New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#26 2022-09-10 19:02:19

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

We are going to be waiting for a bit for a possible launch
NASA hopes to launch Artemis I near the end of the month, on September 23 or 27.

Hopefully it's going to look like this

BB1cRY1h.img?w=768&h=497&m=6

Of course, there are those that think that NASA and America’s space program are becoming a running joke as its simply a poorly cobbled-together poster child for a once great space program

Our nation cannot afford apologists for NASA, any incompetent or greedy contractors who may supply the agency, nor the clueless politicians who enable failure and the disgraceful waste of American taxpayers’ hard-earned money.

All of the contractors have been passing the startup cost back to Nasa such that this first ride is estimated to cost $4.1 billion

Offline

#27 2022-09-10 22:37:16

kbd512
Administrator
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 7,548

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

So, they're not taking SLS back to the high bay to properly fix it?

On top of that, they want to fly without sufficient electrical power for the self-destruct mechanism?

Where is this "good idea fairy"?

We need an oversized flyswatter to kill it before it kills one of us.

Offline

#28 2022-09-11 05:56:17

tahanson43206
Moderator
Registered: 2018-04-27
Posts: 17,841

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Following up on post #27 by kbd512, and others who have commented upon the inability to recharge the self-destruct mechanism ...

Yesterday's Zoom meeting of the North Houston NSS chapter included lengthy discussion of Artemis I.  A chat is included in the Zoom service, and a former NASA employee wrote a chat message indicating that the batteries were accessible and rechargeable in the Shuttle system. He said that the designers of Artemis decided NOT to include that feature in their design.

(th)

Offline

#29 2022-09-11 09:26:33

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

What you are watching play out here,  is essentially the proof of my contentions in posts 4 and 10 of this thread.  Ugly,  ain't it?

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#30 2022-09-11 18:04:59

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

space dot com

NASA engineers replaced leaky seals on two fuel lines of the Artemis 1 moon rocket over the weekend, setting the stage for a fueling test to see if the repairs worked.  The repair work is aimed at plugging a hydrogen fuel leak in an 8-inch line leading into the core stage of the 32-story SLS rocket.  While replacing that seal, engineers also replaced the seal on a smaller 4-inch hydrogen "bleed line" that also saw a leak in a scrubbed Aug. 29 launch try. With the repair work complete, NASA is now preparing for a fueling test to check if the SLS rocket's hydrogen leaks are indeed fixed. That test could occur as early as Saturday, Sept. 17, and will fill the 322-foot-tall (98 meters) rocket with the 736,000 gallons of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen it needs for launch, NASA has said.

Well at least its a proper test.

That test is designed to chill the engines down to a temperature of minus 420 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 251 degrees Celsius) to prepare them for their super-chilled propellant.

Offline

#31 2022-09-12 13:46:41

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

They are counting on getting approval to fly with batteries factor 2+ past their rated "cannot fail" life.  They may still be good,  and they may not be,  nobody can know,  because the designers of this abortion thought there would never,  ever be any need to have access to those batteries,  anywhere but in the assembly building.  Nobody bothered to ask old-timers like me,  obviously.  Any of us oldsters could have told them that design choice was asinine-stupid,  long before any metal was ever cut. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#32 2022-09-21 11:11:25

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

It would appear that the hydrogen continues to leak,  despite the seal repairs (apparently there were 2).  They still lack the waiver to launch with untested termination system batteries,  now more than factor 2 beyond the allowable interval. 

I predict:  this thing will have to go back to the assembly building.  The repaired seals may,  or may not,  be the source of the continuing leaks.  However,  it is clearly something closely adjacent,  in that same vicinity.

The 4% criterion they keep quoting is the lower flammability limit for hydrogen in air at 1 atm pressure. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#33 2022-09-22 09:59:21

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Details in the news stories are scarce.  However,  there seem to be 2 hydrogen fittings,  the 8-inch one that they repaired,  and another 4-inch one.  They got the leaks down to an acceptable level,  then had the leak with the 4-inch one.  It wasn't enough to reach the 4% flammability limit,  but one obscure story did say that this would have stopped a real countdown to launch. 

So they still have hydrogen leak problems that threaten their launch countdown protocols,  and there is the unverified battery charge issue for the flight termination system. 

Even without a crew,  this would be one expensive failure,  if they make bad management decisions.

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#34 2022-09-24 10:05:03

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Well,  even Mother Nature is trying to give them a hint,  with a hurricane headed for Florida.  They got their waiver,  but the timing would be wrong if they can't let the rocket ride out the hurricane on the pad.  Current forecasts call for Cat 3 at landfall in Florida.  The winds will very likely exceed the 74 knot max certified pad rideout speed.

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#35 2022-09-24 19:45:43

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

So far land fall of the hurricane is going to be on the opposite side of Florida in the pan handle shaped area of the state from the gulf side.
It would seem that the contractors have forgotten how to build rockets that are trouble free in the design.

Offline

#36 2022-09-25 11:14:26

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

The most likely consensus predicted track is bit more west today than it was yesterday.  The consensus seems to be a major storm at landfall in Florida.  Could be a cat 3 or a cat 4,  opinions and predictions vary.  Bear in mind that a storm that intensifies to major status will be multiple hundreds of miles wide.  Hurricane-force winds could easily extend a hundred miles or more from the center. 

I think it very likely that the 74 knot windspeed limit for SLS sitting out in the open will be exceeded.  Not a certainty,  but a strong likelihood. 

As for the current crew of rocket folk at NASA not being able to design it more trouble-free,  well,  you know what I say about that:  40% science,  50% art,  10% blind dumb luck (in production work,  art and luck higher in development work).  Nobody at NASA has done this in over 50 years.  The folks who did this 50 years ago are long retired or long dead.  The art was never passed on,  because nobody was doing this kind of work during those 50 years. 

I am very unsurprised to see some very stupid design mistakes surfacing.  These are the ones never written down in what reports were written,  about how to avoid stupid mistake problems.  Manager hate to put anything but good PR into reports they have to sign off. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#37 2022-09-26 12:31:08

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

I see they decided to roll it back into the VAB.  Smart.

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#38 2022-09-26 14:50:41

tahanson43206
Moderator
Registered: 2018-04-27
Posts: 17,841

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

For GW Johnson re #37

It's a chance to recharge the batteries without having to admit the error.

(th)

Offline

#39 2022-09-26 20:04:53

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Plus, it will get the protection from the building from flying scraps that might occur from other building damages.

Offline

#40 2022-09-28 14:08:00

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Looks like most of Florida is getting the crap beat and/or flooded out of it over the next few days.  That would include the Cape Canaveral stuff.

Like I said,  putting it into the VAB was smart.  It was quite clear they did not want to do that,  because they waited to the last possible hour to do it,  but at least they did the right thing.

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#41 2022-09-28 18:01:10

kbd512
Administrator
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 7,548

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

GW,

Better late than never, right?

Offline

#42 2022-09-28 18:55:18

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

There has been a fire indicated at the vertical bay it's in

Artemis I: A fire at NASA Kennedy gives the long-delayed Moon mission its latest twist

Offline

#43 2022-09-29 09:23:37

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Fire in a building full of several million pounds of solid propellant (class 1.3 explosive,  by the way) is certainly something to be concerned about.  Heat lights solid propellant.  So do electric arcs (lightning). 

Odd that the article had only 1 sentence revealing a fire occurrence.  The rest of the article dealt with other things.  Considering the impacts if one or both of those boosters had ignited or exploded in that building,  I find that lack quite odd. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#44 2022-09-29 20:10:31

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 29,178

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

https://news.yahoo.com/leaks-hurricanes … 49855.html

It appears that it was an electrical problem in the mobile platform on which the SLS rests generated a spark that ignited a rope, leading to an evacuation of the rocket hangar. They are still not sure what did it or if it will have any impact to getting the rocket to launch soon.

Offline

#45 2023-03-08 15:44:56

Mars_B4_Moon
Member
Registered: 2006-03-23
Posts: 9,761

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Artemis 1 in November 2022 flys for 25 days an Uncrewed lunar orbit and return

NASA's Artemis 2 mission around Moon set for November 2024

https://phys.org/news/2023-03-nasa-arte … ember.html

Artemis-II will be manned

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-03-08 15:46:33)

Offline

#46 2023-12-03 21:18:11

Mars_B4_Moon
Member
Registered: 2006-03-23
Posts: 9,761

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

other the missions in the future will be manned?

they say deliver of Lunar Gateway or simply Gateway will also be manned, launched on both Falcon Heavy and SLS. Into a Polar near-rectilinear halo orbit with an orbital period of 7 days.

Artemis 2 officially Artemis II
Four astronauts are to perform a flyby of the Moon and return to Earth,

Artemis 5 is said to involve a Blue Origin Blue Moon Lander and Astronauts Driving a Car on the Moon, a 30 day mission.

Artemis 8 would be living inside a Surface Habitat

https://web.archive.org/web/20230615105 … _rev_b.pdf

GAO report

they conclude "we found the lunar landing mission is unlikely to occur in 2025 as planned" due to ambitious schedule, delays to key events, large volume of remaining work, spacesuit design challenges

https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/statu … 7969775751

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-12-04 05:43:17)

Offline

#47 2023-12-12 18:58:31

Mars_B4_Moon
Member
Registered: 2006-03-23
Posts: 9,761

Re: Artemis Launch Coverage

Artemis/Orion atmosphere re-entry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U88DzZcsubs

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB