News NASA's Future: The News and Updates Thread

N_Molson

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
9,271
Reaction score
3,244
Points
203
Location
Toulouse
Spaceflight Now

NASA announces design for new heavy-lift rocket

NASA NEWS RELEASE
Posted: September 14, 2011

WASHINGTON -- NASA has selected the design of a new Space Launch System that will take the agency's astronauts farther into space than ever before, create high-quality jobs here at home, and provide the cornerstone for America's future human space exploration efforts.

14sls400378.jpg

Credit: NASA

This new heavy-lift rocket-in combination with a crew capsule already under development, increased support for the commercialization of astronaut travel to low Earth orbit, an extension of activities on the International Space Station until at least 2020, and a fresh focus on new technologies-is key to implementing the plan laid out by President Obama and Congress in the bipartisan 2010 NASA Authorization Act, which the president signed last year. The booster will be America's most powerful since the Saturn V rocket that carried Apollo astronauts to the moon and will launch humans to places no one has gone before.

"This launch system will create good-paying American jobs, ensure continued U.S. leadership in space, and inspire millions around the world," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said. "President Obama challenged us to be bold and dream big, and that's exactly what we are doing at NASA. While I was proud to fly on the space shuttle, tomorrow's explorers will now dream of one day walking on Mars."

This launch vehicle decision is the culmination of a months-long, comprehensive review of potential designs to ensure the nation gets a rocket that is not only powerful but also evolvable so it can be adapted to different missions as opportunities arise and new technologies are developed.

"Having settled on a new and powerful heavy-lift launch architecture, NASA can now move ahead with building that rocket and the next-generation vehicles and technologies needed for an ambitious program of crewed missions in deep space," said John P. Holdren, assistant to the President for Science and Technology. "I'm excited about NASA's new path forward and about its promise for continuing American leadership in human space exploration."

The SLS will carry human crews beyond low Earth orbit in a capsule named the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle. The rocket will use a liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen fuel system, where RS-25D/E engines will provide the core propulsion and the J2X engine is planned for use in the upper stage. There will be a competition to develop the boosters based on performance requirements.

The decision to go with the same fuel system for the core and the upper stage was based on a NASA analysis demonstrating that use of common components can reduce costs and increase flexibility. The heavy-lift rocket's early flights will be capable of lifting 70-100 metric tons before evolving to a lift capacity of 130 metric tons.

The early developmental flights may take advantage of existing solid boosters and other existing hardware. These flights will enable NASA to reduce developmental risk, drive innovation within the agency and private industry, and accomplish early exploration objectives.

"NASA has been making steady progress toward realizing the president's goal of deep space exploration, while doing so in a more affordable way," NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver said. "We have been driving down the costs on the Space Launch System and Orion contracts by adopting new ways of doing business and project hundreds of millions of dollars of savings each year."

NASA elected to initiate a competition for the booster stage based on performance parameters rather than on the type of propellant because of the need for flexibility. The specific acquisition strategy for procuring the core stage, booster stage, and upper stage is being developed and will be announced at a later time.
 

orb

O-F Administrator,
News Reporter
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
14,020
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Florida Today - The Flame Trench: NASA unveils plans for deep-space rocket

Parabolic Arc: SLS Briefing — Live Blogging!:
William Gerstenmaier
  • 8.4 meter diameter core stage — same size as the shuttle tank – compatible with facilities at Cape, with tech developed for Constellation
  • shuttle main engines — three engines initially, grow to five engines
  • build upper stage and rest of rocket at the same time — commonality between the core and the upper stage — if they don’t need upper stage, can fly without it….don’t have to design upper stage at a later time….can use the same tooling….
  • SRBs used for the first and maybe second test flight….will compete with full-up procurement activity for liquid boosters….
  • plan to build the core and be able to change the strap-on boosters….
  • starts with 90 MT capability and grows to 130 MT with bigger boosters and upper stage
  • J-2X upper stage developed for Constellation program
  • early version will use off-the-shelf space shuttle main engines
  • other existing technologies such as space shuttle plumbing could be used

Question: Adequate amount to build the rocket? What about long-term costs?

William Gerstenmaier
  • roughly $3 billion per year through 2017 for core system, MPCV and ground-based system
  • $18 billion ($3 billion x 6 years)
  • part of the human rating is the first uncrewed flight
  • can still do some very dynamic missions with 70 MT — needs 130 MT vehicle to do some of the more ambitious missions

Question: Is this rocket really supported?

William Gerstenmaier
  • We’ve been through a thorough process
  • I think we have a really sound configuration here
  • Stakeholders resonate with it — a flexible program moving forward, can deal with budget changes
  • Feels there is some really strong support
Doug Cooke
  • We’ve briefed this to OMB, the White House and Congress — has strong political support

Question: When will we see an exploration road map?

William Gerstenmaier
  • This is a really strong capability to get BEO
  • have been working on various mission architectures and looking at targets for exploration that we’ll be refining over the next year

Question: How are you doing the modifications to existing contracts?

William Gerstenmaier
  • Procurement strategy being developed this week
  • Plan to release that strategy to industry next Friday, Sept. 23
  • Industry Day planned planned for Sept. 29
  • Can’t modify contracts within the next week or so (as Sen. Hutchison said earlier today)….however, will begin that process over the next week

Question: When will competition for upgraded strap on boosters?

William Gerstenmaier
  • Need to design the core stage to accommodate any strap-on booster — different requirements for solids vs. liquid…
  • Have built flexibility into the plan to deal with changes in budget…

Question: Why did this take so long? Why couldn’t you have put it out earlier to avoid layoffs planned for this month?

William Gerstenmaier
  • worked as hard as we could to get the plan out as soon as possible
  • a major engineering challenge
  • a very big commitment by the government….needed time to get it right

Question: What happens if you start running into budget shortfalls?

William Gerstenmaier
  • will focus on meeting the 2017 deadline for the first test flight
  • if there are budget limitations, will slow down work done after 2017

Question: How do you control costs? What is impact on commercial programs?

William Gerstenmaier
  • using off-the-shelf space shuttle main engines for the first flights
  • may use some of the plumbing from the shuttle
  • building this extended tank is not going to be easy — larger diameter tank than on Ares V
  • use modern machining on the tank — different approach than the way space shuttle tanks were built
  • boosters on the side are pretty attractive things to build for commercial companies

Question: What is the Orion schedule? Would you consider flying with crew on first test flight? Will you test Orion first on another vehicle first (Delta IV or Liberty)?

William Gerstenmaier
  • Prefer to test unmanned first — too many things to be concerned about trying to fly with people on first flight
  • Will do an abort test first without a crew on another vehicle
  • Looking at options for flying uncrewed Orion on a Delta IV to test high-speed re-entry – will consider what can be gained and what the costs will be for doing that type of a test
 

T.Neo

SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Addon Developer
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
6,368
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Can anyone explain the difference between this and the defunct Ares V? Sure looks similar to my untrained eye...

SLS is essentially the "classic" version of Ares V.

But in comparison to the last Ares V iteraction;

- Five SSME/RD-25 engines as opposed to six RS-68 engines.

- 8.4 meter diameter instead of ~10 meter diameter core.

- 5 segment instead of 5.5 segment boosters.
 
Last edited:

T.Neo

SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Addon Developer
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
6,368
Reaction score
0
Points
0
They will use ssme? why?

Because they're high performance, there is heritage, they can cannibalise engines off of the Shuttles, and they're apparently not prohibitatively costly (if optimised for easier production rather than reusability). They're also regeneratively cooled, which means they can withstand the thermal environment between the SRBs.

Oh, and they're lucrative for Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne.

On the other hand, pretty much every large liquid engine in the US is produced by PWR (it is also part of the joint venture that supplies RD-180s for Atlas)...
 
Last edited:

N_Molson

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
9,271
Reaction score
3,244
Points
203
Location
Toulouse
They will use ssme? why?
It looks like a Saturn V with RSB

Because those are very reliable, flight proven engines with an excellent ISP.

Saturn-V used Kero/LOX for the first stage, that's a very different design. Kero/LOX engines can deliver more thrust but have a lower ISP. LOX/LH2 engines have very good ISP (for chemical rockets) but can't deliver the same amount of thrust and usually need SRB to lift off.

The white paint and black squares make it look like a Saturn-V. Which is probably not a coincidence.
 

Keatah

Active member
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
2,218
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Nasa annonced a new PowerPoint rocketship!

We have another PowerPoint rocketship from NASA. Something about the SLS or whatever that means. Anyways, it's a nice looking LV, eh? And it's 14 meters bigger than a Saturn V!


Hey and what's this thing about space-x covering up stuff?? I don't know the details. But I would expect this to be a common occurrence, covering things up, if the space access business is run by profit mongering corporations.
 

ky

Director of Manned Spaceflight
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
1,409
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boynton Beach
NASA Unveils Giant New Rocket Design

Deep space, here we come!

NASA announced the design for its next-generation rocket Wednesday morning, a potentially $35 billion vehicle called the Space Launch System (SLS) that the space agency believes can replace the space shuttle and power the future of American space flight.

"The next chapter of America's space exploration program is being written today," NASA administrator Charles Bolden said in a joint news conference at the Senate.

The design for NASA's newest behemoth of a rocket harkens back to the giant workhorse liquid-fueled rockets that propelled men to the moon. But this time, destinations will be much farther and the rocket -- which will carry astronauts in a capsule called Orion and will start test launching by 2017 -- will be even more powerful.

"The long term goal has to be what's out there that we haven't explored yet," said Senator Kay Hutchison (R-Tex.), ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

The size, shape and heavier reliance on liquid fuel as opposed to solid rocket boosters is much closer to Apollo than the recently retired space shuttles, which were winged, reusable ships that sat on top of a giant liquid fuel tank, but needed twin solid rocket boosters for most of their power. It's also a shift in emphasis from the moon-based, solid-rocket-oriented plans proposed by the George W. Bush administration.

"It's back to the future with a reliable liquid technology," said Stanford University professor Scott Hubbard, a former NASA senior manager who was on the board that investigated the 2003 space shuttle Columbia accident.

NASA figures it will be building and launching about one rocket a year for about 15 years or more in the 2020s and 2030s.

The idea is to launch its first unmanned test flight in 2017 with the first crew flying in 2021 and astronauts heading to a nearby asteroid in 2025, officials told the Associated Press. From there, NASA hopes to send the rocket and astronauts to Mars -- at first just to circle, but then later landing on the red planet -- in the 2030s.

Initially the rockets will be able to carry into space 70 tons to 100 tons of payload, NASA said, which would include the six-person Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle capsule and more. Eventually it will be able to carry 143 tons into space, maybe even 165 tons, officials told the Associated Press. By comparison, the long-dormant Saturn V booster that sent men to the moon was able to lift 130 tons.

The plans dwarf the rumbling lift-off power of the space shuttle, which could haul just 27 tons. The biggest current unmanned rocket can carry about 25 tons.

The size of the plans elicited an amazed "good grief" from Hubbard, who said it would limit how often they could be built or launched. Unlike the reusable shuttle, these rockets are mostly one-and-done, with new ones built for every launch.

Some of the design elements, the deadline and the requirement for such a rocket were dictated by Congress.

While the recently retired space shuttle's main engines were fueled by liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, it was primarily powered into orbit by solid rockets. Solid rocket boosters were designed to be cheaper, but a booster flaw caused the fatal space shuttle Challenger accident in 1986. The biggest drawback was that solid rockets can't be stopped once they are lit; liquid ones can.

The new plan is to use a giant rocket powered by liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. Apollo, Gemini and Mercury flew into space on liquid rockets, and liquids fuel most of the world's unmanned commercial rockets. Russia's Soyuz rocket is liquid fueled too.

SLS%20on%20launchpad%20640_604x500.jpg


During its initial test flights the rocket will use five solid rocket boosters designed for the shuttle strapped on its outside and will have shuttle main engines powering it on the inside. But soon after that the solid rocket boosters will be replaced with new boosters that should have new technology and may be either liquid or solid, the officials said

NASA figures it will spend about $3 billion a year on the plan, officials told the Associated Press. The key financial part of this arrangement is that NASA hopes to save money by turning over the launching of astronauts to the International Space Station, which orbits the Earth, to private companies and just rent spaces for astronauts like a giant taxi service. NASA would then spend the money on leaving Earth's orbit and the Earth-moon system.

Hubbard worries that NASA has a history of spending way more than initially proposed -- the space shuttle cost about twice what it was supposed to -- and this new rocket system will drain money from other NASA missions.

And the cost of the program is just one issue that remains unclear. Senator Bill Nelson, chairman of the Science and Space Subcommittee, puts the cost of the program at about $18 billion over the next five years -- or $3 billion a year. Some estimates, however, are closer to $35 billion.

NASA hopes to save money by turning over the launching of astronauts to the International Space Station, which orbits the Earth, to private companies and just rent spaces for astronauts like a giant taxi service. NASA would then spend the money on leaving Earth's orbit and the Earth-moon system.

Nelson argued that if we continued steady spending, the project would be successfully funded.

"In the bosom of every American there is a yearning for us to explore the heavens," he said.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/14/nasa-to-unveil-giant-new-rocket-design/#ixzz1Xxt2BiJH
 

Pyromaniac605

Toast! :D
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Melbourne
Now, I wonder how long it'll take them to give up on this as well. :dry:

Let's hope that they don't, but considering NASA's recent track record, it definitely doesn't look too good.
 

ky

Director of Manned Spaceflight
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
1,409
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boynton Beach
I know right, but they are developing a lot of other things such as Orion capsule, ATK Liberty rocket, Moon lander, and the list goes on. Then they also have companies building a capsule for them. So they have a lot on their plate, while proposing a new rocket, doesn't really sound good. Then again, I shouldn't be criticizing anyone because I've done that a few times.
 

Keatah

Active member
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
2,218
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Yeeehaww!!!! Back to deep space and the planets beyond.. This is 15 meters taller than the Saturn V and fueled by PowerPoint!



 

Wood

New member
Joined
Jan 2, 2011
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I haven't seen this posted here, the NASA document that caused quite the ruckus recently.

Take it with a pich of salt, it's not an accurate estimate, more like "if we had this much, we could do probably manage this sort of timetable" as I understand it.

The recent news makes it quite clear that 3 billion a year is about the upper limit that congress is willing to spend on the SLS, MPCV and ground systems. Hutchinson and Nelson strongly opposed even the levels in the 2010 authorisation act, let alone levels that would allow any funding of "In-Space Elements" such as a Deep Space Hab or the SEV. With only SLS and Orion, BEO exploration is simply not possible. Even the "modest" goal of visiting a NEO by 2025 is completely unachievable. Landers and surface systems are decades away, if ever.

This just isn't going to work. There either needs to be a significant increase in NASA funding (extremly unlikely, to say the least), or NASA and the government need to do things very, very differently.


On a lighter note, what is it with concepts painting black and white squares on rockets? Combined with orange tanks, it clashes horribly. :lol:
 

T.Neo

SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Addon Developer
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
6,368
Reaction score
0
Points
0
On a lighter note, what is it with concepts painting black and white squares on rockets?

There's there to track the roll of the vehicle visually (in camera footage, etc). I'm not sure if they're really that necessary on modern vehicles, I don't think I see them on either Delta or Atlas.

But the paint scheme for SLS is entirely in an attempt to look like Saturn V and evoke an emotional response. And distance the vehicle from Ares, of course.
 

N_Molson

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
9,271
Reaction score
3,244
Points
203
Location
Toulouse
By the numbers: NASA's Space Launch System

BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: September 14, 2011

Billed as the biggest rocket ever built, NASA's concept for a behemoth heavy-lift booster unveiled Wednesday will initially weigh 5.5 million pounds, stand taller than the Statue of Liberty and generate 10 percent more thrust than the Saturn 5 moon rocket produced at liftoff.

sls.jpg

The Space Launch System would be the biggest rocket ever built. Credit: NASA

Powered from the launch pad on its first flight by two solid rocket boosters and three hydrogen-fueled main engines, the Space Launch System would initially haul 70 metric tons, or about 154,000 pounds, of payload into low Earth orbit. That's more than double the lift capacity of any operational launch vehicle today.

NASA says it will cost $10 billion to design and develop the mega-booster in time for its first test launch by the end of 2017. It will cost another $6 billion to get the Orion capsule, or Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, ready for flight. Modifications and upgrades to launch infrastructure at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida will cost $2 billion more.

The twin five-segment solid rocket motors and three RS-25D/E engines are derived from equipment used on the space shuttle program. It's likely the early missions of the enormous rocket would fly with hardware that helped launch space shuttles.

NASA plans to plug its existing inventory of space shuttle main engines for the first few heavy-lift rocket flights. The engines are designed to be reusable, but they would crash back to Earth and be destroyed with the launcher's 27.5-foot-diameter core stage on SLS missions.

In its earliest crew configuration, the super rocket will stand 320 feet tall and weigh as much as 24 fully-loaded Boeing 747 jumbo jets. Its three main engines and pair of boosters will ramp up to 8.4 million pounds of chest-thumping thrust at liftoff, more than than the Saturn 5 moon rocket or the space shuttle.

That thrust level is equivalent to the horsepower of 160,000 Chevrolet Corvette engines, according to NASA.

With the addition of two more RD-25D/E engines on the first stage, the Space Launch System's "evolved" architecture would be able to deliver 130 metric tons, or 286,000 pounds, of mass to low Earth orbit. Its voluminous nose fairing would carry 9 school buses into space.

Its mass would increase to 6.5 million pounds and it would stand as tall as a 40-story building. The extra propulsion would raise its liftoff thrust to 9.2 million pounds, 20 percent more than the Saturn 5 rocket's powerful F-1 first stage engines.
 
Top