NASA finally acknowledges the elephant in the room with the SLS rocket

"You know, you're right, the flight rate—three years is a long time."

See full article...

 

[Major Major]

Killing SLS without funding a credible replacement was a bad idea. The US should have superheavy lift. Just not this one.

To do what? Taking that as a maxim without any real defined mission for it is a large part of why we’ve been in this shit show for the last 15+ years.

 

[ISUAero1986]

All of this has been known for a long time and the initial use of Shuttle hardware set this up for disaster along with NaSA's over the top risk adverse nature, lack of leadership, decisions by committee and endless analysis and congressional/political BS. SLS is indeed dead hardware walking and probably the same goes for Orion, an incredibly expensive 20 years in the making going nowhere capsule.

 

[Anton Longshot]

Literally every single excuse I read in the article stinks.
How do these people live with themselves?

 

[Rambie]

So, in a semi-sarcastic question... how many supporters does this bloated whale of a rocket still have in Congress, without Shelby's influence?

As many as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Bechtel can buy.

 

[blackhawk887]

To do what? Taking that as a maxim without any real defined mission for it is a large part of why we’ve been in this shit show for the last 15+ years.

Constellation had a well-defined lunar surface landing mission. The later lack of purpose was a result (not a cause) of the massive launch vehicle budget overruns and schedule delays.

 

[Wickwick]

Saturn V cost $68 billion (2020 dollars) before its first flight, and it wouldn't have been any cheaper the second time around.

I only referenced Saturn for its variable densities of propellants. That's the "derivative" part. None of the hardware for Apollo was available in 2005 regardless. The various proposals to upsize Atlas would have made more sense than a hydrolox sustainer core with an upper stage and solids. There were plenty of hydrocarbon demonstration engine cores floating around AFRL at the time that could have been put to work. Hell, NASA could have just put 12 RD-180's on the bottom of a rocket and had similar liftoff thrust than a Saturn V. The structural elements could have been very similar after that.

(this is 2005, RD-180's were not political hot potatoes for another decade).

 

[BCGeiger]

M

Killing SLS without funding a credible replacement was a bad idea. The US should have superheavy lift. Just not this one.

The purpose of the SLS was never to fly, as others have pointed out it was to keep money going to connected contractors. You cannot design a rocket without knowing the mission. At the time NASA, Congress, Academics, the Public were all arguing about where to go. The Moon? Mars? An Asteroid? Nobody could decide where they wanted to go. As such the SLS was designed in the dark. It’s not optimal for anything. If Obama had been able to kill this monstrosity when he wanted to, then when there had been some consensus on WHERE to go they could have designed a rocket for that mission. We would still be where we are now, but with a far better system designed for the mission at hand. It would have cost far less, would have been flying far quicker, and would be for more reliable than the SLS.

 

[Ed1024]

I was hoping for a cool rocket launch to temporarily distract me from the hot mess that is the state of things so far in 2026, but I guess that was magical thinking.

Yes, a cool rocket launch would have been best but a close second would be the thing blowing up in the middle of the night with no-one nearby and taking the pad with it, hopefully consigning the program to history.

 

[Major Major]

Constellation had a well-defined lunar surface landing mission. The later lack of purpose was a result (not a cause) of the massive launch vehicle budget overruns and schedule delays.

A plainly unaffordable and unrealistic one that was all post hoc rationalization to give Ares something to do. Sound familiar?

Orion is a direct hold over from that program, SLS is Ares V in a trench coat, and the less said about that pogo stick Ares I the better.

 

[DragonDeborn]

Literally every single excuse I read in the article stinks.
How do these people live with themselves?

They live very well with themselves, having held on to their jobs for all this time, since the SLS keeps them employed. They also sleep well at night, thank you very much. (50% sarcasm)

 

[GlockenspielHero]

the SLS rocket is dead hardware walking

Wouldn't that be more like "The SLS rocket is dead hardware rolling very slowly back to the VAB"

 

[SunnyD]

Saturn-V used LH2 for its second and third stages 60 years ago, and those were very large stages. Shuttle used LH2 as its main propellant for 30 years, also a large rocket. Atlas and Delta second stages used LH2 for decades. The Vulcan second stage uses LH2. Ariane-5 used and Ariane-6 still uses LH2. Even the SLS second stage uses LH2!

So what's the deal, NASA? Although this is rocket science, it is not NEW rocket science. We have literally over half a century of experience fueling rockets with LH2. These leaks are inexcusable. They should have been addressed after Artemis-1. From what I understand, NASA and Boeing made NO hardware changes after Artemis-1. They only made procedural changes to the fueling process, such as lower LH2 flow rates, pausing to to let the seals warm up and reseat, etc.

Sad.

The problem was that in the lag between programs expertise was lost. There's a couple documentaries on this, where some of the lessons learned for manufacturing techniques from the SaturnV program were simply undocumented and lost as people retired/died/moved on when it came to overcoming certain problems with the engines. For a lot of these (US) programs they were using old inventory that already existed, and that was the problem. Once they're gone, nobody was around that had the skills to make new ones.

 

[sporkinum]

I am hoping when the current nightmare is done that SpaceX is taken over by sober minds, and that Musk is deported to South Africa.

 

[Thereitis]

Sometimes it just sucks to be right.

I remember joking about the Senate Launch System a decade ago and hoping against hope it would get the axe. Then hoping in recent years I (and countless other skeptics) were wrong and it turn into something at least semi-reliable and useful. Nope. Worst of both worlds.

I've always liked to call it the Shelby Launch System. In years past, I believe that Eric has pointed out how Shelby pushed for the program simply because of the jobs it provided for his state. Cost and schedule overruns are a bonus when that is your goal.

 

[fenris_uy]

Killing SLS without funding a credible replacement was a bad idea. The US should have superheavy lift. Just not this one.

Obama asked for funding for a new heavy lift following the Augustine panel proposals.

In developing this new vehicle, we will not only look at revising or modifying older models; we want to look at new designs, new materials, new technologies that will transform not just where we can go but what we can do when we get there.

The congress killed that and forced SLS by law.

 

[Dadlyedly]

I would have preferred the SunnyD Launcher over the SLS.

And it would be pretty close to the right color!

 

[Frodo Douchebaggins]

How unfortunate. SLS could’ve been something had there been better control on flight cadence and cost. I liked the idea and look of the rocket, but it is what it is. Money wasted. I’ll go buy the LEGO set and that’ll be that.

Buy a 3d printed poop emoji on Etsy and you'll have a much cheaper representation of the same concept.

 

[Speaking from Europe...]

Literally every single excuse I read in the article stinks.
How do these people live with themselves?

Hint: See the old Donald Duck cartoons of Scrooge McDuck diving into money and gold coins...

 

[Frodo Douchebaggins]

I've always liked to call it the Shelby Launch System. In years past, I believe that Eric has pointed out how Shelby pushed for the program simply because of the jobs it provided for his state. Cost and schedule overruns are a bonus when that is your goal.

I've said for years it would have been more cost effective to pay all the non-management individuals working on the program the same amount directly to do literally nothing, and there'd likely be enough left over to fund a competently-run program to build a launcher with the same capabilities

 

[NopeNopeNope]

The Chinese lunar program will ironically be the best hope for Nasa turning things around.

Maybe they'd consider some reverse espionage and plant some better solutions in NASA (and Congress, of course).

 

[nomoroto]

I only referenced Saturn for its variable densities of propellants. That's the "derivative" part. None of the hardware for Apollo was available in 2005 regardless. ....

NASA considered the improved F-1B for the SLS under their Advanced Booster Competition as recently as ~12 years ago. NASA (Marshall SFC) even did testing on an original F-1 they retrieved from the Smithsonian. The F-1B engine was intended to produce 1,800,000 lbf (8.0 MN) of thrust at sea level.

(edit to add) The RS-25 (SSME) was largely based on Rocketdyne's HG-3 engine, itself an improved J-2 engine from the Saturn V S-II & S-IVB stages.

 

[H2O Rip]

The SLS is truly a monument befitting of our times: Towering tall, vain, wasteful, and hopefully a lesson to later generations.

...and orange.

Is questionably functional, congress insanely keeps supporting it, it clearly siphons money from better uses, and leaks gas. Unpleasant yet poetically allegorical

 

[theOGpetergregory]

he said as part of a longer post about the test on social media.

I'm semi-amused at the vagueness of referring to a post on "social media" to avoid having to delve into the whole spacex buying X thing.

I'm imagining the eyebrows that would be raised if Isaacman had posted his comments on blue origin's website and it was referred to with similar vagueness as being "on a website."

 

[Dadlyedly]

Wait, if you know that ahead of time then I would think that a relatively(relatively) cheap change to the build/launch procedure is to proof test(FWR) when the last bolt is turned? It seems cheaper than a bunch of failed tests and launches.

What? You mean don't ship it, stack it with the other hardware in the VAB, roll it out to the launch pad, hook the thing up and then check to see if it works?

Can we do that?

/S

 

[Wickwick]

A plainly unaffordable and unrealistic one that was all post hoc rationalization to give Ares something to do. Sound familiar?

Orion is a direct hold over from that program, SLS is Ares V in a trench coat, and the less said about that pogo stick Ares I the better.

Since you mentioned Ares I, I have an excuse to mention that the displays were going to have to strobe in-phase with the expected vibrations or else none of the passengers would have been able to read anything.

It's a cool solution to a problem that should never, ever be allowed to exist.

 

[Wickwick]

The problem was that in the lag between programs expertise was lost. There's a couple documentaries on this, where some of the lessons learned for manufacturing techniques from the SaturnV program were simply undocumented and lost as people retired/died/moved on when it came to overcoming certain problems with the engines. For a lot of these (US) programs they were using old inventory that already existed, and that was the problem. Once they're gone, nobody was around that had the skills to make new ones.

This is an overblown point. Certainly, there are processing details that were lost, but most of those were very specific to a given piece of equipment using stock from a given supplier. The rocket science (engineering) was well captured and is taught to tens of thousands of students every year. It's almost better to forget these detailed points of expertise or else they can turn into a bit of Cargo Cult Science behavior. It's better to work through them again as needed when new tooling and materials might bump into the same problem.

 

[NCARalph]

SLS is doing exactly what it was intended to do, spread a layer of pork over the supporting senators' states. The program continues to be a total success. What's not to like?

 

[Major Major]

Since you mentioned Ares I, I have an excuse to mention that the displays were going to have to strobe in-phase with the expected vibrations or else none of the passengers would have been able to read anything.

It's a cool solution to a problem that should never, ever be allowed to exist.

Yeah, the likely only positive legacy of that thing is it never got far enough along to kill anyone.

 

[Edzila]

The SLS program's extremely low launch cadence means each flight is treated as experimental, even years after its debut. Without more frequent launches, NASA can't develop the operational experience and reliability that come from routine operations. At the current pace—roughly one launch every few years—it will struggle to ever achieve that level of proficiency.

 

[Urist]

Your options for getting to the Moon in 2026:

Incredibly expensive modern art piece that is really a collage of cutting edge tech from the 1980's.

Shiny compensation project that's awkwardly trying to block the view of the owner's CSAM factory.

Amazon Prime delivery.

... well at least China has a functioning space program (just don't ask why that neighborhood is now a smoking crater)

 

[dougravens]

It’s like the tried to reinvent the rocket. Instead of just using what they already had, and just making it better. Whole program is a joke.

 

[Infidel753]

I am hoping when the current nightmare is done that SpaceX is taken over by sober minds, and that Musk is deported to South Africa.

They could try deporting him to Mars.....

 

[dougravens]

It’s like the tried to reinvent the rocket. Instead of just using what they already had, and just making it better. Whole program is a joke. It’s a showcase for government waste

 

[jvanaken]

Saturn-V used LH2 for its second and third stages 60 years ago, and those were very large stages. Shuttle used LH2 as its main propellant for 30 years, also a large rocket. Atlas and Delta second stages used LH2 for decades. The Vulcan second stage uses LH2. Ariane-5 used and Ariane-6 still uses LH2. Even the SLS second stage uses LH2!

So what's the deal, NASA? Although this is rocket science, it is not NEW rocket science. We have literally over half a century of experience fueling rockets with LH2. These leaks are inexcusable. They should have been addressed after Artemis-1. From what I understand, NASA and Boeing made NO hardware changes after Artemis-1. They only made procedural changes to the fueling process, such as lower LH2 flow rates, pausing to to let the seals warm up and reseat, etc.

Sad.

This. Exactly this. We used to be able to handle hydrogen, and now we can't? Why?

Eric, if there's a follow-up article, I hope it addresses this question specifically.

 

[Oldmanalex]

I have worked in very large corporations in R&D, and I know from experience when we were going to wrestle with "The moose on the table" it actually meant that "The elephants under the carpet" were smelling too bad to ignore any more. So baby steps.

 

[Wickwick]

This. Exactly this. We used to be able to handle hydrogen, and now we can't? Why?

Eric, if there's a follow-up article, I hope it addresses this question specifically.

The Shuttle program averaged about one delay per launch because of propellant transfer issues and it launched 135 times in 30 years. So even with a lot more practice, NASA has always had trouble with these volumes of liquid hydrogen.

 

[miker289]

"Dead hardware walking ..." I love it.

A previous post compared the SLS tanking to hydrogen/oxygen upper stages like Delta III/Delta IV, Centaur, and SLS's own upper stage, which is really a version of the Delta IV 5M upper stage. Those typically use smaller umbilicals. Probably a better comparison to getting propellant into the SLS first stage would be the Delta IV first stage. Both O2/H2. Both had "dog houses" on the side of the vehicle. Delta IV had it's issues with leaks, but they figured it out. Point is, some of those same people are still around. And some of them work on SLS. The expertise is there, somewhere.

Is someone not listening to the engineers?

 

[firedeuce]

But guys hydrogen is real tiny, now give us $30 billion.

 

[DeeplyUnconcerned]

Orion can be launched by New Glenn and moved via tug to the Moon. However Blue Origin keeps flirting with building its own crewed spacecraft, so the marriage between the two has never occurred. But the bottom line is that I do not believe SLS and Orion are tied to the hip beyond Artemis III.

This kind of insight is Ars space reporting at its best.