Space and Science BS Thread

https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1563534188694761473?s=21&t=3b-sYdVbB5JpE7eVBCSAPg

Weather remains at 70%

 

Fingers crossed.

 

https://twitter.com/commercial_crew/status/1563229377185193984?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw

 

https://twitter.com/nasagroundsys/status/1563535845285830662?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw

I’m bummed- need to be in the Office tomorrow morning and have a 9:00 meeting. Hoping she goes at current T-0 but I’ll be watching on my phone

 

Little kid: “Why are the VAB doors shaped lik that?

NASA:

 

If you made the last minute decision to go (and a really cool pic):
https://twitter.com/launchphoto/status/1563885672770969602?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw

 

I know they use propellant to cool the nozzles on liquid fueled rockets but how do they do it with SRB’s? Shuttle boosters were recovered, refurbished(segment by segment), and reused but were the motors also? They were the biggest SRB’s and these each have yet another segment.

 

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1563889901019582465?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1563891092566818816?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw


SRBs should be reused but then again- SLS

 

I’ve been wondering about the trajectory. Looks like two close lunar passes.
https://twitter.com/tony873004/status/1562847682263011329?s=21&t=1K8b9dyLrNE6zTi-e2KFbw

 

Good grief. Apparently we need a bigger mobile launcher for A-4 and on and Bechtel isn’t doing much besides cashing checks and thinking up excuses. No A-4 means no gateway which makes my earlier question more germane “How do we rondezvous Orion and HLS without without gateway?”. Apparently we don’t. No ML-2 means no A-4. No A-4 means no gateway. No gateway means ???

 

Gateway can be launched on other vehicles. Portions of it are already scheduled on Falcon Heavy. NASA screwed up bad and should’ve specified an initial mobile launcher design that could support the entire lineup of SLS configurations. Just another example of the fraud waste and abuse inherent in this program.

 

I have a meeting tomorrow for 9:30am, so I took am hoping for no delays.

If it comes down to it, SpaceX may get more of the contract than they do now. Or possibly ULA may take up the pieces A-4 would have carried.

 

I think ML-1 is a modification of an existing launcher made by Hensel Phelps(possibly for Constellation?) then modified with a larger flame hole to accommodate a larger core stage and SRB’s along with other mods to get through the first 3 missions. They knew they needed another and Bechtel won the contract for that but have since been a black hole for information and funding but not excuses. NASA was obligated to use both original parts and workforces from Constellation and others which set the stage for a cosmic CF. Bechtel is just the latest installment of cost-plus bs. A whole lot of money gets spread around to do not very much. We eventually end up with really cool shit but the process is a huge (and very visible)target for budget hounds. Remember, the mobile launcher doesn’t refer to the crawler/transporter just everything that is attached above it, which seems to be the real problem. I can easily see why Spacex does it differently even though it means stacking at the launch site it also means the high bay doesn’t need to be nearly as tall or complex as the VAB.

 

But would that essentially kill off SLS at A-3? I suppose if the argument were that it’s safer to refuel an unmanned HLS and have it dock with Orion at Gateway why not bring the crew up on Dragon and man the HLS in leo? It would have ten times the volume for redundant life support not to mention the elbow room. I’m guessing the gateway halo orbit is a necessary precursor to a polar landing or is that just a convenient parking orbit for communications? The station will be there but is it a necessary stop for every mission?

 

The NRLO is the mission plan for the Artemis Program. It’s convenient for both the polar landings and communications.

They say to get to the orbit from Orion launching on SLS will be a 5 day flight going to and coming from. I’m still trying to figure it out and reconcile with the time for Capstone and the propsed flight of the first two Gateway modules via the FH..

 

I think capstone utilizes a trajectory that goes much farther beyond the moon than artemis but at a low relative velocity that allows the moon to reel it into the desired orbit. Something like that anyway.

 

I wonder if this means they would make do with a smaller fuel load when making the transit burn. Fewer trips to the tanker to get it ready. Or if having a full and more stable tanker for docking with HLS and more fully fueled HLS for dockng with Orion when the time comes is warranted. I’m excited about tomorrow and trying to distract myself.

 

Nothing new about that. At least Nelson, even though he was instrumental in getting the Artemis program going as a senator hasn’t been shy about awarding Spacex contracts when they could deliver when Starliner couldn’t. Let’s hope he continues with that “job before contractor” bottom line and doesn’t throw the baby out with the bath water when it’s his baby on the hot seat.

 

Great, we're having an engine chill/vent problem...

 

https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1564222642810503168?s=21&t=1EvyeIQGSAknEMX1uSAqOQ