192 posts in this topic

FlyingPigCraft.thumb.jpg.dcbce3f23636458

with mission patch....

Pigsinspacelogo-sketch.thumb.jpg.6c3a6c7

:woot:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrrgh. Where do I begin ...

- That "pretty, heat-reflective, metallic coating" is completely unnecessary. All they're doing is adding weight and that weight will throw off the balance of the spacecraft, which is now balanced properly (not top-heavy) after the Engineers & Laborers building the damned thing just trimmed 20% of the weight just by doing some smart ... well, Engineering. The spacecraft was already designed to withstand the reentry temperatures on the outer skin iirc via a circulatory liquid cooling system like the ISS has. What's the matter, the liquid cooling system didn't scale properly? The composite material that the outer shell of the craft is made out of / that was applied to it didn't work either? Good grief, don't you people test this s**t before committing it to a design?

- Tiles in place of a Heat Shield ... okay. Long as SpaceX is supplying them and the personnel to install/repair/replace them after each mission. They're much lighter than a Heat Shield too, so they'll be sure to watch the spacecraft's balance (weight distribution) carefully. We need that rear end pointing prograde and staying put when we want it to.

*sigh* Money pit. Absolute Money Pit. I could have designed a better ship using Kerbal Space Program and Autodesk Designer.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More like this, now.........

original.thumb.jpg.94235dd550c5664dc9588

:D

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, really. SLS/Orion is really just a dog-and-pony show, now. Something for NASA to do "in the meantime" so that the Senate Science Committee has something to complain about every year during Budget Hearings. "Create your own entertainment" is the phrase that best comes to mind.

Build SLS -- fine, whatever. At this point, SpaceX and the other NewSpace companies are up to their eyeballs with other projects. The Super-Heavy LV will get some use, certainly -- and customers will buy it, if NASA is in the market to sell rides like Roscosmos does and it's a fantastic way to generate revenue. A Super-Heavy capable of 125t at the high end?! There'll be a line out the door and around the corner for booking flights. They'd have to start up RS-25 production again with all the business; and they'd be able to with all that scratch. Develop a Satellite Dispenser that can carry 16 birds at a time -- heavy, full-size birds -- into GTO at $25m~45m a head, yeah. They'll come running.

Sadly, nobody in the U.S. Government will authorize that scenario, and NASA will be left holding the blame like usual.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More useful will be a 180-250+ tonne launcher. 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of pork....this is plain nutty.....

NASA awards new contract for rocket engine development

rs-25-flight-engine-a-1-test-stand-stenn
The new RS-25 engine developed under this contract will have fewer parts and welds and will be certified to a higher operational thrust level. The new engine benefits from improvements in materials and manufacturing techniques such as five-axis milling machines, 3-D manufacturing and digital X-rays.

NASA selected Aerojet Rocketdyne of Sacramento, California, to restart production of the RS-25 engine for the agency's Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful rocket in the world, and deliver a certified engine. SLS will use four RS-25 engines to carry the agency's Orion spacecraft and launch explorers on deep space missions, including to an asteroid placed in lunar orbit and ultimately to Mars.

Part of NASA's strategy to minimize costs of developing the SLS rocket was to leverage the assets, capabilities, and experience of the Space Shuttle Program, so the first four missions will be flown using 16 existing shuttle engines that have been upgraded.

Under the $1.16 billion contract, Aerojet Rocketdyne will modernize the space shuttle heritage engine to make it more affordable and expendable for SLS. The contract runs November 2015 and continues through Sept. 30, 2024.

The new RS-25 engine developed under this contract will have fewer parts and welds and will be certified to a higher operational thrust level. The new engine benefits from improvements in materials and manufacturing techniques such as five-axis milling machines, 3-D manufacturing and digital X-rays.

The contract restarts the firm's production capability including furnishing the necessary management, labor, facilities, tools, equipment and materials required for this effort, implementing modern fabrication processes and affordability improvements, and producing hardware required for development and certification testing.

The contract also allows for a potential future modification that would enable NASA to order six flight engines.

NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, manages the SLS Program for the agency. Engine testing will be performed at NASA's Stennis Space Center in Mississippi and the SLS will launch from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/NASA_Awards_Contract_to_Restart_Development_of_Engines_to_Power_Agencys_Journey_to_Mars_999.html

 "to restart production of the RS-25 engine"    implies they have the plans from prior production.

"The new engine benefits from improvements in materials and manufacturing techniques such as five-axis milling machines, 3-D manufacturing and digital X-rays."     If they did not already have this equipment in house for use on other designs, they are incompetent.

"necessary management, labor, facilities, tools, equipment and materials required for this effort, implementing modern fabrication processes and affordability improvements, and producing hardware required for development and certification testing." as if none of this is present on site.

$ 1.16 billion....to get ready......:s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another 'vampire that ate the NASA budget' project, the RS-25 restart has been in the works for some time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True...it has been planned for the "throw aways" for some time, but with time, lots, to negotiate a reasonable price for start up and a price for each engine. This is a terrible start up cost, and engine prices, probably to be released much later, will probably be terrible as well....it is surprising what NASA can accomplish with what is left over, with politicians dictating this SLS mess.

And this as well...

Aerojet Rocketdyne Signs $200 Million Contract for CST-100 Starliner Propulsion

HIGHBAY-Boeing_CST100.thumb.jpg.335f5f5b
High Bay of KSC facility used to manufacture Boeing CST-100 spacecraft.

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Nov. 23, 2015 (Aerojet Rocketdyne PR) — Aerojet Rocketdyne, a subsidiary of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:AJRD), has signed a contract with Boeing valued at nearly $200 million that supports a new era of spaceflight – one that will carry humans to the International Space Station (ISS) from American soil once again. Under its Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) subcontract to Boeing, Aerojet Rocketdyne is completing the design, development, qualification, certification and initial production of the Crew Space Transportation (CST)-100 “Starliner” service module propulsion system.

 

Under the CCtCap contract, Aerojet Rocketdyne will provide seven shipsets of hardware with options for additional shipsets. Each production hardware shipset will include four Launch Abort Engines (LAEs), 24 Orbital Maneuvering and Attitude Control (OMAC) engines, 28 Reaction Control System (RCS) engines, 164 valves, 12 tanks and more than 500 feet of ducts, lines and tubing. Boeing will assemble hardware kits into the service module section of the CST-100 spacecraft at its Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Aerojet Rocketdyne also provides hardware supporting the Qualification Test Vehicle; Service Module hot fire testing, which will take place at White Sands Test Facility in New Mexico; the orbital flight test, which will be launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida; and Pad Abort testing, which will occur at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. The CST-100 is scheduled to deliver astronauts to the ISS for NASA, beginning in 2017. 

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/11/24/aerojet-rocketdyne-signs-200-million-contract-cst100-starliner-propulsion/#more-56911

I can imagine this as well, will eventually make it back to NASA's wallet.....with poor AR not doing so well.....and Boeing can't/or won't, do this themselves? 

Look's like a race between oldspace vampires trying to beat SpaceX to the ISS.....with a heinz 57 capsule.....:s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A year before Starliner flies they're finally signing the contracts to buy a propulsion systems for it. Figures. Last Minute Larry strikes again. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A year before Starliner flies they're finally signing the contracts to buy a propulsion systems for it. Figures. Last Minute Larry strikes again. 

/s   It's okay...They'll test it in a wind tunnel along with the abort system....that'll make everyone comfy and safe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've tested RS-88 engines on a stand, but that's not the same as a synchronized 4 engine abort sysyem for Starliner - which also has no in-quadrant redundancy. The SuperDraco pods do - if one fails the other can be throttled up and the opposing engines throttled down to balance the thrust.

Previously RS-88 was an option for the small class Bantam launcher, a liquid based LAS for Orion, as well as the the engine for Rocketplane XP -  a modified Learjet spaceplane which would have flown an SS2 style profile.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

European Service Module Undergoes Testing

 

ooEuropean_Service_Module.thumb.jpg.bff5

Orion Service Module                          NASA

 

 

Quote

The European Service Module is ESA's contribution to NASA's Orion spacecraft that will send astronauts to the Moon and beyond. It provides electricity, water, oxygen and nitrogen as well as keeping the spacecraft at the right temperature and on course.

The cylindrical module is unpressurised and 4 m long, including the main engine and tanks for gas and propellant. During launch it is held in place by the Spacecraft Adapter and is connected to the capsule where the astronauts are by the Crew Module Adapter.

The main body of the service module is around 2 m high but its main engine, the Orbital Maneuvering System Engine, extends into the Spacecraft Adapter. Likewise, some of the equipment in ESA's service module protrudes into the Crew Module Adapter.

During launch the service module fits into a 5.2 m-diameter housing. Once Orion is above the atmosphere and the rocket fairing is jettisoned, the service module's solar array unfolds to span 19 m.

The spacecraft resembles ESA's Automated Transfer Vehicle, from which it evolved. Five Automated Transfer Vehicles delivered supplies to the International Space Station and helped to keep the outpost in orbit.

Three types of engine push Orion to its destination and can turn it in all directions to align the spacecraft as needed.

Inside the Service Module, large tanks hold fuel as well consumables for the astronauts: oxygen, nitrogen and water.

Radiators and heat exchangers keep the astronauts and equipment at a comfortable temperature, while the module's structure is the backbone of the entire vehicle, like a car chassis.

The European Service Module is built by main contractor Airbus Defence and Space, with many companies all over Europe supplying components. The final product is assembled in Europe before being shipped to NASA in the USA.

http://spaceref.com/orion-1/european-service-module-undergoes-testing.html

 

In depth article at this link.....

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/12/nasa-testing-orions-european-service-module/

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NASA Safety Panel Worries about Schedule Pressure on Exploration Programs

 

shiny-Orion-879x485.thumb.jpg.e2e17a82b0

The ASAP report warns of several concerns with Orion, including its heat shield and life support system, that could create safety issues if NASA tries to keep the first crewed mission on a schedule for launch in 2021. Credit: NASA

 

Quote

WASHINGTON — An independent safety panel warns that “a continuing and unacknowledged accretion of risk” in NASA’s human space exploration programs, caused by schedule pressures and flat funding, could put crews on future missions in jeopardy.

 

NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP), in its annual report published Jan. 13, stated it has growing concerns about a variety of issues in the development of the Space Launch System and Orion spacecraft that result in “an apparent erosion of safety” in those programs.

 

“Over the past year, the Panel has noted a continuing and unacknowledged accretion of risk in space flight programs that we believe has the potential to significantly impact crew safety and the safe execution of human space missions,” the report stated. “The Panel’s concern is not the result of singular action but the accumulated impact of decisions made and risks assumed — either explicitly or tacitly, in small or large steps — that have mounted up and led to an apparent erosion of safety.”

 

One specific area of concern ASAP raised in its report is the schedule for Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2), the second flight of the SLS and the first intended to carry a crew. In September, NASA announced that mission had a 70-percent chance of being ready for launch by April 2023, but that NASA would continue to work towards a launch in 2021, as originally scheduled.

 

ASAP criticized that approach. “NASA’s internal direction to the programs is to work to a 2021 EM-2 launch date, which has a schedule confidence level close to zero at requested funding levels,” the report stated, adding that NASA appeared to be making “safety trade-offs” to make that date.

The report cited several specific issues with SLS and Orion development and planning for the EM-2 mission, including development of a new SLS upper stage called the Exploration Upper Stage and testing of the life support system in Orion on that mission. The report suggested some of those concerns could be eased if NASA kept Orion in Earth orbit during that mission, rather than go into cislunar space as currently planned.

 

“This decision,” the report said of NASA’s current EM-2 plans, “reflects an aggressive development plan that takes the Exploration System from qualification testing to integrated human operations in cislunar space in just two missions.”

 

Other issues raised by ASAP include revisions to a planned in-flight abort test of Orion, changes to the spacecraft’s heat shield and “zero fault tolerant” systems in Orion’s service module, such as propellant valves, that could result in catastrophic failures of the overall spacecraft.

 

ASAP noted that SLS and Orion have received more money from Congress than what NASA has requested in recent years, but that a flat funding profile has contributed to development issues the panel found. “This distribution of resources reflects one more typically observed in ‘level-of-effort’ programs rather than a budget constructed to achieve the needed design efforts of a major program’s discrete and integrated requirements,” the report stated.

 

ASAP, which in past years has been critical of NASA’s commercial crew program, was more supportive of it in this year’s report. The panel cited “substantial improvement in openness and interaction” with program management, a concern it raised in its 2014 report. It also endorsed keeping two companies in the program, despite budget pressures.

 

However, ASAP warned that “significant challenges” still exist for the commercial crew program and the two companies, Boeing and SpaceX, currently developing crew vehicles. The panel concluded there is “a high likelihood of delays to the first test flights” scheduled for 2017, citing ongoing delays in completing reviews of the companies’ plans to certify their vehicles for carrying NASA astronauts.

 

“The Panel’s concern is that over time, schedule or budget pressure — or both — will lead the [NASA commercial crew] Program Office to accept more risk than desirable for crew and mission safety,” the report stated.

 

ASAP also cast a skeptical eye on NASA’s overall plan for sending humans to Mars, known by the agency as the “Journey to Mars.” The panel criticized a lack of technical details and mission architectures in a NASA report released in October about the Journey to Mars. Providing more details, the panel argued, “would go a long way toward gaining the needed support from future administrations, the Congress, and the general public.”

“If not,” the panel added, “then perhaps NASA should be working on a different mission, or at least using a different approach for the current mission.”

http://spacenews.com/nasa-safety-panel-worries-about-schedule-pressure-on-exploration-programs/

 

Yes...SLS got slammed...but at least they eased up on commercial crew....:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lockheed says Orion is on track for fall 2018, meaning any slip takes it into 2019. No meat bags on board until 2023-ish, but said slips means 2024-2025.  

 

Also, for SpaceX's BFS to land on Mars in 2025 it would have to launch around November 2024 (optimum for that synod), meaning it could fly people before Orion.

 

/sigh

 

http://spacenews.com/lockheed-says-orion-still-on-schedule-for-2018-mission/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good grief. Kill it already. They'll be testing FX, FHX and BFR by then. 2024-2025 ... sheesh.

 

It's LH/M -- of course it's going to slip to 2025. They're gonna milk Bessie for all she's worth just to get the money.

 

And is there really a reason that damned SM is the width it is?? I mean, honestly. Widen that [bleeping] thing already. Get some real "Service" out of that "Service Module", you hacks. It's not like there's a design purpose for it to be that skinny. It looks like you're balancing a Badminton cone on the end of a chopped toilet paper tube. Yikes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we just have to remember one image...

 

800.thumb.jpg.a41dd7bf8135ec4f98b2e5894e

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, that was classic. :D 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.