Space Launch System - Orion

Space Launch System - Orion

Author
Discussion

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Friday 8th November 2019
quotequote all
All four fitted


RobDickinson

31,343 posts

254 months

Friday 8th November 2019
quotequote all
Ars reporting launches with fixed and development costs etc for the 2020s will be around $5bn each.


Beati Dogu

8,883 posts

139 months

Friday 8th November 2019
quotequote all
Flooble said:
Is this the one they are preparing for the "Green Run"? Looks like they are on track to have all four engines installed before Christmas since it seems to take about ten days to install each one, so somewhere around the end of November - then presumably they have to do other stuff to actually connect them up inside (unless that is done per engine already).

What will be the next steps after the engines are installed?
Yes, They'll be shipping this rocket from New Orleans round to the test stand at the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.

Before that, they'll be doing "integrated functional test of flight computers, avionics and electrical systems that run throughout the 212-foot-tall core stage in preparation for its completion later this year. This testing is the first time all the flight avionics systems will be tested together to ensure the systems communicate with each other and will perform properly to control the rocket’s flight."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibuv5hcnE3E

They've obviously got the engine mounting procedure down now. Engine 4 was mounted just one day after engine 3.


It's going to make one hell of a rain cloud. Here's what just one of these engines does:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_XGPfY3mIs

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Sunday 10th November 2019
quotequote all
Article about the Europa Clipper launcher argument

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/11/the-white-...

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Sunday 10th November 2019
quotequote all

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Saturday 16th November 2019
quotequote all
More political rumblings about NASA's plan to return to the Moon - unsurprisingly the politicians want a greater dependence on SLS rather than commercial launch vehicles ( after all, SLS only costs 10x as much per kg of payload as Falcon Heavy for example frown )

https://spacenews.com/house-committee-raises-doubt...

Talksteer

4,857 posts

233 months

Saturday 16th November 2019
quotequote all
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/11/nasa-rejec...

NASA rejects Blue Origin bid for upper stage because it would require changes to Orion, the VAB and require new wind tunnel tests of the whole stack.

Instead gives the contract to Boeing as a result the SLS with the exploration upper stage will cost $2 billion per launch.

I'd suggest that the additional costs of integrating the Blue Origin upper stage would probably be paid for in a single flight and it is ikely that the New Glenn second stage probably costs less than the Delta IV upper stage they currently use.

Whole saga is getting beyond the joke, the logic for the SLS made some sense back in 2011, but today spending on exploration upper stages with Boeing is clearly just corporate welfare.

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Saturday 16th November 2019
quotequote all
Boeing are also bidding for the lunar lander element too - seems they want the whole thing to have a Boeing logo on it frown

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/11/09/boeing-propo...

And it has now emerged that, as well as being paid extra over the contract price for Commercial Crew ( see linked article below ) Boeing will be charging 60% more per seat than SpaceX for a trip to the ISS

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/11/nasa-repor...

Edited by MartG on Saturday 16th November 14:35

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

254 months

Saturday 16th November 2019
quotequote all
It's nuts Boeing want more than the Russians per seat even after their inflated gouging price hikes.

Flooble

5,565 posts

100 months

Saturday 16th November 2019
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
It's nuts Boeing want more than the Russians per seat even after their inflated gouging price hikes.
Not sure about that really, the R&D for Soyuz must have been paid off decades ago so it's only manufacturing costs and ... oh wait .. you meant the Russians were making inflated gouging price hikes. My mistake.

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Monday 18th November 2019
quotequote all
Orion and SM now complete and headed to Plum Brook for vacuum thermal testing






Beati Dogu

8,883 posts

139 months

Friday 22nd November 2019
quotequote all
A look inside the Systems Integrations Lab at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama:



This is the development and testing layout of the SLS core stage's avionics system. Functionally identical to that fitted to the rocket itself.


https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/news/...

Gandahar

9,600 posts

128 months

Friday 22nd November 2019
quotequote all
People keep going on about Orion like it being the old days and dinosaurs and amount of money etc.

As a kid from the moon landings I love it. I leave LEO to the younger phone generation and their apps.

smile



Edited by Gandahar on Saturday 23 November 00:00

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Tuesday 3rd December 2019
quotequote all

MartG

20,666 posts

204 months

Thursday 5th December 2019
quotequote all

Flooble

5,565 posts

100 months

Thursday 5th December 2019
quotequote all
I hope they don't blow the top off :-)

Interesting that they test to 140% of expected flight stress. What's the usual safety factor?

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,941 posts

265 months

Thursday 5th December 2019
quotequote all
Not much. Rockets are not designed to the same strength tests that (say) aircraft are. I think the Space Shuttle orbiter had a 150% test failure level.

Flooble

5,565 posts

100 months

Thursday 5th December 2019
quotequote all
I had a look and found this:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa....

I was surprised it was so low, but I can see why. I'm used to aircraft being certified for e.g. -1 to +2.5g when they will probably never get near that, so I thought that there would be a similar "safety factor on factor". I can see why they don't need to though, it's not like a human is going to inadvertently apply too much control input in a rocket.

Beati Dogu

8,883 posts

139 months

Saturday 7th December 2019
quotequote all
Well they found its limit:



It took more than 260% of expected flight loads over five hours before buckling and rupturing.

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/nasa-...

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,941 posts

265 months

Saturday 7th December 2019
quotequote all
Anyone got a large roll of duct tape?