NASA's Space Launch System: DOA?

[DocM]

....just $38 BILLION, for a system that may fly only twice over the next 10 years :angry:

Space Launch System (SLS) is the 70 metric ton lo orbit launcher requited for NASA's Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (aka: Orion) and upgradeable to a 130 metric ton heavy lifter. Basically the parts would be derived from shuttle bits, with all their problems and huge legacy costs made worse by redesigning them into something else, requiring all new tooling. Truth be told, it was mandated by the last Congress (mostly the US Senate) as a way to keep certain suppliers and NASA centers from losing jobs. This has resulted in it's derogatory nickname: the Senate Launch System.

That's right kiddies: the Senate couldn't formulate a budget for 2.5 years because they were designing rockets in the committee chambers :p

Orlando Sentinel....

WASHINGTON ? The rocket and capsule that NASA is proposing to return astronauts to the moon would fly just twice in the next 10 years and cost as much as $38 billion, according to internal NASA documents obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

The money would pay for a new heavy-lift rocket and Apollo-like crew capsule that eventually could take astronauts to the moon and beyond. But it would not be enough to pay for a lunar landing ? or for more than one manned test flight, in 2021.

That timeline and price tag could pose serious problems for supporters of the new spacecraft, which is being built from recycled parts of the shuttle and the now-defunct Constellation moon program. It effectively means that it will take the U.S. manned-space program more than 50 years ? if ever ? to duplicate its 1969 landing on the moon.

>

[stevember]

There are so many things wrong with this but not in the way you are thinking.

1. It is just theoretical at the moment

2. It is an idea proposed to send man back to the moon, how often do you want them to take off?

3. It does not mean the government would be paying for this, commercial ventures would have a big part in something like this.

There is nothing wrong with NASA, or any other government or private firm looking into what it might cost to do something in the future.

Move along nothing interesting here apart from somebody trying to make something out of nothing.

[DocM]

This is not theoretical; it's been in the US budget since last year and will be 100% on the taxpayers dime.

Nothing at all to do with the CCDev program, which is mostly privately funded.

[stevember]

This is not theoretical; it's been in the US budget since last year and will be 100% on the taxpayers dime.

Nothing at all to do with the CCDev program, which is mostly privately funded.

Sorry 'proposal' then. Says in first line.

[stevember]

NASA spokesman David Weaver said nothing was final, however, and that the agency still was crunching numbers.

The preliminary estimate is NASA's first step to forecast the cost of the fledgling program.

They are just two examples in the article, there are many more where the $38 billion is more speculation than anything else.

[DocM]

A program almost no one thinks will fly because these early numbers are almost always underestimates. See Constellation (this is Constellation-lite), JWST etc.

If they were really serious they'd have a COTS/CCDev style competition with milestone based partial funding.

[Reacon]

Meanwhile, SpaceX can do the same for less than a hundredth of the price.

[DocM]

Maybe not a hundredth, but they did say they could build a 130 ton launcher for about $3 billion. Hell, one of their concepts, Falcon XX, could launch a bunch more than that.

[stevember]

Maybe not a hundredth, but they did say they could build a 130 ton launcher for about $3 billion. Hell, one of their concepts, Falcon XX, could launch a bunch more than that.

Falcon XX can put man on moon?

[Unix2]

Hey DocM, if it was a republican the president and he declare war to another country and this will cost trillions from tax payer, I bet, you will not have problem about it. Typical republican hypocrite.

[DocM]

Falcon XX can put man on moon?

If Falcon XX were built it could put a manned mission on Mars, Ceres, Deimos etc. We're talking about a system with much more up-mass than the Saturn V and almost 400'mtall. Huge.

[DocM]

Hey DocM, if it was a republican the president and he declare war to another country and this will cost trillions from tax payer, I bet, you will not have problem about it. Typical republican hypocrite.

First - I'm a Conservative not a Republican, If you knew anything about politics you'd know the difference.

Second - politics has nothing to do with this. I support Obama's puushing commercial space. It's good policy. I don't support SLS because it's bad policy and has a low bang/buck factor, but it was also designed to please the political needs of the Senate by the Senate - not by Obama. That's why its called the Senate Launch System in space circles.

Third - I fail to see where you see hypocracy in the above positions, but I do recognize your right to hold that view. Now, you should in return recognize my right to think your analytical skills are a bit lacking.

[spudtrooper]

First - I'm a Conservative not a Republican, If you knew anything about politics you'd know the difference.

Second - politics has nothing to do with this. I support Obama's puushing commercial space. It's good policy. I don't support SLS because it's bad policy and has a low bang/buck factor, but it was also designed to please the political needs of the Senate by the Senate - not by Obama. That's why its called the Senate Launch System in space circles.

Third - I fail to see where you see hypocracy in the above positions, but I do recognize your right to hold that view. Now, you should in return recognize my right to think your analytical skills are a bit lacking.

I don't think you have posted ANYTHING without a political spin to it and you do so as if you know all of the facts - hardly scientfic and hardly news worthy. I hope we get some mods in here to clean this place up or shut it down because its a disgrace to science and a disgrace to critical thinking. Its like you use this place to google juice your political ideology and its getting old

[Charisma Veteran]

Good idea, bad timing. Really should wait until we're a little more stable. Maybe it would be better off happening a few years down the line.

[DocM]

@ Spudtrooper -

Read the thread. I was responding to Unix2 inserting "republican" in this,not espousing beyond the FACT that politicians on BOTH SIDES are pushing a bad program; SLS. Hell, I'm as ticked at Sen. Shelby (R-Ga) as I am Sen. Nelson (D-Fla).

That the Senate hasn't produced a budget bill in 2.5 years isn't a political statement but historical fact. Look it up instead of flaming.

@ ammai -

Commercial like SpaceX has their own bux in the game, so it's not like typical NASA programs where it's all on the taxpayer. They are then incentivized to be efficient, which is why their whole program thus far cost $800M when NASA's beancounters estimated it at up to $6B.

[guru]

Hey DocM, if it was a republican the president and he declare war to another country and this will cost trillions from tax payer, I bet, you will not have problem about it. Typical republican hypocrite.

I don't think you have posted ANYTHING without a political spin to it and you do so as if you know all of the facts - hardly scientfic and hardly news worthy. I hope we get some mods in here to clean this place up or shut it down because its a disgrace to science and a disgrace to critical thinking. Its like you use this place to google juice your political ideology and its getting old

can you guys stop with the politics here

[Azies]

ugh.. I can't wait until nuclear propulsion.. :/ We'll need to make re-usable crafts that can easily leave and enter the earth's atmosphere without the use of a one time use booster rocket system.

[Charisma Veteran]

@ ammai -

Commercial like SpaceX has their own bux in the game, so it's not like typical NASA programs where it's all on the taxpayer. They are then incentivized to be efficient, which is why their whole program thus far cost $800M when NASA's beancounters estimated it at up to $6B.

A fair point, but that's still $800M that could be better used elsewhere at the moment, no?

[DocM]

It's their dime and Musk has a personal goal: man on Mars.

This also not a zero sum game. Look at it this way:

they have hired over 1,600 bleeding edge engineers and technicians, many who lost their jobs at NASA or the other aerospace companies, and those jobs pay very well. They will spend those $$ and keep others employed.

The satellite builders and their customers bottom lines will be better because of SpaceX's lower prices, and their emplyees job security will benefit from that.

Companies and researchers with ISS contracts, private labs, and the US govt and military will also benefit from lower launch costs.

And everyone in those chains drawing a paycheck, and most of their employers, pay taxes.

[LittleNeutrino Veteran]

that really is not all that much money over time, since the current system is rather expensive as well, however, that price tag with the hope of only using it a couple times is a bit much.

[Tomoko]

Spending trillions on pointless wars is still ok though, right?

[DocM]

The wars are winding down. Deal with it.

[neoadorable]

time to bring back NERVA and my beloved Venture Star! and i don't care how much the next launch system costs, we can print the money. just get it done.

[DocM]

Looks like $38B for the Space Launch System was a gross UNDERESTIMATE!

$38B was to get SLS flying in the 2020's, which is insanely late. Now the paper is in on getting an accelerated program flying -

Just $62.5B :angry:

Sorry, but the WSJ story is behind a paywall so no link.

This is rediculous. Congress needs to authorize a commercial competition for a heavy lifter. Let SpaceX, ULA etc. have at it, but it's obvious that a Shuttle derived system inherits too many legacy costs and is unaffordable.

[neoadorable]

why would it cost so much? where is the money going? if Zubrin can lay out a $600 million mission to Mars with existing hardware, why does a new rocket system cost $60 billion?