One Mars spacecraft, two Senators, and a cloud of questions
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
"One Mars spacecraft, two senators, and a cloud of questions"
Some nice bait on the hook you've got there. Well done.
Some nice bait on the hook you've got there. Well done.
Upvote
90
(91
/
-1)
I'm sure that Beck is genuinely passionate about planetary science, but keeping Senators happy is also good for business.
Upvote
46
(46
/
0)
Have any of these proposals considered a second relay sat at one (or both) of the Earth orbit trojan points to avoid blackouts when Mars is behind the Sun?
-edit Could be combined with trimeta's post below
-edit Could be combined with trimeta's post below
Last edited:
Upvote
38
(38
/
0)
The obvious way to square the circle of "$700 million is too much to build and launch a single Mars communication satellite" and "both Rocket Lab and Blue Origin have been gunning really hard for this contract" is "award both of them $350 million." Two communication satellites is better than one. Maybe even force them to agree on a protocol to let them operate as relays for each other. Or each company builds two satellites, for a total of four, to increase the odds that a satellite is where it needs to be (and also help the relay aspect).
Upvote
73
(73
/
0)
It's ironic that this may be a case where Blue Origin is actually justified in becoming “Sue Origin.”
Upvote
4
(8
/
-4)
This, like, totally makes sense. Better to cancel a $10B mission plan, rather than getting it done this decade. Instead, let's initiate a new $8B mission plan, that could be fulfilled no earlier than next decade at this point.
And it's nearly a certainty that this new $8B plan will have no cost overruns that might utterly dwarf the old $10B plan by the time all is said and done: after all, there's no precedent upon which to base any such apprehensions...
Upvote
60
(61
/
-1)
I remember reading Robert Gates' book Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, and being absolutely appalled at the level of congressional meddling that goes on in military contracts and procurement.
But honestly, considering the kind of blatant, brazen and unrepentant corruption we see in the White House every day now, this shit just seems kind of quaint and old-fashioned by comparison. It's like reading about a bunch of little old ladies running an unlicensed bingo game.
But honestly, considering the kind of blatant, brazen and unrepentant corruption we see in the White House every day now, this shit just seems kind of quaint and old-fashioned by comparison. It's like reading about a bunch of little old ladies running an unlicensed bingo game.
Upvote
70
(70
/
0)
The RFP already requires the MTN to use CCSDS (https://ccsds.org/) standards for interoperability. Relay wise, it would be DTN, for which there is a recently released Orange Book for BP7. There are some tricky aspects for licensing - historically, deep space missions have used X-band, and there’s no “space to space” allocation in X-band (like there is for S-band and Ka-band).
Technically, there are significant challenges with flying a spacecraft to one of those leader/follower positions (Sun Mars L4 or L5, essentially) (or to Sun Earth L4 or L5) and operating it as a relay. Historically, NASA has funded science missions, which carry relay capability as incidental (on MRO, the Electra Relay payload was an experiment). I’m not sure there’s compelling science to be done at SM L4. But with MTN, it’s “infrastructure first, science second” which is a change for NASA, but a good thing. (Because I am a deep space telecom guy, and better comms from deep space is, to me, an intrinsic good thing.)
Upvote
64
(64
/
0)
Budgets of almost any kind in this Country are getting so painful to watch being discussed or reviewed. Most of us don't want to know what's in a simple hotdog, but if looking at what gets passed for as a "budget" doesn't make you queasy, then nothing will.
Upvote
32
(33
/
-1)
If you think the original $10 billion was going to “get it done this decade” AND for $10 billion, you’re living in an alternate universe.
Upvote
21
(22
/
-1)
Whatever further delays and cost overruns you might imagine for the old plan with its $10B revised price tag (based on already-completed detailed design and analysis), you can confidently increase those by another whole-number multiple off of the new $8B baseline for the new plan. (Aside from which, even if this new push gets approved by the end of the year - which it very well might not be, if Congress gridlocks as per usual - then we'll have lost 2 years just in terms of getting nothing done, let alone all the time previously invested and now needing to be spent again for detailed design and analysis.)
Upvote
9
(12
/
-3)
Oh, Earth... "Missed it by that much." My mind immediately went to George O. Smith's Venus Equilateral stories. Gotta keep those vacuum tubes warm!
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
Recall that current communications are done with one endpoint as a 35m dish, provided all the power it wants, and we still only get a few Mbps out of the link. You could use lasers instead. The receiver for those tests was only a 5m observatory. And you’ll need duplicate hardware for passing that traffic in both directions.
Either way, this is going to be an enormously expensive satellite, and all it gets you is eliminating two weeks of blackout that comes every 26 months. It’s something to do eventually, but it’s really low on the list of needs, or even wants.
Upvote
20
(22
/
-2)
Upvote
-2
(1
/
-3)
So does Gold Monkey buy more Rocket Lab shares for the Oct announcement or that’s been factored in with the recent run-up in value ?
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)
Two remaining questions that I expected would be addressed in the article:
1) Was Rocket Lab wrong when they essentially claimed to be the only company eligible for the contract?
2) Is this kind of restriction on eligibility legal?
1) Was Rocket Lab wrong when they essentially claimed to be the only company eligible for the contract?
2) Is this kind of restriction on eligibility legal?
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)
I grew up on Sci Fi, love science still, yet can’t really be excited about Mars communication when we’re running eye watering deficits, largely due to the billionaires winning these contracts? Let’s not, ok? Business is nothing like normal and these have become weird vanity projects instead of an academic output from a highly advanced society.
Upvote
-16
(2
/
-18)
Considering:
Is this actually true?
Did all these other companies include a relay satellite as part of their MSR proposals? The paragraph only says they're eligible due to
Is this actually true?
Did all these other companies include a relay satellite as part of their MSR proposals? The paragraph only says they're eligible due to
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)
I think we would want to put a telescope at the Sun-Venus L4 or L5 to search for Near Earth Asteroids and Sun Grazer Comets.
And it could also act as a relay if you need it.
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
$10B wasn't realistic either, nor would it have been ready this or even next decade. The only way to fix it was to restart and rescope.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
Sure. The planets could align and leave you with a blackout once or twice a century.
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)
From the article;
”In March, the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation unanimously passed a new NASA Authorization Act that called for a reinstatement of Mars Sample Return.”
That is a positive decision imo in terms of increasing the scientific knowledge about Mars.
— In terms of the cost? I look at the bigger picture.
** The 2003 Iraq War totaled at least $1.474 trillion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War
** The cost of the current Iran war is between $25 to $50 billion depending on the source.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-war-cost-closer-50-billion-us-officials/
”In March, the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation unanimously passed a new NASA Authorization Act that called for a reinstatement of Mars Sample Return.”
That is a positive decision imo in terms of increasing the scientific knowledge about Mars.
— In terms of the cost? I look at the bigger picture.
** The 2003 Iraq War totaled at least $1.474 trillion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War
** The cost of the current Iran war is between $25 to $50 billion depending on the source.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-war-cost-closer-50-billion-us-officials/
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
And the pork marches on...
I hope the value-for-money and timeliness of the product is better than the moon-rocket programs pushed by the Southern senators (no doubt other region's senators were supporters too). Will the Mars orbiter be another Artemis, decades late and enormously over-budget???
I hope the value-for-money and timeliness of the product is better than the moon-rocket programs pushed by the Southern senators (no doubt other region's senators were supporters too). Will the Mars orbiter be another Artemis, decades late and enormously over-budget???
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
Upvote
-1
(3
/
-4)
The big players aren't involved and it has both up-front requirements and an actual deadline so it isn't an unlimited time/unlimited budget program. That doesn't mean it won't go over time and budget but it won't be by an order of magnitude.
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)