Summary:
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) has encountered too many obstacles to be successfully completed. This evaluation found the following neglected and unsolvable problems:
· The SLS is based on the Apollo Saturn V expendable heavy launch vehicle concept which is obsolete and has been found to be unaffordable. The launch of two SLS vehicles for a crew and cargo mission is expected to exceed a conservatively $4 billion (FY2011) launch cost evaluation. A feasibility NASA Mars mission study indicates that an austere human science and exploration mission ( http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/41432/1/09-3135.pdf ) could require 15 SLS launches for crew, cargo and habitat at a minimum cost of $30 to $40 billion over a four year period for one manned Mars mission.
· NASA has been disingenuous in their promotion of the safety of the Orion MPCV. The Orion MPCV or any of the commercial crew modules are known potential deathtraps.
· The SLS's Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) does not have sufficient payload return to earth capability to meet the need for commercial development of deep space resources. In order for the nation's 21st century deep space transportation system to be sustainable it must have commercial support.
· China will develop a space transportation system with commercial applications which will be based on a reusable space shuttle launch concept.
NASA's Space Launch System and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (SLS/MPCV) will fail because…mission costs are too high, the Orion MPCV crew module has an unsolvable water recovery issue, and there is no commercial or military application.
The following SLS/MPCV "operation" cost estimates were presented to the Congressional Budget Office to make the executive branch aware of the prohibitive cost to operate expendable heavy lift vehicles.
· The SLS development program scenario based on 13 flights over a 21 year period would have extreme difficulty maintaining the manufacturing labor force for such a low flight rate. However, it is the introduction of the cargo vehicle which forewarns that it will require two launches of these mammoth vehicles to accomplish one mission. The SLS is the same heavy lift launcher concept used in the Constellation program which was cancelled because: "The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources." Such is the case today.
· The following extremely conservative $4.2b estimate of annual operations cost for the SLS indicated it will cost more to manufacture the expendable vehicles, plan the mission, and conduct flight operation than NASA has budgeted for human exploration. NASA is assuming that future budgets will be increased to cover mission operations. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN!
Summary:
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) has encountered too many obstacles to be successfully completed. This evaluation found the following neglected and unsolvable problems:
· The SLS is based on the Apollo Saturn V expendable heavy launch vehicle concept which is obsolete and has been found to be unaffordable. The launch of two SLS vehicles for a crew and cargo mission is expected to exceed a conservatively $4 billion (FY2011) launch cost evaluation. A feasibility NASA Mars mission study indicates that an austere human science and exploration mission ( http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/41432/1/09-3135.pdf ) could require 15 SLS launches for crew, cargo and habitat at a minimum cost of $30 to $40 billion over a four year period for one manned Mars mission.
· NASA has been disingenuous in their promotion of the safety of the Orion MPCV. The Orion MPCV or any of the commercial crew modules are known potential deathtraps.
· The SLS's Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) does not have sufficient payload return to earth capability to meet the need for commercial development of deep space resources. In order for the nation's 21st century deep space transportation system to be sustainable it must have commercial support.
· China will develop a space transportation system with commercial applications which will be based on a reusable space shuttle launch concept.
NASA's Space Launch System and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (SLS/MPCV) will fail because…mission costs are too high, the Orion MPCV crew module has an unsolvable water recovery issue, and there is no commercial or military application.
The following SLS/MPCV "operation" cost estimates were presented to the Congressional Budget Office to make the executive branch aware of the prohibitive cost to operate expendable heavy lift vehicles.
· The SLS development program scenario based on 13 flights over a 21 year period would have extreme difficulty maintaining the manufacturing labor force for such a low flight rate. However, it is the introduction of the cargo vehicle which forewarns that it will require two launches of these mammoth vehicles to accomplish one mission. The SLS is the same heavy lift launcher concept used in the Constellation program which was cancelled because: "The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources." Such is the case today.
· The following extremely conservative $4.2b estimate of annual operations cost for the SLS indicated it will cost more to manufacture the expendable vehicles, plan the mission, and conduct flight operation than NASA has budgeted for human exploration. NASA is assuming that future budgets will be increased to cover mission operations. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN!
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) has encountered too many obstacles to be successfully completed. This evaluation found the following neglected and unsolvable problems:
· The SLS is based on the Apollo Saturn V expendable heavy launch vehicle concept which is obsolete and has been found to be unaffordable. The launch of two SLS vehicles for a crew and cargo mission is expected to exceed a conservatively $4 billion (FY2011) launch cost evaluation. A feasibility NASA Mars mission study indicates that an austere human science and exploration mission ( http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/
· NASA has been disingenuous in their promotion of the safety of the Orion MPCV. The Orion MPCV or any of the commercial crew modules are known potential deathtraps.
· The SLS's Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) does not have sufficient payload return to earth capability to meet the need for commercial development of deep space resources. In order for the nation's 21st century deep space transportation system to be sustainable it must have commercial support.
· China will develop a space transportation system with commercial applications which will be based on a reusable space shuttle launch concept.
NASA's Space Launch System and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (SLS/MPCV) will fail because…mission costs are too high, the Orion MPCV crew module has an unsolvable water recovery issue, and there is no commercial or military application.
The following SLS/MPCV "operation" cost estimates were presented to the Congressional Budget Office to make the executive branch aware of the prohibitive cost to operate expendable heavy lift vehicles.
· The SLS development program scenario based on 13 flights over a 21 year period would have extreme difficulty maintaining the manufacturing labor force for such a low flight rate. However, it is the introduction of the cargo vehicle which forewarns that it will require two launches of these mammoth vehicles to accomplish one mission. The SLS is the same heavy lift launcher concept used in the Constellation program which was cancelled because: "The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources." Such is the case today.
· The following extremely conservative $4.2b estimate of annual operations cost for the SLS indicated it will cost more to manufacture the expendable vehicles, plan the mission, and conduct flight operation than NASA has budgeted for human exploration. NASA is assuming that future budgets will be increased to cover mission operations. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN!
Sent from my iPad
No comments:
Post a Comment