Debug: Database connection successful Why Artemis is “better” than Apollo. (Page 4) / Human missions / New Mars Forums

New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society plus New Mars Image Server

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations via email. Please see Recruiting Topic for additional information. Write newmarsmember[at_symbol]gmail.com.

#76 2026-03-04 15:56:44

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 6,174
Website

Re: Why Artemis is “better” than Apollo.

From AIAA “Daily Launch” for 3-4-2026,  following a link to Spacnews.com,  a Jeff Foust article dated 4 March:

WASHINGTON — Workers have completed repairs to the helium pressurization system in the upper stage of the Space Launch System, keeping a potential April launch of the Artemis 2 mission on track.

In a March 3 statement, NASA said engineers traced a blockage in helium flow in the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage, or ICPS, to a seal in a quick-disconnect line feeding helium from ground equipment into the stage. The seal had become dislodged, blocking helium flow.

Technicians removed the quick-disconnect fitting, reassembled it with the seal properly positioned and reinstalled it. Tests confirmed that helium was flowing into the stage after the repairs.

The quick-disconnect line was one of the leading suspected causes of the blockage, along with a check valve inside the stage. NASA said Feb. 21 that neither issue could be addressed at the launch pad, requiring the agency to roll the vehicle back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs.

While addressing the helium issue, workers also performed maintenance on other parts of the SLS. That included replacing batteries in the core stage, ICPS and boosters, as well as replacing batteries in the rocket’s flight termination system ahead of end-to-end testing required by the Eastern Range.

NASA also said it is replacing a seal in a line that feeds liquid oxygen into the core stage. That seal is separate from those in liquid hydrogen lines that caused leaks during a wet dress rehearsal in early February and were replaced at the pad. NASA did not disclose why it is replacing the liquid oxygen seal, as there were no reports of leaks during the two fueling tests conducted last month.

NASA said the repairs and maintenance keep the vehicle on schedule to roll back out to the pad later this month for a launch attempt in early April. Two-hour launch windows are available on the evenings of April 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 during the next launch period. The following opportunity opens April 30.

The agency did not disclose when it plans to roll the SLS and Orion spacecraft back to the pad. At a Feb. 27 briefing, Lori Glaze, acting associate administrator for the Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate, said teams would need “at least a week and a half or so” at the pad after rollout to complete preparations for a launch attempt.

----- 

My take: 

The Helium valve seal displacement problem sounds similar to,  but not quite the same,  as the bad helium valves in Starliner.  This was the interim upper stage of the SLS in which this occurred,  which is old Delta-4 hardware acquired when Boeing absorbed McDonnell-Douglas.  The oxygen seal wasn’t leaking,  but got replaced in the first stage core anyway,  for unspoken reasons.  The first stage core is a Boeing in-house design.  Most of the replacements were actually various batteries that were too long past being fully charged.

I've also seen some statements elsewhere from Isaacman,  somewhere,  about "standardizing" the SLS rocket configuration.  There was no clue what that meant,  but I suspect it might mean there will only ever be an SLS block 1,  with the interim upper stage.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2026-03-04 16:01:08)


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

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

Offline

Like button can go here

#77 Yesterday 15:29:10

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 30,633

Re: Why Artemis is “better” than Apollo.

It sure is walking and quacking like.... Duck

Offline

Like button can go here

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB