Joel Achenbach reports on Tito’s plans.
He wants to use Cygnus, but how does he propose to enter? Guess I have to read the paper. I think he’s crazy to stake the mission on an SLS flight.
[Update a few minutes later]
Jeff Foust has a more detailed description. I think it’s crazy to rely on unbuilt NASA hardware.
[Update a while later]
This makes so little sense that I am compelled to think that it is driven by politics. I smell Boeing/LM behind this.
If I were Tito, I’d be working with SpaceX to do the mission with a dual-heavy concept, and use Dragon, not Orion. I’d order a stretch Centaur from ULA, or use two of them. I’d also bypass OSC and go directly to Thales Alenia for a PCM. The changes needed are so extensive that it doesn’t make sense to start with a Cygnus.
[Early-afternoon update]
So Tito and Taber MacCallum had a phone call with the press afterwards, and said that they couldn’t make the case close commercially, that the solutions didn’t have the margins they wanted. Question: Did they ask ULA if they could demo orbital fueling within three years? Of course, Boeing/Lockmart would never let ULA do that, which is why it would be good for the space industry to force a divestiture. You have a commercial space company that’s hamstrung by its cost-plus-contractor parents.
Wow! Something I never thought I’d see — SEI’s 90-day study in miniature: SLS and Orion and commercial cargo and commercial crew and additional development on top of all of that.
That’s $2.5 billion worth of hardware, not counting development costs. Where are they going to get that kind of money?
They want to launch on the very first flight of SLS. They want to use an unmanned prototype Orion for crew return. They want to launch on the first scheduled flight of commercial crew (I’d consider that the least risky part of the plan, as I believe either of the two commercial crew frontrunners could meet that date, if NASA allows).
Just….amazing. Amazing how everything that NASA is even mildly affiliated with turns risky & expensive.
That’s not the way I’d go about it. If I didn’t believe he’s serious about the schedule I’d suspect he’s setting it up so others would take the blame for failure. But let’s play devils advocate.
Why Orion over Dragon? Dragon already has a heat shield that would do the job but Orion has a toilet. Both would need upgrades. The heat shield is required. On Dragon it’s been tested. The toilet is not required (or tested) but wouldn’t be that hard for Dragon to include. In any case, the crew will learn to defecate in zero g (and use the excrement as part of radiation shielding.) Dragon is less than half the mass than Orion and has a two year duration. I just can’t see why you’d use the Orion for any reason other than politics to get NASA on board.
Using the first flight of SLS for hardware is a mission risk but not a crew risk. If it’s ready and NASA picks up the cost, why not? It may be the only time the SLS ever gets used for something practical (after wasting all that money which is sunk at that point.)
Cygnus doesn’t seem like that bad a choice for a few reasons but doesn’t it only have one docking port? Which means they will have to undock the earth return vehicle (Orion or whatever) before they can dock to put crew aboard? Then dock the ERV again. Wouldn’t it make more sense to not launch an ERV as part of the SLS stack and just use whatever crew vehicle takes them to LEO as the ERV?
Cygnus and Orion: Mass (1800kg + 8913kg) & Volume(18.9m3 + 19.56m3)
Sundancer and Dragon: (8618kg + 4200kg) & (180m3 + 10m3)
I took out the wikipedia links to the above four vehicles because I couldn’t post such a spammy comment!
They have to add life support to Cygnus but that isn’t too difficult. Sundancer already has 50% more life support than required and enough space to include much more variety of consumables. Cygnes already has a propulsion module and much lower mass, but crew and consumables would be the same mass for either and you have to add life support equipment mass that Sundancer already has.
IDK but however it’s done, I just hope it does happen so it puts some negative arguments to rest and we get the experience behind us.
Orion doesn’t have a proper toilet – that was removed a long time ago (if it ever was there).
It doesn’t need one. The toilet will be in the Cygnus.
Yes. My point was merely that neither Orion nor Dragon have a toilet.
My guess; Tito is hoping for political support, plus of course $$$$.
The decision to rely on mostly as-yet-unbuilt hardware when dealing with a firm launch window really doesn’t bother me much now that there’s precedent for it. After all, they did this with the Obamacare website and backsystems (Large portions, such as the payment system, haven’t been built, let alone tested and installed). So, they launched it October 1st, even though much of it was as-yet unbuilt. I see no reason why a space shot can’t use the same operational concept. If, say, the booster for the Trans-Mars insertion hasn’t been built by launch day, why not go ahead without it? If the re-entry vehicle hasn’t been built yet, why not go without it? At worst, it’d be ready to launch not long after the returning Mars crew hits the Earth entry interface at 14 miles per second in the Cignus, so why let that stand in your way? The Obamacare launch can thus be the precedent for the Mars launch; if a lot of the hardware hasn’t been built by launch day, why worry? Just go ahead and launch. What could possibly go wrong?
/snark
On a serous note… I think the real consequences of Tito’s change of plan will be that Inspiration Mars is going nowhere. Just one reason out of many; I think the chances of SLS flying in 2017 to be close to zero.
By late 2017 FH should have been flying for almost three years already. Since neither is going to directly throw a stack around mars, FH seems like a no brainer at that point, unless… SLS is ready to launch anyway (doubtful) and they get a huge break in price for using it.
As far as I can tell they want to get the SLS launch for free.. it would have just been an unmanned test launch anyway, and they want Congress to fund NASA an extra $100M to $200M per year to get the Dual Use Upper Stage ready for that flight.
Just watched the webcast. Tito completely fails to communicate to Congress what he wants. His written testimony fails to do it either.
Maybe Tito didn’t want competition with Elon? That’s a lot of SpaceX resources going into a fly-by when Elon has been throwing the idea of a Red Dragon around for a couple of years.
Seems more likely that cost + easy excuse with SLS being pushed back would give Tito a valid excuse to NOT fly in 2017.