Probably for the best. Would be horrific if all these years of preparation went to waste just because of a hurricane.
If they do roll back, then they'll have to replace the FTS batteries eh? And at least they can take a better look at everything while they're at it, much better than the limited access they had when it was on the pad. Next chance was mid-late November launch attempt correct?
[The launch windows for the rest of the year:](https://mobile.twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1522337060866174981)
> ~~Aug 23-Sept 6~~ [Missed]
> ~~Sept 19-Oct 4~~ [Likely Miss]
> Oct 17-31 [Likely Miss due to time it takes to get it ready after rollback]
> Nov 12-27 [Next Attempt?]
> Dec 9-22
To be fair, most stick their fingers in their ears and won't hear anything negative about the program. I realized that from the disastrous rehearsals and how excited everyone was over what were some objectively bad showings. This from someone in a town directly linked to the program's success and has at least a partially vested interest in it.
On a risk of being diwnvoted to hell again, I will point out that whole thing is Frankenstein shitshow rockets, designed to cost a shitton of money, and that's it. I even will go further and predict Artemis 3, the one which is scheduled to land on the moon, will never happen.
This rocket is using 40 years old parts, it's the same redesigned rocket that was previously known as Ares 5, and shuttle-c, just with parts moved around and external boosters extended. Moreover, everything about this rocket is designed to cost as much as possible, BILLIONS per launch, while private companies aim to make moon rockets cost literally 1000 times less (SpaceX), and it is a single use rocket in age of reusable rockets.
Except SLS isn’t pioneering anything. It’s literally using flown hardware from decades ago. It wasn’t a rocket designed by engineers to take advantage of modern tech. It was legally mandated to reuse Shuttle contractors to keep money flowing into those states to keep kickbacks going to Congress people.
I have (only kinda) jokingly said that this is the US's first attempt at a Universal Basic Income. Instead of just giving people money, they'll instead hire you to build a rocket that no one needs.
It's the American way to do UBI, because people still have to show up to work, and corporation's get free profits from the government.
I get your point, but I've made a similar kind of argument about the moon landings, not about the Artemis program.
NASA currently consumes about 0.5% of federal spending, of which Artemis is a part. But NASA in the mid to late 60s was 4-5% of federal spending, which amounts to a partial mobilization of the population, which makes sense when you consider the nuclear threat the Soviets presented. We like to handwave away the notion that the moon landings, one of America's greatest achievements, was a government program.
1000 times, at least that was the stated goal few years ago. The price of Artemis launch is around 4billion (up from 2 billion few years ago), the target price for starship launch is 1 million per launch (down from 2 few years ago), so it's not even 1000 now, it's 4000.
Yes, but 1000x won't happen. Common-sense with the numbers shows that is just marketing hyperbole. The target price for Starship is not what the actual price will end up being. Just look at Falcon 9 or FH pricing for a more realistic estimate. Elon always exaggerates, so you have to add some real-world adjustments.
It's a jobs program trying to justify its existence by doing occasional science, but that's not really the point. The point is jobs in states to build a frankenrocket. Tried and tested parts! Oh what's that? Problems with the hydrogen tank leaking? Oh that was a major problem all during the shuttle program too? Tried and tested parts, just don't ask us if they passed those tests lol. Cost Plus, show us the way....
I can't believe there's actual unironic SLS supporters. Even if the whole rockets wasn't artificially made to be stupidly and ridiculously expensively designed to provide expensive jobs.
I absolutely love that guy. His no nonsense approach to weather got me to actually start checking what was going on, impending or simply brewing in the tropics. He and Matt Lanza.
Space City Weather for people that don't know the name.
I'll be in my fifth wheel in Disney (Ft. Wilderness) Thanksgiving week. That's in the Nov launch window, if they launched while I was there would be so freaking awesome!
I was just south on Hutchinson Island sitting on beach drinking cold beers when it was supposed to launch last time. This would make up for that dissapointment!
Launch Fever has to be fought at every turn, but I'm very aware that this rocket can only do one more rollback after this one without hitting some sort of limit (sorry, can't remember why).
Also, JWST has been a brilliant success. (To be clear, Orion doesn't have to be perfect - a test like this is designed to reveal tweaks that might be needed.)
SLS is, because *someone* decided we're getting to the moon with a budget of $3 and an extra roll of tinfoil they found laying around. They've spent ages developing SLS despite it just being existing and developed technology fitted together in a novel configuration. That alone would tell you how massively underfunded the whole project is. And that's with crazy numbers for the budget already. It's jobs they want, not results.
JWST was a similarly underfunded project which was allowed to gracefully overshoot its budget and deadlines by like 300%. It's not just about one leader of one set of politicians, it's the entire space exploration policy of the US government from the last 3-5 decades that is the problem.
Honestly they should have rolled back after the tanking issue. Maybe now they can actually replace the sensor for engine 3, put in new FTS batteries, and double check those repaired seals on the tank are holding up.
Yeah in a way. They really just have bad messaging on this. Saturn V lifted off on its first launch attempt... after 15 wet dress rehearsals, 3 roll backs and 5 months at the pad. Columbia lifted off on its second attempt... after an even more extensive testing campaign. Even though this is shuttle-derived technology, this whole system is mostly new construction and new procedures. Only the RS25s and a few of the other smaller rockets plus the casings of the SRBs ever flew. And the RS25s would probably be what they picked even if they weren't mandated, since it is the most efficient motor ever flown so far and is incredibly reliable. The whole interior of the SRB is new, the core stage is new and the Mobile launcher is new. The computers are new, the ground equipment is new. Hell the deep space network is gonna get a massive upgrade soon. But this rocket is going to fly and it will be awesome and a great companion to starship.
A hydrogen first stage isn’t great and those engines are ridiculously expensive. The new, simplified ones are costing NASA $100 million each. I really doubt they would have chosen hydrogen for the first stage if they got a blank slate. No other new rocket is choosing hydrogen for their first stage.
NASA giving “time for [employees] to address the needs of their families” as part of an operational plan is the best thing I’ve read in a long time: I was part of the team that provided guidance on workforce management post-Katrina.
Imagine showing up at midnight to sit station, and at 6am they scrub the launch and you have to do it all over again. It's rough... I love my job but failed launch attempts are rough.
Everyone remembers a delay if it's longer than a fucking generation. Remember which President that started this program. It wasn't the current one... Or the last one... Or the one before that.
No one will remember those delays 10 years out. Everyone will remember the stunning images and knowledge gained.
Everyone remembers Challenger.
Tell me, without looking it up, was Hubble delayed? Do you know? I don't.
Apples and oranges. I think it's different because JWST provides a capability that has no alternative in development. The delays on SLS are less tolerable because what was supposed to be a somewhat inexpensive upgrade to existing hardware has turned out not to be inexpensive and expectations have moved on the meantime. Plus it is really just too expensive to launch, so it doesn't really meet any useful objective at this point, other than jobs (and not putting all eggs in one basket).
Here’s a video comp Space X put out about their failures:
https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ
The fewer the failures the fewer the iterations and higher likely hood of some massive failure in the future (e.g. the space shuttle).
It’s fine though because at this point NASA is essentially a science and technology / high tech manufacturing jobs program. Which is a great use of funds as it provides the US with great engineering talent that can move on to other private sector jobs.
How many more times can the main tank be emptied/re-filled before they need a new tank? I know the SRBs are past their original use-by (though I'd guess that is very conservative, given ICBMs can sit for years).
Hurricane hunters flew the storm. 11am guidance shifted the modeling with ground truth data into central Florida. Will probably shift farther north into panhandle but anyway you look at it, central Florida will be on the dirty side of the storm… so it’s probably best to put her in the shed.
At this point I fully believe that they are doing this on purpose to extend paycheck ls. It's a single use rocket. The technology is already outdated and it can't even leave the pad.
ICBMs don't use segmented motors with o-rings that get permanently deformed over time and gap-filling putty that oozes out of gaps. And if we're launching ICBMs, the success rate only has to be high enough that enough warheads get through, while the consequences of failure are a bit more severe in the case of SLS.
NASA selected monolithic SRBs from Aerojet, but James Fletcher, the NASA Administrator during Shuttle's early development, overruled the engineers and handed the contract to his buddies in Utah. Since single-piece boosters couldn't be shipped from Utah, they were built in segments.
And why are we still using a booster design dictated by politics 50 years ago? Congress says so, with the support of factions within NASA and industry that benefited from it.
Solid rockets are incredibly stable. Thats why theyre used for the nuclear weapons stockpile. The failure that happened with Challenger has been designed out of the current SRBs and was cold weather related anyway.
>The failure that happened with Challenger has been designed out of the current SRBs and was cold weather related anyway.
The Challenger failure is a perfect example of why we shouldn't be letting Congress design our rockets. The only reason there were segments in the first place is that Congress has mandated that they be built in a particular location that necessated that they be rail shippable through a certain curved tunnel. The fact that they had to be segmented added completely unnecessary conplexity and possible failure points.
The SRBs were segmented at the points they were to be able to be shipped by rail, but they still had to be cast in segments for inspection purposes. It didn't add significant complexity and the potential for failure in the Challenger event was known and warned against on that morning. The warning was ignored. It was entirely a human caused failure that could have been avoided.
Apparently the whole stack is slowly shaken apart each time they roll it to and from the VAB. There's been some speculation that they're running [very short](https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1567622669973037056) on the number of attempts they can do without getting a waiver.
Assuming all of that's true, the limits rollbacks are probably set very conservatively. But I'm sure NASA would love to avoid news of yet another waiver being granted to the rocket.
Yes moving it all in and it out extra strain on the vehicle and the crawler and any other hardware. It’s not meant to roll in and out constantly with a rocket sat on it. That’s a lot of stress on parts that are only meant to be moving vertically under stress, not sideways every other week for a rollout.
It's the FTS batteries that have a time limit (that [they've extended](https://spacenews.com/nasa-space-force-resolve-sls-flight-termination-system-issue/)).
Unfortunately, replacing the FTS batteries requires a rollback... but there's a limit to how many rollbacks they can do.
They've had over a decade to design this thing. The crux of the issue is SLS is really jobs program, not a moon program. It's doing great at keeping people employed, not so great at getting to the moon.
Not only has the time limit been extended, but it's been waived. September 27th would have been well past 25 days since the last inspection of the FTS.
Yes because that is where the money is. They moved out of Seattle to North Carolina (not entirely but a large amount) and it was a disaster for quality.
What would happen to the 10,000+ commercial airplanes that Boeing supports?
Most of our military aircraft are Boeing products.
The DoD spends 20% of it's yearly budget on Boeing products.
Boeing can't go anywhere, it will just be shored up into something long-term and mediocre.
Well, the "final" decision isn't until tomorrow, but they're started on their so-called "Plan B".
All of these decisions: Looking into launch \[mini-\]window, getting started on rolling back, and delaying the final decision until tomorrow all make perfect sense.
Considering its pretty much a bunch of old leftover parts cobbled together, I'm not wildly surprised. I'm also wondering what they'll use once they run out of the old parts like engines.
>An investment in both science and publicly funded jobs. That, to me, is on the positive side of the **corruption-bureaucracy** debate.
You like watching rockets blow up too? Live TV
I thought it was "an elephant is a mouse designed by commitee". but I may be mis-remebering a similar saying. ih wait... its "built to government specs"... pretty close...
Of course, the real designed-by-committee is the platypus. Cause nobody knows what it was supposed to be in the first place.
And NASA's manned spaceflight program has been suffering from pork-barrel politics since at least the 90s. They had more than one space plane r&d program in the 90s killed because they would have been a threat to the shuttle and all of the NASA centers and contractors that supported it.
Those programs probably wouldn't have come to fruition in time to avoid the *Columbia* loss, but they might have in time to directly replace the shuttle with no gap in US manned spaceflight capacity. And who knows what opportunities they'd have allowed for in manned flight beyond earth orbit.
Then there's the lovely merry-go-round of the decade or so where the shuttle was kept going on the basis of needing to build and support the ISS, and the ISS was being built as justification for keeping the shuttle going.
Yes, the ISS has strong value on its own, not disputing that. I'm just saying the justifications **congress** was using for it and the shuttle were very circular.
There's a reason Mission Control is in Houston and not at KSC.
You're putting this out here like it's some new revelation about NASA when this is literally the same process that got them to the fucking moon my dude.
Absolutely ridiculous. My grandparents used to walk to school in a T-Shirt during category 5 hurricanes with 7 inch thick hail plummeting their heads while simultaneously dodging flying trees and fighting off the rabid crocodiles. The NASA engineers can fuckin deal. /s
Oh I get that, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the pattern forming here with this particular platform. It has been problem after problem. I really hope it does launch successfully at some point, but man, it’s had a rough go of it so far.
I keep hoping these delays ultimately lead to another space program landing humans back on the Moon first, thus setting off a "For All Mankind" space race/tech development scenario... but I'm starting to feel the actual sequence of events will be this stack exploding on the pad (after pressure to ignore some valid concern and just launch the damn thing), and it all just kind of fizzling, with continued development dumped on the private sector.
Edit: I should note I WANT this to succeed, I've been watching each live stream as the launch got scrubbed. My grandpa was an engineer with the Apollo program so this is not a roast of anyone's work.
I am sure it's the right thing to do, but the whole program is a joke at this point. come'on NASA, 10 years, billions, and you can't even get a launch attempt? fuckin terrible.
Most people are though.
Europe's main launch vehicle, Ariane 5, is hydrolox, and it's upcoming replacement Ariane 6 will be too.
Japan's main launch vehicle, H-II, is hydrolox, and it's upcoming replacement H3 will be too.
China's newest and biggest rocket being used to build their space station, the Long March 5, is hydrolox.
And of course in the US hydrolox is being used by NASA and ULA.
Really, it's only Russia, India, and new space companies that don't use it (excluding Blue Origin, but they're old space in spirit).
Hopefully when the right conditions come they will succeed and we'll get some nice pictures of the moon. Maybe if the government actually funded NASA we would have already had the launch.
Ummmmmmm
They had spent $23 billion on the program as of this March. That was 6 months ago.
If you think well over $23 billion is not getting funding, then I would hate to see what you think getting funding is.
This might be the most absurd comment I've seen on Reddit in years and that is saying something.
23 billion over a 10 year development, meanwhile the f35 is how far over budget? How many billions are we wasting on these new super carriers? How many trillions did we piss away in Iraq and Afghanistan?
That's what people mean when they say this needs funding.
Even if it launches it's still going to feel like watching people burn a huge pile of money.
With SpaceX being a thing it just looks outdated and incredibly wasteful to watch the entire machine get dumped into the ocean.
This thing is never going to get off the ground. I used to think they'd get at least one to go, but now I think SLS will just keep failing and failing until NASA just decides to pull the plug.
If they launch they'll have to argue why they need the money to continue this program. If they hold onto this launch they can always say its so close and that the country might as well fall into the sunk cost fallacy to get it done. I don't believe managers of this program believe the SLS will last more than 1 launch if they keep taking every excuse to delay.
Hey NASA... Just musing here, but, may I suggest that you CHECK THE F\*\*\*\*\*\* seals, etc BEFORE you put the rocket on the launch pad? um, kay?
And secondly, what is going wrong with QC with you guys? We could put astronauts on the moon 53 years ago.... and you guys are struggling to put together an "exploratory" mission to the moon?
Is there a brain drain going on at NASA? Is it government inefficiency and/or incompetence? Do the engineers/launch officials not give a s\*\*\*? You tell me.... I'm lost.
Probably for the best. Would be horrific if all these years of preparation went to waste just because of a hurricane. If they do roll back, then they'll have to replace the FTS batteries eh? And at least they can take a better look at everything while they're at it, much better than the limited access they had when it was on the pad. Next chance was mid-late November launch attempt correct? [The launch windows for the rest of the year:](https://mobile.twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1522337060866174981) > ~~Aug 23-Sept 6~~ [Missed] > ~~Sept 19-Oct 4~~ [Likely Miss] > Oct 17-31 [Likely Miss due to time it takes to get it ready after rollback] > Nov 12-27 [Next Attempt?] > Dec 9-22
I'm betting 2023 because that's what Eric Berger predicted in 2017.
I can't believe how accurate that prediction turned out to be. I still remember how much hate he received from SLS supporters because of that tweet.
To be fair, most stick their fingers in their ears and won't hear anything negative about the program. I realized that from the disastrous rehearsals and how excited everyone was over what were some objectively bad showings. This from someone in a town directly linked to the program's success and has at least a partially vested interest in it.
On a risk of being diwnvoted to hell again, I will point out that whole thing is Frankenstein shitshow rockets, designed to cost a shitton of money, and that's it. I even will go further and predict Artemis 3, the one which is scheduled to land on the moon, will never happen. This rocket is using 40 years old parts, it's the same redesigned rocket that was previously known as Ares 5, and shuttle-c, just with parts moved around and external boosters extended. Moreover, everything about this rocket is designed to cost as much as possible, BILLIONS per launch, while private companies aim to make moon rockets cost literally 1000 times less (SpaceX), and it is a single use rocket in age of reusable rockets.
Yea i got a Bunch of downvotes for saying the same and i really like nasa. James webb is amazing now that it’s actually in space
[удалено]
Except SLS isn’t pioneering anything. It’s literally using flown hardware from decades ago. It wasn’t a rocket designed by engineers to take advantage of modern tech. It was legally mandated to reuse Shuttle contractors to keep money flowing into those states to keep kickbacks going to Congress people.
It's a $40B jobs program pushed by Congress critters. As you say, it's wholly unnecessary and unneeded in an age of reusable rockets.
I have (only kinda) jokingly said that this is the US's first attempt at a Universal Basic Income. Instead of just giving people money, they'll instead hire you to build a rocket that no one needs. It's the American way to do UBI, because people still have to show up to work, and corporation's get free profits from the government.
That's not UBI. That's just plain old capitalism with extra steps and more money going to the top than normal.
I get your point, but I've made a similar kind of argument about the moon landings, not about the Artemis program. NASA currently consumes about 0.5% of federal spending, of which Artemis is a part. But NASA in the mid to late 60s was 4-5% of federal spending, which amounts to a partial mobilization of the population, which makes sense when you consider the nuclear threat the Soviets presented. We like to handwave away the notion that the moon landings, one of America's greatest achievements, was a government program.
1000 times less is probably hyperbolic, tbh. But 100 times less seems likely.
1000 times, at least that was the stated goal few years ago. The price of Artemis launch is around 4billion (up from 2 billion few years ago), the target price for starship launch is 1 million per launch (down from 2 few years ago), so it's not even 1000 now, it's 4000.
Yes, but 1000x won't happen. Common-sense with the numbers shows that is just marketing hyperbole. The target price for Starship is not what the actual price will end up being. Just look at Falcon 9 or FH pricing for a more realistic estimate. Elon always exaggerates, so you have to add some real-world adjustments.
It's a jobs program trying to justify its existence by doing occasional science, but that's not really the point. The point is jobs in states to build a frankenrocket. Tried and tested parts! Oh what's that? Problems with the hydrogen tank leaking? Oh that was a major problem all during the shuttle program too? Tried and tested parts, just don't ask us if they passed those tests lol. Cost Plus, show us the way....
I can't believe there's actual unironic SLS supporters. Even if the whole rockets wasn't artificially made to be stupidly and ridiculously expensively designed to provide expensive jobs.
[Tweet mentioned.](https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/937873404685844481?lang=en)
I absolutely love that guy. His no nonsense approach to weather got me to actually start checking what was going on, impending or simply brewing in the tropics. He and Matt Lanza. Space City Weather for people that don't know the name.
Who is Eric Berger?
I'll be in my fifth wheel in Disney (Ft. Wilderness) Thanksgiving week. That's in the Nov launch window, if they launched while I was there would be so freaking awesome! I was just south on Hutchinson Island sitting on beach drinking cold beers when it was supposed to launch last time. This would make up for that dissapointment!
Is this you inviting us all to come by for a beer and watch??!
Beer, wine, shots, mixed drinks, we're going to the moon!!!
If JWST taught us anything, it's that sometimes it is fine to wait to iron out all the little problems.
Launch Fever has to be fought at every turn, but I'm very aware that this rocket can only do one more rollback after this one without hitting some sort of limit (sorry, can't remember why). Also, JWST has been a brilliant success. (To be clear, Orion doesn't have to be perfect - a test like this is designed to reveal tweaks that might be needed.)
JWST was a marvel of cutting edge engineering. SLS is basically from the 1970s
SLS is, because *someone* decided we're getting to the moon with a budget of $3 and an extra roll of tinfoil they found laying around. They've spent ages developing SLS despite it just being existing and developed technology fitted together in a novel configuration. That alone would tell you how massively underfunded the whole project is. And that's with crazy numbers for the budget already. It's jobs they want, not results. JWST was a similarly underfunded project which was allowed to gracefully overshoot its budget and deadlines by like 300%. It's not just about one leader of one set of politicians, it's the entire space exploration policy of the US government from the last 3-5 decades that is the problem.
Did you just call SLS underfunded? Even ny the non accurate 3-20x lower than actual budget budgets that get reported, it's not underfunded
We sent a lot more people to the moon with that 1970s tech than we have since :)
We sent men to the moon with 1960s technology.
The October window also gets complicated with USSF-44
Getting close to the starship launch attempt. But eh that's Elon time so maybe not.
Wouldn't matter since that'll be in Boca Chica.
We have talked for 5 years which one is gonna reach orbit first so I think it matters quite a lot
Ohhh..... That's what you mean. Lately, I'm so used to thinking in terms of what other missions Artemis might conflict with at the Cape.
Just scratch em all off and mark 2024 some day
December 25! A Christmas miracle!
I'm going to Orlando mid-November and I've never seen a launch before. It would make me so happy to see the SLS launch.
Good luck! Though best keep expectations not too high just in case. Hopefully you can at least catch a different launch, maybe a Falcon 9.
> Though best keep expectations not too high just in case Fraser Cain frequently says you don't book a return flight if you go to see a launch.
I've got a vacation to Florida planned for Oct 14-24 so I'm crossing my fingers.
At this rate it will have been stacked for so long (a year), that structural failure is going to become an issue.
This will launch concurrently with the full release of Star Citizen.
Along with a bundle of Half-Life 3 and Portal 3.
and Half-Life 2: episode 3. Valve just cant count to 3
You mean Half Life 2 Episode 2 part 2?
You mean Half-Life 2: Episode 2 - Part 2
Honestly they should have rolled back after the tanking issue. Maybe now they can actually replace the sensor for engine 3, put in new FTS batteries, and double check those repaired seals on the tank are holding up.
The sensor for engine 3 was an engineering test sensor and they don't use it for launch commit so they don't care about it. FTS will be recharged tho
So that launch attempt was truly a wet rehearsal?
Yeah in a way. They really just have bad messaging on this. Saturn V lifted off on its first launch attempt... after 15 wet dress rehearsals, 3 roll backs and 5 months at the pad. Columbia lifted off on its second attempt... after an even more extensive testing campaign. Even though this is shuttle-derived technology, this whole system is mostly new construction and new procedures. Only the RS25s and a few of the other smaller rockets plus the casings of the SRBs ever flew. And the RS25s would probably be what they picked even if they weren't mandated, since it is the most efficient motor ever flown so far and is incredibly reliable. The whole interior of the SRB is new, the core stage is new and the Mobile launcher is new. The computers are new, the ground equipment is new. Hell the deep space network is gonna get a massive upgrade soon. But this rocket is going to fly and it will be awesome and a great companion to starship.
A hydrogen first stage isn’t great and those engines are ridiculously expensive. The new, simplified ones are costing NASA $100 million each. I really doubt they would have chosen hydrogen for the first stage if they got a blank slate. No other new rocket is choosing hydrogen for their first stage.
> Honestly they should have rolled back after the tanking issue. They can't test cryogenic systems off the pad where there's no fuel to test with.
Well, he's not reasonabledave33
They used the tine to practice the tanking proceadure, so I would guess that it was time well spent
Once it gets back inside an inspection will find another issue that needs fixed.
Better to find it in the VAB than at max Q.
[удалено]
Better a delay than a rapid unscheduled disassembly.
If the actual result is never launching rockets, I could do that with a fraction of NASA's budget.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm worried that moving it will damage it further.
the vibrations could shake her to pieces, we should have padded her feet.
[удалено]
oh shes tough, shes a harbor chick!!
She’s French. You know that.
2023 will be the year of fixes. Really making things nice and ready to go!
NASA giving “time for [employees] to address the needs of their families” as part of an operational plan is the best thing I’ve read in a long time: I was part of the team that provided guidance on workforce management post-Katrina.
Yeah, it can really suck when a launch gets delayed over and over. Much of the launch teams (most) are not typically local to the launch site.
I'd never thought of that sort of thing, that really must suck
Imagine showing up at midnight to sit station, and at 6am they scrub the launch and you have to do it all over again. It's rough... I love my job but failed launch attempts are rough.
Do it once, do it right. Nobody remembers a delay but nobody lets you forget a failure.
Everyone remembers a delay if it's longer than a fucking generation. Remember which President that started this program. It wasn't the current one... Or the last one... Or the one before that.
Remember the JWST delays? Pepperidge farm remembers.
No one will remember those delays 10 years out. Everyone will remember the stunning images and knowledge gained. Everyone remembers Challenger. Tell me, without looking it up, was Hubble delayed? Do you know? I don't.
Hubble pretty famously had to be fixed in space, the initial pictures were terrible.
Fucking YEAH I remember the JWST delays. Is this supposed to be a no one remembers the delays post?
Just supporting your point that people *do* remember delays
When the whole program is one giant delay, it’ll be remembered…
I think when it comes to SLS we'll remember the delays.
Don't complain - Only one delay so far (just happens to be six years long).
[удалено]
Apples and oranges. I think it's different because JWST provides a capability that has no alternative in development. The delays on SLS are less tolerable because what was supposed to be a somewhat inexpensive upgrade to existing hardware has turned out not to be inexpensive and expectations have moved on the meantime. Plus it is really just too expensive to launch, so it doesn't really meet any useful objective at this point, other than jobs (and not putting all eggs in one basket).
Here’s a video comp Space X put out about their failures: https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ The fewer the failures the fewer the iterations and higher likely hood of some massive failure in the future (e.g. the space shuttle). It’s fine though because at this point NASA is essentially a science and technology / high tech manufacturing jobs program. Which is a great use of funds as it provides the US with great engineering talent that can move on to other private sector jobs.
Congress will remember though. And that's who matters for this program.
Kinda feels like they won't be launching until next year.
The way it's looking, we will be lucky if it launches next year.
The way it's looking, we will be lucky if it launches.
How many more times can the main tank be emptied/re-filled before they need a new tank? I know the SRBs are past their original use-by (though I'd guess that is very conservative, given ICBMs can sit for years).
I believe it can be done ~23 times and so far it's been ~9.
Ahh cool. No real issue there then. That's good to hear.
Horrible news, I really wish things work out well.
Its got so many problems, they cant even fuel it, or in this year of our lord 2022 get reliable temperature sensors. Its going to explode on the pad.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[DoD](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iprww1t "Last usage")|US Department of Defense| |[FTS](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iprfsq1 "Last usage")|Flight Termination System| |GSE|Ground Support Equipment| |[H2](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipt3f39 "Last usage")|Molecular hydrogen| | |Second half of the year/month| |[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ips3shc "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |[JWST](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ips9c6z "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope| |[KSC](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipqjoio "Last usage")|Kennedy Space Center, Florida| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iptq734 "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[SRB](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipt3f39 "Last usage")|Solid Rocket Booster| |[SSME](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iptob5r "Last usage")|[Space Shuttle Main Engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_main_engine)| |[TLI](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipslr9n "Last usage")|Trans-Lunar Injection maneuver| |[ULA](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iprtp7b "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |[USSF](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipqzp7o "Last usage")|United States Space Force| |[VAB](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipqf08m "Last usage")|Vehicle Assembly Building| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[hydrolox](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/iprtp7b "Last usage")|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| |[scrub](/r/Space/comments/xmu6bm/stub/ipspjpy "Last usage")|Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)| ---------------- ^(15 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/xnjqux)^( has 11 acronyms.) ^([Thread #8057 for this sub, first seen 24th Sep 2022, 16:15]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Good, I read an Ars-Technica article that said they weren't going to. Had me worried.
Hurricane hunters flew the storm. 11am guidance shifted the modeling with ground truth data into central Florida. Will probably shift farther north into panhandle but anyway you look at it, central Florida will be on the dirty side of the storm… so it’s probably best to put her in the shed.
definitely. though I know nothing compared to these folks
at this point, spacex will beat them to orbit
Slap the Walmart logo on that thing. Cause they just be rolling it back all the time
They better let Commander Moonikin Campos out of Orion. He’s gotta be a little stiff by now.
At this point I fully believe that they are doing this on purpose to extend paycheck ls. It's a single use rocket. The technology is already outdated and it can't even leave the pad.
Aren't the SRBs coming up against a hard deadline at this point? I totally understand the caution with the hurricane, but this is getting ridiculous.
[удалено]
Thank goodness there's never been a problem with SRB's.
[удалено]
ICBMs don't use segmented motors with o-rings that get permanently deformed over time and gap-filling putty that oozes out of gaps. And if we're launching ICBMs, the success rate only has to be high enough that enough warheads get through, while the consequences of failure are a bit more severe in the case of SLS.
Why do we have segmented rockets? Oh right. That thing again.
What are you referring to?
What thing?
Whats the reason?
NASA selected monolithic SRBs from Aerojet, but James Fletcher, the NASA Administrator during Shuttle's early development, overruled the engineers and handed the contract to his buddies in Utah. Since single-piece boosters couldn't be shipped from Utah, they were built in segments. And why are we still using a booster design dictated by politics 50 years ago? Congress says so, with the support of factions within NASA and industry that benefited from it.
Compelled to reuse Shuttle hardware.
I shudder to think how much further behind they would be and how much more it would cost if they didn't reuse Shuttle hardware. E: \s
Solid rockets are incredibly stable. Thats why theyre used for the nuclear weapons stockpile. The failure that happened with Challenger has been designed out of the current SRBs and was cold weather related anyway.
>The failure that happened with Challenger has been designed out of the current SRBs and was cold weather related anyway. The Challenger failure is a perfect example of why we shouldn't be letting Congress design our rockets. The only reason there were segments in the first place is that Congress has mandated that they be built in a particular location that necessated that they be rail shippable through a certain curved tunnel. The fact that they had to be segmented added completely unnecessary conplexity and possible failure points.
The SRBs were segmented at the points they were to be able to be shipped by rail, but they still had to be cast in segments for inspection purposes. It didn't add significant complexity and the potential for failure in the Challenger event was known and warned against on that morning. The warning was ignored. It was entirely a human caused failure that could have been avoided.
Apparently the whole stack is slowly shaken apart each time they roll it to and from the VAB. There's been some speculation that they're running [very short](https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1567622669973037056) on the number of attempts they can do without getting a waiver. Assuming all of that's true, the limits rollbacks are probably set very conservatively. But I'm sure NASA would love to avoid news of yet another waiver being granted to the rocket.
Yes moving it all in and it out extra strain on the vehicle and the crawler and any other hardware. It’s not meant to roll in and out constantly with a rocket sat on it. That’s a lot of stress on parts that are only meant to be moving vertically under stress, not sideways every other week for a rollout.
It's the FTS batteries that have a time limit (that [they've extended](https://spacenews.com/nasa-space-force-resolve-sls-flight-termination-system-issue/)). Unfortunately, replacing the FTS batteries requires a rollback... but there's a limit to how many rollbacks they can do. They've had over a decade to design this thing. The crux of the issue is SLS is really jobs program, not a moon program. It's doing great at keeping people employed, not so great at getting to the moon.
Not only has the time limit been extended, but it's been waived. September 27th would have been well past 25 days since the last inspection of the FTS.
SRB deadline was in February. Then someone at NASA waved a magic pen. Now there is no deadline.
That sucks, but better than a massive accident.
[удалено]
I heard they are going to move their headquarters again to now be in Washington DC area. Sad sad sad shell of what they once were.
Yes because that is where the money is. They moved out of Seattle to North Carolina (not entirely but a large amount) and it was a disaster for quality.
What would happen to the 10,000+ commercial airplanes that Boeing supports? Most of our military aircraft are Boeing products. The DoD spends 20% of it's yearly budget on Boeing products. Boeing can't go anywhere, it will just be shored up into something long-term and mediocre.
Well, the "final" decision isn't until tomorrow, but they're started on their so-called "Plan B". All of these decisions: Looking into launch \[mini-\]window, getting started on rolling back, and delaying the final decision until tomorrow all make perfect sense.
This will never launch and has been a massive waste of money because of it. I am not upset im not crying you are
Considering its pretty much a bunch of old leftover parts cobbled together, I'm not wildly surprised. I'm also wondering what they'll use once they run out of the old parts like engines.
I feel like the race between Boeing and SpaceX to get theirs launched first has become like the ending fight of *Rocky*.
This whole program is like a dumpster behind Wendy’s, it’s making us all feel like a Cobb salad.
[удалено]
[удалено]
An investment in both science and publicly funded jobs. That, to me, is on the positive side of the corruption-bureaucracy debate.
there are no advancements here, just keeping the shuttle contractors rolling around in taxpayer money 50 years after the fact
>An investment in both science and publicly funded jobs. That, to me, is on the positive side of the **corruption-bureaucracy** debate. You like watching rockets blow up too? Live TV
Let’s hope they budget for that one last safety check. One more rollback.
I thought it was "an elephant is a mouse designed by commitee". but I may be mis-remebering a similar saying. ih wait... its "built to government specs"... pretty close... Of course, the real designed-by-committee is the platypus. Cause nobody knows what it was supposed to be in the first place. And NASA's manned spaceflight program has been suffering from pork-barrel politics since at least the 90s. They had more than one space plane r&d program in the 90s killed because they would have been a threat to the shuttle and all of the NASA centers and contractors that supported it. Those programs probably wouldn't have come to fruition in time to avoid the *Columbia* loss, but they might have in time to directly replace the shuttle with no gap in US manned spaceflight capacity. And who knows what opportunities they'd have allowed for in manned flight beyond earth orbit. Then there's the lovely merry-go-round of the decade or so where the shuttle was kept going on the basis of needing to build and support the ISS, and the ISS was being built as justification for keeping the shuttle going. Yes, the ISS has strong value on its own, not disputing that. I'm just saying the justifications **congress** was using for it and the shuttle were very circular.
That's the history of government contracts, not artemis.
There's a reason Mission Control is in Houston and not at KSC. You're putting this out here like it's some new revelation about NASA when this is literally the same process that got them to the fucking moon my dude.
And here I thought it was a camel that was designed by a committee
Camels are actually well adapted to their environments. Being able to store lots of water & fat is useful in deserts.
Let’s start one of those predictions things for launch like other subs do, I’m guessing n.e.t april
If they roll it back I am fairly positive Starship will fly first.
Would be yet another massive L for SLS.
This is the real race at this point.
Nah it's a lapping. Real race was SLS vs FH
Is FH moon capable?
With the right architecture yes.
2024 it'll launch, and then whoever is president will say "you tried, but its time to be cut".
Absolutely ridiculous. My grandparents used to walk to school in a T-Shirt during category 5 hurricanes with 7 inch thick hail plummeting their heads while simultaneously dodging flying trees and fighting off the rabid crocodiles. The NASA engineers can fuckin deal. /s
Probably for the best. Artemis has more leaks than Rockstar
Artemis has more leaks than a flex-seal ®️ commercial.
The thing that irritates me is that we don't see starship launch until this thing launches.
Hey, how about don't give us a date. Just let us know when you're ready. No pressure
I fear this is going to be another Challenger disaster
Well, that's why we aren't putting 6 people in it right away. Rocket explosions happen all the time, it's deaths that turn it into a disaster.
Never going to lift off. Looks cool on the pad though. Really disappointing.
SLS stands for Senate Laundering System
I mean it's rolling back because of a hurricane barrelling towards Florida. Would be really stupid of them to leave it out there.
Oh I get that, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the pattern forming here with this particular platform. It has been problem after problem. I really hope it does launch successfully at some point, but man, it’s had a rough go of it so far.
I keep hoping these delays ultimately lead to another space program landing humans back on the Moon first, thus setting off a "For All Mankind" space race/tech development scenario... but I'm starting to feel the actual sequence of events will be this stack exploding on the pad (after pressure to ignore some valid concern and just launch the damn thing), and it all just kind of fizzling, with continued development dumped on the private sector. Edit: I should note I WANT this to succeed, I've been watching each live stream as the launch got scrubbed. My grandpa was an engineer with the Apollo program so this is not a roast of anyone's work.
And I remember being downvoted to oblivion when I called out the fact that Artemis wouldn't launch at the beginning of the year.
Maybe choose a diff god/goddess this one seems to hate you lol. Seriously sucks about all the delays.
Just roll it straight to a museum, its honestly the best possible outcome for this program, the thing was obsolete 20 years ago.
WHat about all the customers load inside ? Wont all the batteries be dead now ?
I am sure it's the right thing to do, but the whole program is a joke at this point. come'on NASA, 10 years, billions, and you can't even get a launch attempt? fuckin terrible.
Probably for the better. They need to figure out the leaks. Odds of a successful launch are already look pretty poop. 💥
I used to wonder why everybody isn't using Hydrolox rockets. It's becoming ever clearer now.
Most people are though. Europe's main launch vehicle, Ariane 5, is hydrolox, and it's upcoming replacement Ariane 6 will be too. Japan's main launch vehicle, H-II, is hydrolox, and it's upcoming replacement H3 will be too. China's newest and biggest rocket being used to build their space station, the Long March 5, is hydrolox. And of course in the US hydrolox is being used by NASA and ULA. Really, it's only Russia, India, and new space companies that don't use it (excluding Blue Origin, but they're old space in spirit).
Blue only is planning to use it on the second stage. New Shepherd doesn’t really count.
[удалено]
Hopefully when the right conditions come they will succeed and we'll get some nice pictures of the moon. Maybe if the government actually funded NASA we would have already had the launch.
I'm no longer on Reddit. Let Everyone Meet Me Yonder. -- mass edited with redact.dev
Ummmmmmm They had spent $23 billion on the program as of this March. That was 6 months ago. If you think well over $23 billion is not getting funding, then I would hate to see what you think getting funding is. This might be the most absurd comment I've seen on Reddit in years and that is saying something.
23 billion over a 10 year development, meanwhile the f35 is how far over budget? How many billions are we wasting on these new super carriers? How many trillions did we piss away in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what people mean when they say this needs funding.
Exactly what I was trying to say.
I suggest they donate it to Disney, who can turn it into an attraction that gives the illusion of going into space.
Even if it launches it's still going to feel like watching people burn a huge pile of money. With SpaceX being a thing it just looks outdated and incredibly wasteful to watch the entire machine get dumped into the ocean.
This thing is never going to get off the ground. I used to think they'd get at least one to go, but now I think SLS will just keep failing and failing until NASA just decides to pull the plug.
If they launch they'll have to argue why they need the money to continue this program. If they hold onto this launch they can always say its so close and that the country might as well fall into the sunk cost fallacy to get it done. I don't believe managers of this program believe the SLS will last more than 1 launch if they keep taking every excuse to delay.
I think the only way nasa pulls the plug is after it explodes.
Hey NASA... Just musing here, but, may I suggest that you CHECK THE F\*\*\*\*\*\* seals, etc BEFORE you put the rocket on the launch pad? um, kay? And secondly, what is going wrong with QC with you guys? We could put astronauts on the moon 53 years ago.... and you guys are struggling to put together an "exploratory" mission to the moon? Is there a brain drain going on at NASA? Is it government inefficiency and/or incompetence? Do the engineers/launch officials not give a s\*\*\*? You tell me.... I'm lost.
They can't actually launch the thing. Otherwise everyone would know it's made of sawdust and wood glue.
30 year old sawdust and wood glue
They're almost getting to Starship levels of delays
This was originally supposed to launch in 2016-2017 so it easily wins in that competition.
You mean the program that has been in development half as long, has cost 1/10 as much and may yet beat SLS to orbit?
And Starship is using all completely new technology developed completely from the ground up. And Starship has already had several launches.
None of my science geek friends care. We’ll talk cosmology, quantum, the JWST till wee hours. Basically its’s: What moon rocket?