IMG_20201212_194530.jpg

  23. #233
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Quote Originally Posted by docmordrid View Post
    NASA has delayed the Human Lander System downselect from February 28, 2021 to April 30, 2021.

    https://www.nasa.gov/nextstep/humanlander2

    The candidate systems are,

    "America's Team" (Blue Origin (prime), Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Draper), a larger re-do of Apollo with disposable elements.

    Dynetics. a smaller lander, disposable elements, and drop-tanks.

    SpaceX Starship HLS

    Image: Everyday Astronaut (Tim Dodd)
    Erday_Astro_IMG_20201212_194530.jpg
    NASA's SpaceX Starship Lunar Lander is under development in South Texas

    https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesm...g/moonstarship
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  24. #234
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    NASA's delayed Moon lander contracts cast doubt on Artemis timeline. The program is less likely to make its 2024 target.

    https://www.engadget.com/nasa-delays...221522659.html
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  25. #235
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Airbus awarded €650 million contract to build three more Orion service modules. The European Service Module (EMS) is the 15,000-kilogram powerplant of NASA’s Orion spacecraft. In addition to propulsion, it provides consumables like oxygen and water, thermal control and electrical power. The production of service modules for the Orion crew spacecraft is part of ESA’s long-term involvement in Artemis, NASA’s push to return humankind to the surface of the moon. The finalization of the €650 million contract to produce ESM-4 through 6 was announced on Feb. 2 as part of a joint ESA and Airbus briefing. The firm, fixed-price contract brings the total number of ESMs to be built by Airbus to six.

    https://spacenews.com/airbus-awarded...rvice-modules/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  26. #236
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,888
    Space Launch System advocate Sen. Richard Shelby (Alabama) does not intend to run for re-election in 2022.

    https://www.theintelligencer.com/new...e-15928534.php

  27. #237
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,691
    Well, that will make things interesting. If SpaceX is successful with Starship, I am even more convinced SLS will be quickly sidelined.

    I’m not sure if this has been mentioned in another thread, but there’s an article on Ars Technica with a recent update on the Biden’s administration support for Artemis, and they are definitely for it. No details yet, but best guess is that the timing will change. Still, it looks like we have a real shot at seeing humans on the Moon again within a decade. It really could happen this time. Here is the article:

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...-moon-program/

    Quoting the update to the article:

    Today, at the outset of her briefing with White House reporters, press secretary Jen Psaki offered the following statement on the Artemis Program:

    "Through the Artemis Program, the United States will work with industry and international partners to send astronauts to the surface of the Moon—another man and a woman to the Moon, which is very exciting—conduct new and exciting science, prepare for future missions to Mars, and demonstrate America's values. To date, only 12 humans have walked on the Moon— that was half a century ago. The Artemis Program, a waypoint to Mars, provides the opportunity to add numbers to that. Lunar exploration has broad and bicameral support in Congress, most recently detailed in the FY2021 omnibus spending bill, and certainly we support this effort and endeavor."

    The statement is notable because it clearly comes after Psaki was briefed by science officials within the Biden administration and reflects their support for the general thrust of the Artemis Program. Details are nonexistent, but that's to be expected from a new administration on a topic such as space. And there will certainly be changes in timing and approach. But the bottom line is this: Game on for the Artemis Program.
    (Emphasis added)

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  28. #238
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Well, that will make things interesting. If SpaceX is successful with Starship, I am even more convinced SLS will be quickly sidelined.
    Yeah, Starship doesn't even have to be all that successful to displace SLS. If there's insurmountable difficulties with reentry and landing, a Starship stripped of its fins and other reuse-related hardware would still easily put more payload into LEO at a tiny fraction of the cost. Lack of rapidly reusable tankers would be a big problem for Starship HLS, but a Starship-launched HLS would still be far more practical than a SLS-launched one. Same goes for big high energy stages launched by Starship.

  29. #239
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,888
    The could use the Super Heavy booster with a beefy expendable upper stage if they wanted. Musk talked about this for ultra high deltaV launches; strip Starship down to just the propulsion module, about 40-45 tonnes dry, 1200+ tonnes of props.

  30. #240
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,786
    Blue Origin shows off an on-the-ground pathfinder version of its cargo lunar lander. (photo)

    https://www.geekwire.com/2021/blue-o...-lunar-lander/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •