 
     |
| ARTEMIS launch Aug. 29 (Page 2/2) |
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
SEP 02, 01:40 PM
|
|
I really don't want to trash this project, but I'm also very frustrated by its history.
The rocket on the pad over there, is literally the prototype... and it's cobbled together with used parts... not intentionally like Space-X does when it reuses parts because they are built that way, but this rocket was literally built with junkyard parts.
Both booster rockets are leftovers from the shuttle era... each one is at least over a decade old, and they've been modified at that. The engines (part between the fuel and cone) are all reused... some from the space shuttle, and others from even older rockets.
The funding issue... ugh... they have had so many cost-overruns.
Imagine if I was contracted to build a house, and I quoted a price. Then, I still hadn't finished it, but I built it with some left-over parts, or parts I'd taken from other houses... and charged the new homeowners twice as much. I realize space flight is hard... but Space-X can do it in half the time.
Space-X offered to build the engines a long time ago, and NASA emphatically said no... no doubt because of resistance from Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
I hope ARTEMIS does well, I really do... but there's a reason why we're having all these problems, and it goes to the absolute root of mismanagement at NASA, and the bloated bureaucracy that Boeing and Lockheed Martin have become.
|
|
|
|
Notorio
|
SEP 03, 12:53 AM
|
|
I was just looking for an Artemis schedule and am quite disappointed to see that launches are spaced out a year or more in between. A quick review of the Apollo program shows they were doing Saturn V launches on average every 155 days, with four consecutive missions launched in only 59 - 76 days. That's the NASA I remember.
|
|
|
|
kslish
|
SEP 03, 11:19 AM
|
|
Looks like it's going to be scrubbed again today. Hydrogen leak in the fueling quick disconnect due to seals not sealing correctly at cold temps.
Apparently there a valid reasons why SpaceX doesn't use hydrogen as a rocket fuel.
I'm betting it gets rolled back to the VAB after this.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
SEP 03, 12:17 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by kslish:
Looks like it's going to be scrubbed again today. Hydrogen leak in the fueling quick disconnect due to seals not sealing correctly at cold temps.
I'm betting it gets rolled back to the VAB after this. |
|
Someone ask me why... come on, anyone...
Ok, I'll answer. Because Government sucks, and is almost entirely incapable of managing itself at this point. They politicized NASA in the mid 2010s, and effectively laid off thousands of top NASA scientists and engineers. MANY of them went to China... yes. People don't understand, when you have some of the world's most brilliant minds, they often could really care less who they're doing the work for... they just want to solve a challenge. Werner Van Braun is a perfect example. He had no problem doing work for the NAZIs, or the United States... just wanted to work the science.
Luckily... many of these scientists and engineers went to Space-X... but those that didn't outright retire, or go to China or the French space agency... they became contractors for Booze Allen Hamilton, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin... and now they're under contract, and what's the best way to make more money on a contract??? ... extend the contract, cost overruns.
NASA is literally operating on the JV team.
it works like this:
Space-X (Top tier engineers / scientists)
Boeing (Basically the left-overs that Space-X had no interest in)
Lockheed Martin (the Boeing leftovers)
NASA (the people who are basically unhireable, not even the JV team)
It pains me to no end to say this, because NASA was the pinnacle of science in technology when I was growing up. But every single person at NASA knows this.
This Artemis launch... it can almost be compared to if I went to my storage unit in Central Florida where my Fiero is located, tinkered with it, and after sitting for 10 years, I bring a fresh battery and some gas and decide I am going to drive it to my home in Tampa... and I kept finding problems as I tried to get it out on the road.
They're basically trying to launch a junkyard truck... this is a complete embarrassment for NASA... and I hope EVERYONE is watching, because we need to face our failures before we're willing to change.[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 09-03-2022).]
|
|
|
|
kslish
|
SEP 03, 02:17 PM
|
|
I'm not sure I'd rank Boeing that high. They are, after all, the primary contractor on Artemis.
We all see how well Boeing's Starliner is working out. SpaceX just got awarded the contract for the remainder of the manned crew flights to the ISS through 2030.
What SpaceX could probably have done with 32 billion dollars and 10+ years..... Starship is being developed on a relative shoestring budget by comparison.
I just watched Tim Dodd on his YouTube live broadcast from the the launch site state that the reason that there is such a gap to Artemis II launching (even though the center stack is close to being completed this year) is that they are planning on reusing the avionics components from this Orion capsule for the next one and that takes time to transfer over.
That would be the last thing I'd expect to be reused on a project like this. What happens if this capsule doesn't make it back from this test? More cost overruns and delays? Supply chain issues? 😀[This message has been edited by kslish (edited 09-03-2022).]
|
|
|
|
cvxjet
|
SEP 03, 02:49 PM
|
|
Back in the 1990s, Lockheed was working on SSTO Venturestar.....This was an amazing vehicle. Lockheed can make aircraft (And spacecraft) do things no other manufacturer can. It had a Linear Aerospike engine, and all new composite materials in it's structure.
One problem with it, though, was trying to use a composite Cryogenic tank...When this was specified in the NASA request, numerous engineers said that would be near impossible; A composite structure is usually a honeycomb design- moisture can penetrate that structure and then, when freezing, expand and damage that structure.
They had numerous failures of these test tanks- but Lockheed had a backup plan; A team was working on an ALUMINUM tank- and it turned out to be LIGHTER than the Composite tank. Although the SKIN was lighter, the 3-lobe tank shape required connecting joints- on the composite tanks these had to be much heavier.
They were close to actual first flight, and then.....
Congress wanted an update briefing from NASA- and a PLANETARY scientist somehow was selected- this buffoon stated (To Congress) that "If we don't do ALL the technology, why bother?" and so Congress cancelled the program.
New technology is great- but sometimes it is not the best solution. Ivan Bekey- the man who stated the above- is an arrogant fool.
|
|
|
|
kslish
|
SEP 03, 10:56 PM
|
|
A good read:
https://arstechnica.com/sci...-of-liquid-hydrogen/
I am not a fan of the current NASA Administrator, former Senator Bill Nelson, like I was of Jim Breidenstein (although he was a politician as well). Bill Nelson is a politician that seems to be part of the "this is the way we've always done it" problem, not the solution.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
SEP 03, 11:05 PM
|
|
WSJ had a pretty accurate article (opinion piece) regarding the subject, much of which has already been said here in this thread..
Title:
(you can find the article easily enough but will likely need a subscription to read it all)
ARS/Eric Berger tho, nailed it too:
https://arstechnica.com/sci...-of-liquid-hydrogen/
The last paragraph.
"Effectively, Saturday's "launch" attempt was the sixth time NASA has tried to completely fuel the first and second stages of the rocket, and then get deep into the countdown. To date, it has not succeeded with any of these fueling tests, known as wet dress rehearsals. On Saturday, the core stage's massive liquid hydrogen tank, with a capacity of more than 500,000 gallons, was only 11 percent full when the scrub was called.
Perhaps the seventh time will be a charm."[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 09-03-2022).]
|
|
|
|
kslish
|
SEP 09, 12:40 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Notorio
|
SEP 10, 12:33 AM
|
|
Seals replaced and a tank test this weekend, for possible launch window late Sep / early Oct.
Click Here
|
|
|
|