According to Aviation Week, NASA is considering paying $150 million to "man rate" an interim upper stage on the "Senate Launch System" heavy lift booster. "Man Rating" is a pure paperwork exercise, checking and recording where every bit, piece, nut, and bolt came from, and what testing it passed. Paperwork costs a lot, weighs a lot, and does not contribute to the mission.
But NASA is in love with it.
This blog posts about aviation, automobiles, electronics, programming, politics and such other subjects as catch my interest. The blog is based in northern New Hampshire, USA
Showing posts with label SLS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SLS. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Sequester vs NASA
Aviation Week has Senator Barbara Mikulski as worried about future NASA funding, in the face of the sequester budget cuts. Mikulski fears that there isn't enough money to continue the Space Launch System (SLS) booster program. Oh dear, how tragic.
Space Launch System is an unneeded boondoggle from the word go. We have two (2) working, well proven, heavy lift boosters, Space-X's Falcon 9, and United Launch Association's Atlas 5. Atlas has been lofting big commercial satellites for years. Falcon is newer and has a shorter service record, but it has made resupply missions to the International Space Station (ISS). SLS has never flown.
SLS, wags have suggested the acronym stands for "Senate Launch System" is a $1.385 billion program pushed by the US Senate as a way to keep all those redundant Shuttle people on the NASA payroll. We ought to kill it off completely and use existing, well proven private industry boosters.
Now that the Russians have hiked the price of a ride up to the ISS from $21 million a seat to $71 million a seat, we could pop a capsule atop Falcon or Atlas and save a lot of money.
Aviation Week is clearly in favor of SLS. They close their article thusly. "Is the US space program any less important than on time arrivals for air travelers?"
Well, actually, the US space program would be better off without the SLS program.
Space Launch System is an unneeded boondoggle from the word go. We have two (2) working, well proven, heavy lift boosters, Space-X's Falcon 9, and United Launch Association's Atlas 5. Atlas has been lofting big commercial satellites for years. Falcon is newer and has a shorter service record, but it has made resupply missions to the International Space Station (ISS). SLS has never flown.
SLS, wags have suggested the acronym stands for "Senate Launch System" is a $1.385 billion program pushed by the US Senate as a way to keep all those redundant Shuttle people on the NASA payroll. We ought to kill it off completely and use existing, well proven private industry boosters.
Now that the Russians have hiked the price of a ride up to the ISS from $21 million a seat to $71 million a seat, we could pop a capsule atop Falcon or Atlas and save a lot of money.
Aviation Week is clearly in favor of SLS. They close their article thusly. "Is the US space program any less important than on time arrivals for air travelers?"
Well, actually, the US space program would be better off without the SLS program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)