Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#11

Post by drzaiusapelord »

zrail wrote: post #6

If SpaceX and friends can reliably launch cargo and eventually humans into LEO, why can't NASA focus on what to put into space, rather than how to get there? I'm sure I don't understand the mechanics of it, but wouldn't it be possible to put up a few smaller cargo carriers containing fuel and pieces of a trans-mars ship and assemble it in orbit?

Sure, but something that can assemble things in space (as well as raw materials) is going to be heavy and if its heavy its going to need a heavy launcher. Fuel is heavy too. At the end of the day, you need a powerful rocket to do the heavy lifting. NASA doesn't want to turn into an agency that just gives seed money to SpaceX and wants its own heavy human-rated lifter and capsule.

Not to mention, there's political will for NASA to continue being in the launch business and for good reason. SpaceX could land a monopoly on heavy launches and could raise its prices, get bought by a foreign power, go bankrupt, use shoddy designs, or who knows what else.

edit: really -2 moderation? Downvoting for disgreeing now? Wow HN.

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#12

Post by krschultz »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #11
zrail wrote: post #6

If SpaceX and friends can reliably launch cargo and eventually humans into LEO, why can't NASA focus on what to put into space, rather than how to get there? I'm sure I don't understand the mechanics of it, but wouldn't it be possible to put up a few smaller cargo carriers containing fuel and pieces of a trans-mars ship and assemble it in orbit?

Sure, but something that can assemble things in space (as well as raw materials) is going to be heavy and if its heavy its going to need a heavy launcher. Fuel is heavy too. At the end of the day, you need a powerful rocket to do the heavy lifting. NASA doesn't want to turn into an agency that just gives seed money to SpaceX and wants its own heavy human-rated lifter and capsule. Not to mention, there's political wil…

It's not seed money, it's buying from a private contracter. The Air Force doesn't build planes, it buys planes. The Navy doesn't build ships, it buys ships. The Army doesn't make tanks, it buys tanks.

Now part of that process involves a lot of military oversight and specification to make sure things are up to their standards. I know that the military is involved in the design of systems from Day 1. But all of those things are made by private corporations and they have no commercial equivalent. NASA operates this way already to a large extent. Boeing, Lockheed, etc are primary contractors that design & build a lot of this stuff.

What NASA is going through right now is a switch from that model to using straight Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) stuff. The government buys plenty of things off the shelf with no motification or input if it meets their needs. Space X just happens to provide lift capability instead of laptops, but in the end it really is no different as long as they're not launching people.

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#13

Post by burgerbrain »

krschultz wrote: post #10
zrail wrote: post #6

If SpaceX and friends can reliably launch cargo and eventually humans into LEO, why can't NASA focus on what to put into space, rather than how to get there? I'm sure I don't understand the mechanics of it, but wouldn't it be possible to put up a few smaller cargo carriers containing fuel and pieces of a trans-mars ship and assemble it in orbit?

The proposed payload for the NASA SLS is 64,000kg-120,000kg while the Falcon 9 is 10,450 kg. The proposed payload for the Falcon Heavy is 53,000 kg. So to match 1 SLS launch you are looking at 6-12 Falcon 9s (which have flown) or 2-3 Falcon Heavy launches (which have not flown). I don't think it's a stretch to say that using Space X would be significantly cheaper to get the same weight up there because the design wor…

"So to match 1 SLS launch you are looking at 6-12 Falcon 9s (which have flown) or 2-3 Falcon Heavy launches (which have not flown)."

It is my impression that SpaceX anticipates doing exactly that sort of thing.

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#14

Post by jsmcgd »

krschultz wrote: post #10
zrail wrote: post #6

If SpaceX and friends can reliably launch cargo and eventually humans into LEO, why can't NASA focus on what to put into space, rather than how to get there? I'm sure I don't understand the mechanics of it, but wouldn't it be possible to put up a few smaller cargo carriers containing fuel and pieces of a trans-mars ship and assemble it in orbit?

The proposed payload for the NASA SLS is 64,000kg-120,000kg while the Falcon 9 is 10,450 kg. The proposed payload for the Falcon Heavy is 53,000 kg. So to match 1 SLS launch you are looking at 6-12 Falcon 9s (which have flown) or 2-3 Falcon Heavy launches (which have not flown). I don't think it's a stretch to say that using Space X would be significantly cheaper to get the same weight up there because the design wor…

Exactly. Is this not very similar to the program that was recently cancelled?

Reading this actually made me quite angry, and I'm someone who is a fan of new technology, especially new space technology. What new ground is being covered here? "President Obama challenged us to be bold and dream big, and that's exactly what we are doing at NASA". I have to disagree. This looks a lot like NASA is about to reinvent the Saturn V.

Surely it's best for NASA to completely draw a line and vow to never develop any more (conventional) launch vehicles. In orbit assembly presumably is exactly the kind of thing they should be investigating. Unless of course they plan to do all their deep space exploration via a single rocket launch?

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#15

Post by hga »

Ah, yes, the Senate Launch System. Looks rather like the more sensible DIRECT; I haven't looked closely at it yet, but from glancing at the Wikipedia entry the Feb 11 design shows it's already a boondoggle (as reported by people I trust) by using 5 segment SRBs, one of the fatal flaws of the Ares I (going from 4 to 5 segments results in thrust oscillations severe enough to kill the crew). And from what they're not saying it sounds like they're sticking with the Ares program's wider SRBs, which fantastically drove up the cost of it.

Well, since NASA has been more public works program than anything else since Apollo (and even then, helping the South was an explicit goal of Apollo), I suppose it's fitting. But can we really afford this sort of thing as opposed to building up a commercial launch sector in any one of a number of ways?

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#16

Post by hga »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #11
zrail wrote: post #6

If SpaceX and friends can reliably launch cargo and eventually humans into LEO, why can't NASA focus on what to put into space, rather than how to get there? I'm sure I don't understand the mechanics of it, but wouldn't it be possible to put up a few smaller cargo carriers containing fuel and pieces of a trans-mars ship and assemble it in orbit?

Sure, but something that can assemble things in space (as well as raw materials) is going to be heavy and if its heavy its going to need a heavy launcher. Fuel is heavy too. At the end of the day, you need a powerful rocket to do the heavy lifting. NASA doesn't want to turn into an agency that just gives seed money to SpaceX and wants its own heavy human-rated lifter and capsule. Not to mention, there's political wil…

"use shoddy designs"

Given that NASA's shoddy design of the Shuttle has killed two of them along with their crews, somehow I don't find that to be a strong argument.

If SpaceX is going to "land a monopoly on heavy launches" then by definition their vehicles will be at least somewhat reliable.

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#18

Post by russell »

"...kids today can now dream of one day walking on Mars."

Hell, I dreamed of walking on Mars when I worked on the Apollo Project. I never dreamed that 2011 would come and we would never have even gone back to the moon. It makes me regret even more that I never made the trek to Florida to see a Saturn V launch.

Re: NASA Announces Design for New Deep Space Exploration System

#20

Post by FrojoS »

burgerbrain wrote: post #13
krschultz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proposed payload for the NASA SLS is 64,000kg-120,000kg while the Falcon 9 is 10,450 kg. The proposed payload for the Falcon Heavy is 53,000 kg. So to match 1 SLS launch you are looking at 6-12 Falcon 9s (which have flown) or 2-3 Falcon Heavy launches (which have not flown). I don't think it's a stretch to say that using Space X would be significantly cheaper to get the same weight up there because the design wor…

"So to match 1 SLS launch you are looking at 6-12 Falcon 9s (which have flown) or 2-3 Falcon Heavy launches (which have not flown)." It is my impression that SpaceX anticipates doing exactly that sort of thing.

Elon Musk has said in public, that they hope to build an ultra heavy lift vehicle which would be more powerful than the Saturn V.
Post reply on HN