Business, Economics, Political Commentary, Space

A Shocking Development

18 Comments

NASA has been fibbing to Congress about the SLS and propellant depots.

Bottom lines:

NEA Mission Observations – Mixed Fleet

* Costs $10s of billions less through 2030 over alternate HLLV/SEP-based architecture approaches
– Only $10B more than all Falcon Heavy approach
* Fits within conservative exploration budget through 2030 with extended ISS and budget cuts while allowing 3-4 NEA missions
* Breaking costs into smaller, less-monolithic amounts allows great flexibility in meeting smaller and changing budget profiles
* Allows first mission to NEA in 2024, potentially several years earlier than HLLV/SEP-based approaches, meeting President’s deadline and actual availability of NEA 2008EV5
* Launch capacity not much of an issue with two suppliers
– Availability risk also improved
* Use of two CLVs, similar to COTS, should reduce cost and risk through competition
* Integration of large CPS stage with multiple vehicles could reduce commonality and add complexity

Lunar Mission Observations -RP Depot/CPS

* Costs $10s of billions less through 2030 over alternate HLLV/SEP-based architecture approaches
– Only $2B more than LO2/LH2 Depot approach
* Fits within conservative exploration budget through 2030 with extended ISS and budget cuts while allowing 4-8 lunar missions
* Breaking costs into smaller, less-monolithic amounts allows great flexibility in meeting smaller and changing budget profiles
* Allows first lunar mission to in 2024, potentially several years earlier than HLLV-based approaches
* Launch capacity does not appear to be a major issue
* Dependence on a single CLV and provider likely unacceptable
* Integration of large CPS stage with small-diameter Falcon easier due to smaller stage size
* Integration of lunar lander on Falcon limits design options
* RP-based depot/CPS provides slightly higher LCC for lunar missions with lower risk

Just as I and others have been saying for years. But it doesn’t “save or create” the jobs in the right places.

[Update mid morning]

I’m looking through the briefing now. They have an interesting design reference mission to an asteroid that appears to use solar electric propulsion to get the departure propellant out to EML-1. If you look at the sandpile for the reference HEFT DRM-1, on chart 10, you can see how much the budget would be reduced if you forgo the development of the HLLV. It looks like about a third of the total, and doesn’t get you to the asteroid until eighteen years from now. Going with the depot approach saves tens of billions and accelerates the mission by half a decade.

For the lunar mission, they don’t do it they way I would — they have a LEO depot, and then do it Apollo style from there. I’d put a depot at EML-1, and send the lander up separately on a slow boat, to minimize the high-impulse delta vee necessary for the trip. Ideally, you’d have multiple depots and reusable space systems throughout the architecture. But the way they’ve done it gets the cost down to sixty billion through 2030 (presumably current-year dollars), with a lunar landing in 2024l with another mission every two years. So by my count, we get four lunar missions at a cost of fifteen billion each. Still very expensive, but a lot cheaper than with the SLS, and sooner. If you use Delta IV-H instead of Falcon Heavy, the price goes to $75B. Most likely one would use a mixed fleet for resiliency.

These architectures look an awful lot like the kinds we did at Boeing seven years ago for CE&I, that Mike Griffin never even looked at. All of their cost assumptions appear to be very conservative. And they probably don’t take into account the fact that you’d launch the hardware dry, which reduces structural weight.

[Update a few minutes later]

Wow. The cost comparison charts are devastating. In Chart 48, the heavy architecture is over twice as much in DDT&E as any of the others. If Dana was chairman, this would be the subject of a hearing, but he’s not, so it won’t be. But he can certainly issue a press release. I’m assuming that this is the briefing that he was asking for last month.

[Early afternoon update]

In finishing the briefing, I see that they have a lot of trade studies planned, and they haven’t done the risk comparison with the HLLV approach. The latter surely has to consider that anything that’s only flown once every couple years is intrinsically less reliable, because there’s no way to get the processing team in a rhythm. The SLS is such a monumentally bad idea that it could only have come from Congress.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

Bloody Sunday In Cairo

7 Comments

…and the White House’s disturbing statement:

On Monday, the Christians’ funerals took place, and as the procession left the cathedral for the cemetery, further sectarian clashes occurred. State TV retracted its claim of Sunday, saying that no soldiers were killed after all and the earlier report had been fabricated. Unfortunately, this correction seemed not to have reached the White House, which expressed President Obama’s concern for the “tragic loss of life among demonstrators and security forces,” adding that “now is a time for restraint on all sides.” Perhaps I ought to join the president in his concern and call for restraint: I call upon the security forces to refrain from killing Christians, and upon Christians to refrain from dying.

This is the mindless mentality of the diplomat and “peacemaker.” It is the mentality of the school principal who sees a bully beating up on a defenseless kid, and suspends them both for “fighting.”

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

The Iran Plot

22 Comments

…some useful thoughts. Bottom line, it’s not a distraction from Justice Department scandals, and it’s not really anything new. It’s just part of the war they’ve been waging, and we’ve been pretending isn’t happening, against us for over three decades.

[Update a few minutes later]

Some questions for the president:

Do you consider the Iranian plot to bomb a U.S. restaurant an act of war? If not, would it have been an act of war had the plot succeeded?

Are you still willing to negotiate with Iran without preconditions? Are you still willing to grant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad entry into the U.S.? Do you maintain that your failure to support the Iranian Green Movement in 2009 was not a significant mistake?

In light of the Iranians’ willingness to plant a bomb in Washington, D.C., do you now consider a nuclear Iran unacceptable? Is a military option to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon off the table?

Nah. All we need is another “reset” button.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary

California’s Slow Suicide

14 Comments

…continues:

When the dust settled on Gov. Jerry Brown’s first legislative session in nearly three decades, no group had won more than organized labor, which heralded its largest string of victories in nearly a decade.

At the urging of the food workers’ union, Brown agreed to crack down on the use of automated checkout machines in grocery stores. At firefighters’ request, he approved new restrictions on local governments seeking to void union contracts. He guaranteed wages for workers in public libraries that are privatized — a bill sponsored by another labor group.

Those unions and others helped bankroll Brown’s campaign last year.

Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

What does “crack down on the use of automated checkout machines” mean? Outlaw them? All the groceries have them now. This is luddism, pure and simple.

[Update a few minutes later]

Plus, he’s not only taken away open carry, but established a state registry for long guns. Guess I know what state I’m not going to be buying any guns in. I wonder if this will survive a court challenge?

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!