Space Launch System - Orion
Discussion
This today on Twitter..
We're sending the next man, and first woman, to the lunar South Pole by 2024. To do that, we're updating our call to American industry and broadening it to help us build and design an integrated human lunar lander system. Details: https://t.co/EvJMULPyAg #Moon2024 https://t.co/tLIaRnFnHd
We're sending the next man, and first woman, to the lunar South Pole by 2024. To do that, we're updating our call to American industry and broadening it to help us build and design an integrated human lunar lander system. Details: https://t.co/EvJMULPyAg #Moon2024 https://t.co/tLIaRnFnHd
RobDickinson said:
This today on Twitter..
We're sending the next man, and first woman, to the lunar South Pole by 2024. To do that, we're updating our call to American industry and broadening it to help us build and design an integrated human lunar lander system. Details: https://t.co/EvJMULPyAg #Moon2024 https://t.co/tLIaRnFnHd
Still based on mission architecture using the Lunar gateway - I suspect it won't be long before they realise that to hit the deadline of 2024 with the funding they are likely to have they are going to have to streamline it a bit - do they really have time to design, build, test, and launch a Gateway station as well as a lunar lander...before 2024 ?We're sending the next man, and first woman, to the lunar South Pole by 2024. To do that, we're updating our call to American industry and broadening it to help us build and design an integrated human lunar lander system. Details: https://t.co/EvJMULPyAg #Moon2024 https://t.co/tLIaRnFnHd
As the article I posted yesterday shows, the old SEI failed because it was too expensive, primarily because it included all the unnecessary bells & whistles NASA could think of
They have been working on Orion for 20 years, even flown a test one, yet still require 'more testing' which is delaying it even further
What hope of getting a lander ready in 5 years ?
Crews at NASA’s Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans have moved the forward join, or forward part, of the massive core stage for NASA’s Space Launch System in preparation for its final assembly and integration to the liquid hydrogen tank. In a change from the previous core stage assembly plan, technicians and engineers will mate the forward join with the liquid hydrogen tank horizontally rather than vertically. This revised approach of mating the two critical components allows technicians and engineers to finalize the outfitting and testing of the engine section concurrently. Combined with the use of new production tools, the new assembly process keeps core stage production on target for completion this year. The forward join consists of three parts: the forward skirt, liquid oxygen tank and intertank. It makes up 66 feet of the 212-foot-tall core stage. The core stage includes the liquid hydrogen tank and liquid oxygen tank that together hold 733,000 gallons of propellant to power the stage’s four RS-25 engines needed to launch SLS and NASA’s Orion spacecraft beyond Earth’s orbit forward to the Moon.
NASA is charged to get American astronauts to the Moon by 2024. SLS and Orion are our backbone for deep space exploration including missions to the Gateway in lunar orbit. The agency will launch SLS and Orion from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on their first integrated test flight around the Moon in 2020.
Image Credit: NASA/Steven Seipel
On a related issue, from Rob Mitchell
"Linked below is an older article that highlights a real problem with NASA's SLS/Orion plans. In short, the problem is space suits. NASA has David Clark ACES space suits, but they are only launch and entry suits. NASA's only operational EVA suit is the EMU, made by ILC Dover, but it is designed for work in a weightless environment. It's not designed for work on the Moon's surface or Mars.
Orion is a capable, if heavy, spacecraft, but as large as it is it does not have sufficient space to carry EVA suits in addition to the launch and entry suits the crew will need to wear at the beginning and end of a mission.
During the Apollo program the same problem existed, and its novel solution was an EVA suit that could also be used for launch and entry - the venerable A7L for Apollo 7-14, and the A7LB from Apollo 15 through to the Skylab missions and Apollo-Soyuz.
Another problem is that Orion is already a massive spacecraft and the additional mass of EVA suits would put it over budget even for the SLS to take to the Moon.
The EMU, with its hard torso, cannot be used for launch and entry, nor can the new Z-2 EVA suit which uses a rear entry hatch where its Portable Life Support System (PLSS) can attach. Russia's Orlan suit uses a similar entry and backpack connector.
NASA tried adapting the ACES pumpkin suit used on the Shuttle to see if any meaningful EVA work could be done wearing it by adding bearings and EMU gloves, but the suit's CO2 washout, although sufficient for launch and entry, would not support EVA activity with any meaningful work (Source: Jason Norcross, CO2 Washout Testing of NASA Spacesuits, NESC Academy online video of a talk given 2/21/2017).
If NASA wants to go to the Moon in just five years, the space suit problem will need to be solved, but almost no one is talking about it."
Link - https://www.thedailybeast.com/nasas-space-suit-dra...
OK, the lunar EVA suits could probably be stored in the lander ( which also does not yet exist )
"Linked below is an older article that highlights a real problem with NASA's SLS/Orion plans. In short, the problem is space suits. NASA has David Clark ACES space suits, but they are only launch and entry suits. NASA's only operational EVA suit is the EMU, made by ILC Dover, but it is designed for work in a weightless environment. It's not designed for work on the Moon's surface or Mars.
Orion is a capable, if heavy, spacecraft, but as large as it is it does not have sufficient space to carry EVA suits in addition to the launch and entry suits the crew will need to wear at the beginning and end of a mission.
During the Apollo program the same problem existed, and its novel solution was an EVA suit that could also be used for launch and entry - the venerable A7L for Apollo 7-14, and the A7LB from Apollo 15 through to the Skylab missions and Apollo-Soyuz.
Another problem is that Orion is already a massive spacecraft and the additional mass of EVA suits would put it over budget even for the SLS to take to the Moon.
The EMU, with its hard torso, cannot be used for launch and entry, nor can the new Z-2 EVA suit which uses a rear entry hatch where its Portable Life Support System (PLSS) can attach. Russia's Orlan suit uses a similar entry and backpack connector.
NASA tried adapting the ACES pumpkin suit used on the Shuttle to see if any meaningful EVA work could be done wearing it by adding bearings and EMU gloves, but the suit's CO2 washout, although sufficient for launch and entry, would not support EVA activity with any meaningful work (Source: Jason Norcross, CO2 Washout Testing of NASA Spacesuits, NESC Academy online video of a talk given 2/21/2017).
If NASA wants to go to the Moon in just five years, the space suit problem will need to be solved, but almost no one is talking about it."
Link - https://www.thedailybeast.com/nasas-space-suit-dra...
OK, the lunar EVA suits could probably be stored in the lander ( which also does not yet exist )
That has been an obvious and known about issue since Orion came into being. It has always been envisaged that Orion would operate in conjunction with "plug-in" additional modules and I have always assumed that this is where additional gear such as EVA suits would be stored.
The Space Shuttle era EVA suits were designed specifically envisaged for use in Zero G only and therefore it has always been recognised that they would not be capable of being used on the surface of a moon or planet. NASA has conducted many, many tests into future planetary surface EVA suits - although as far as I know, has not placed any orders or even requests to procure any state of the art planetary EVA suits.
Another issue I have not seen discussed is actual EVA out of the Orion capsule. I presume Orion will use an "air" mixture for its atmosphere - like the Shuttle and the ISS. This causes problems for EVAs as space suits use oxygen only and therefore it is normal for a spacecraft with an air atmosphere to have an airlock to allow the transition from breathing "air" to breathing "oxygen" only. I don't think Orion has an airlock so I don't see how they could conduct a Zero G EVA directly from the Orion capsule.
Again, I would assume these type of operations with require the docked "habitation" module which would have an airlock.
Also, where's the loo on Orion?
The Space Shuttle era EVA suits were designed specifically envisaged for use in Zero G only and therefore it has always been recognised that they would not be capable of being used on the surface of a moon or planet. NASA has conducted many, many tests into future planetary surface EVA suits - although as far as I know, has not placed any orders or even requests to procure any state of the art planetary EVA suits.
Another issue I have not seen discussed is actual EVA out of the Orion capsule. I presume Orion will use an "air" mixture for its atmosphere - like the Shuttle and the ISS. This causes problems for EVAs as space suits use oxygen only and therefore it is normal for a spacecraft with an air atmosphere to have an airlock to allow the transition from breathing "air" to breathing "oxygen" only. I don't think Orion has an airlock so I don't see how they could conduct a Zero G EVA directly from the Orion capsule.
Again, I would assume these type of operations with require the docked "habitation" module which would have an airlock.
Also, where's the loo on Orion?
AshVX220 said:
Did they have a loo on the Apollo missions? I had assumed they used to use bags or something......though bags are probably only good for Number 1's.
Essentially a slip-on rubber hose for urine, which wast then dumped overboard ( the constellation Urion 
), bags for faeces ( self adhesive top so they stuck to your cheeks )It does have a toilet but like many things, it's gone backwards since the Shuttle days:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
Flooble said:
It does have a toilet but like many things, it's gone backwards since the Shuttle days:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
Thanks for that - I was wondering what their plans were. The problem is available space in the Orion is very limited. The internal volume is quite a bit bigger than in an Apollo Command Module, but quite a bit less than in the crew compartment of the Space Shuttle Orbiter.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
Eric Mc said:
Flooble said:
It does have a toilet but like many things, it's gone backwards since the Shuttle days:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
Thanks for that - I was wondering what their plans were. The problem is available space in the Orion is very limited. The internal volume is quite a bit bigger than in an Apollo Command Module, but quite a bit less than in the crew compartment of the Space Shuttle Orbiter.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nrg0uepLNg
ks. Ars Technica article on NASA's latest plans for a return to the Moon - an ambitious 37 launches over the next 10 years. I suspect however that as usual there won't be any money for it, and/or it will be cancelled following a change in Administration.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/05/nasas-full...
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/05/nasas-full...
That was my impression when I heard this too. And renowned space writer David Baker's editorial in the latest edition of "Spaceflight" says the same.
However, the revelation that Bezos has been working on a large capacity lunar lander for the past three years indicates that NASA might have been well aware that serious work on a necessary lander was already well advanced.
I still think that a manned landing by 2024 is too ambitious and highly unlikely to be achieved in such a short time frame..
However, the revelation that Bezos has been working on a large capacity lunar lander for the past three years indicates that NASA might have been well aware that serious work on a necessary lander was already well advanced.
I still think that a manned landing by 2024 is too ambitious and highly unlikely to be achieved in such a short time frame..
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff