banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 04:38 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainable”
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 11:13 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 12813
Post Likes: +13204
Company: Cogswell Cogs, LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/09/n ... ffordable/

_________________
Life is a DiY project.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 11:59 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/06/08
Posts: 4665
Post Likes: +2678
Aircraft: B55 P2
There is a tendency to focus on NASA management problems - which are very real but SLS is also a poor design. Its directly derived from the space shuttle, and some of the early heavy lift variants - a 50 year old design (major design frozen in 1972, flew in 81) that was itself a cost compromise from more capable launch vehicle concepts.

The shuttle was an OK design for the time - but there should have been a follow-on that fixed a lot of its issues. Instead NASA went though an endless series of new concepts / designs, that were then canceled.

This is not the fault of the engineers who I'm sure would love to design a modern launch vehicle, but of management that makes poor project technical decisions.


It will be interesting to see how SpaceX does. Falcon was an excellent design that represented a real advance in the cost performance of launch vehicles. I'm less sanguine about BFR / Starship. I get the sense that Musk is building it just so he can have the biggest rocket. I think a more farsighted approach would have been to work on in-orbit assembly, to allow large spacecraft to be constructed from easier to launch components.

Maybe BFR will be a success - we'll see.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 13:32 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/11/10
Posts: 12359
Post Likes: +11344
Location: Indiana
Aircraft: Cessna 185, RV-7
Since the purposes of Artemis are largely political/virtuous, no cost is too great. This story will never gain traction.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 22:40 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Space Shuttle: "Let's make a launch system where we get back most of the rocket to make it cheaper and faster to get to space".

Result: a high cost, low reliability system that was very difficult to maintain.

SLS: "Let's make a cheap simple quick heavy lift vehicle using parts we mostly already have, should be easy".

Result: Fantastically expensive system that is hugely delayed.

Meanwhile, the commercial launch vendors, particular SpaceX, are shooting stuff into space for a fraction of the cost of any NASA rocket, with amazing reliability.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 23:17 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/04/13
Posts: 4280
Post Likes: +3080
Location: Hampton, VA
Just let the private sector handle it

Personally I have more faith in private sector entrepreneurs and adventurers than government workers


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 09 Sep 2023, 23:27 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/30/10
Posts: 4263
Post Likes: +3718
Company: Flagstaff-Williams Dev. LLC
Location: KCMR
Aircraft: 1965 310J
This is the prime example where innovation doesn't work well with "Standard Specifications".

NASA had a lot of early successes largely due to the lack of any "Standard Specs" go by. Now those specs are the primary obstacle to development and why commercial development is writing their own way into history by throwing out the rule books.

Its expensive, Musk has no accountability to the public, except for it to work; it doesn't even need to hint at making a profit until it does. For now, the cash flow is working and rules continue to be both broken and made at the same time. Amazing really.

I find it both disturbing and exciting to see pad development failures and the rapid and subsequent solutions that seem to be made in real time.

Fortunately, its not my $$ at stake. Still, its entertaining.

_________________
All my friends are here. I know this because all my enemies are dead. :)


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 10 Sep 2023, 09:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/17/08
Posts: 6052
Post Likes: +12331
Location: KMCW
Aircraft: B55 PII,F-1,L-2,OTW,
The space program that scares/bothers/upsets me is Boeing. They are our only domestic producer of airliners and they can't build a functional spacecraft, not to mention the incredible misfires they have experienced with the 787 and Max programs. We need a dependable domestic producer of airliners to continue to be a world leader.

_________________
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
MCW
Be Nice, Kind, I don't care, be something, just don't be a jerk ;-)


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 10 Sep 2023, 11:25 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Fortunately, its not my $$ at stake. Still, its entertaining.

Actually, your $$$ are at stake when it comes to SpaceX success or failure.

For example, the commercial crew program at SpaceX has saved substantial tax payer money over an internal NASA program or what Boeing is trying to do.

The return to the moon depends heavily on SpaceX starship working and lowers the cost of doing so dramatically over anything NASA would do itself or other contractors.

To say it another way, the failure or success of SpaceX has a significant and material impact on where tax dollars are spent, and the potential failure or success of NASA missions.

To a large extent, the FAA is the major threat to NASA's timeline by keeping SpaceX from failing faster and iterating improvements in less time.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 10 Sep 2023, 21:49 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/26/13
Posts: 19752
Post Likes: +19424
Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
Username Protected wrote:
I'm less sanguine about BFR / Starship. I get the sense that Musk is building it just so he can have the biggest rocket.

No, Musk is building it to put Musk on Mars.

The only reason that SpaceX exists is to accomplish that, everything else is ancillary to that goal.

_________________
My last name rhymes with 'geese'.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 10 Sep 2023, 22:23 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/06/08
Posts: 4665
Post Likes: +2678
Aircraft: B55 P2
Partly. He certainly wants to go to Mars. OTOH, I'm really not convinced a large launch vehicle is the best approach. Falcon 9 is very reliable and could launch a mars rocket in pieces. (He is already relying on lots of inflight refueling steps). BFR is distracting from the very large number of other technologies that need to be developed to do a mars mission

Username Protected wrote:
I'm less sanguine about BFR / Starship. I get the sense that Musk is building it just so he can have the biggest rocket.

No, Musk is building it to put Musk on Mars.

The only reason that SpaceX exists is to accomplish that, everything else is ancillary to that goal.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 10 Sep 2023, 22:32 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
BFR is distracting from the very large number of other technologies that need to be developed to do a mars mission

BFR is required to achieve Mars colony.

You need a rocket where 100% of it is reused and can be quickly reflown in a few days or even a few hours. Land the booster in the tower, land the second stage on the ground, winch it on top, refuel, and go. You need to reduce the cost of space by a factor of 10 or more and the BFR is that if successful.

Also, you need a rocket where you can make the fuel from what you find on Mars. That is why it is methalox. CO2 provides the carbon and oxygen, only need to find the hydrogen.

Colonizing Mars is stupid and irrational IMO, but the desire to do that is driving the cost of space down with the BFR.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2023, 06:23 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/17/08
Posts: 6052
Post Likes: +12331
Location: KMCW
Aircraft: B55 PII,F-1,L-2,OTW,
Just like Sputnik, the Starship is not all about space. It will have the potential to deliver, or land, a large payload amywhere on EARTH within less than an hour.

Think about those implications for a minute.

_________________
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
MCW
Be Nice, Kind, I don't care, be something, just don't be a jerk ;-)


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2023, 10:14 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 12813
Post Likes: +13204
Company: Cogswell Cogs, LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
Musk has also stated that without BFR, Starlink cannot achieve profitability.

_________________
Life is a DiY project.


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2023, 10:28 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Musk has also stated that without BFR, Starlink cannot achieve profitability.

Notice this is not the same as "with Starship, Starlink CAN achieve profitability".

The military uses of Starlink and Starship have countries around the world concerned, including the USA. SpaceX has made itself a big factor in military planning.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: NASA: "At current cost levels the SLS pgm is unsustainab
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2023, 11:44 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/02/14
Posts: 1977
Post Likes: +1992
Location: Lakeville, Minnesota (KLVN)
Aircraft: J35
Ask yourself why Boeing is in this situation. Probably have a long debate and come up with multiple contributing factors.

We as a society no longer embrace failure. We fear it, we punish it, we regulate and regulate. Look at Elon and SpaceX, they are an outliner where it is still OK for things to explode. Yet when Starship did explode a few times, which was pretty much planned, people called it a failure.

Wall Street measures shareholder value through stock price based on quarterly results. Hard to lead a company to a long term vision when the metrics are all about yesterday.

The list goes on.


Username Protected wrote:
The space program that scares/bothers/upsets me is Boeing. They are our only domestic producer of airliners and they can't build a functional spacecraft, not to mention the incredible misfires they have experienced with the 787 and Max programs. We need a dependable domestic producer of airliners to continue to be a world leader.

_________________
N340Q
J35

ASEL&MEL ASES CFII MEI BPPP Instructor


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.AAI.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.