Space Launch System

The Space Launch System (SLS) is an American Space Shuttle-derived super heavy-lift expendable launch vehicle, which has been under development by NASA in the United States since its announcement in 2011. It has been planned to become the primary launch vehicle of NASA's deep space exploration plans throughout the 2010s,[22][23] including the planned crewed lunar flights of the Artemis program and a possible follow-on human mission to Mars.[24][25][26] The SLS program has replaced the Constellation program's Ares V launch vehicle program of 2005, which never left the development phase. SLS is intended to replace the retired Space Shuttle as NASA's flagship vehicle. Following the cancellation of the Constellation program, the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 envisioned a single launch vehicle usable for both crew and cargo. In 2013, SLS was projected to possibly be the most capable super-heavy lift vehicle ever built.[27][28]

This article is about the NASA rocket family. For the similarly-named US Air Force project of the 1960s, see Space Launching System. For Turkey's UFS satellite launcher, see Space Launch System (Turkey).

Space Launch System
An artist's rendering of SLS Block 1 with Orion spacecraft on the pad before launch.
FunctionSuper heavy-lift launch vehicle
Country of originUnited States
Project costUS$18.6 billion (as of 2020)
[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]
Cost per launchOver US$2 billion excluding development (estimate)[note 1][11][12]
Cost per yearUS$2.5 billion for 2020[1]
Size
Height111.25 m (365.0 ft), Block 2 Cargo
Diameter8.4 m (28 ft), core stage
Stages2
Capacity
Payload to LEO
Mass
  • Block 1: 95,000 kg (209,000 lb) [13]
  • Block 2: 130,000 kg (290,000 lb) [14]
Payload to trans-lunar injection
Mass
  • Block 1: > 59,500 lb (27,000 kg) [15][16]
  • Block 1B Crew: 83,700 lb (38,000 kg)
  • Block 1B Cargo: 92,500 lb (42,000 kg)
  • Block 2 Crew: > 94,700 lb (43,000 kg)
  • Block 2 Cargo: > 101,400 lb (46,000 kg)
Launch history
StatusFirst launch NET November 2021 [17]
Launch sitesKennedy Space Center, LC-39B
First flightArtemis 1
Notable payloadsOrion
Boosters (Block 1, 1B)
No. boosters2 five-segment Solid Rocket Boosters
Length177 ft (54 m) [18]
Gross mass1,600,000 lb (730,000 kg) [18]
Thrust14,600 kN (3,280,000 lbf) sea level
16,000 kN (3,600,000 lbf) vacuum[19]
Total thrust29,200 kN (6,560,000 lbf) sea level
32,000 kN (7,200,000 lbf) vacuum [19]
Specific impulse269 s (2.64 km/s)
Burn time126 seconds
FuelPBAN, APCP
First stage (Block 1, 1B, 2) – Core stage
Length65 m (212 ft) [20]
Diameter8.4 m (27.6 ft)
Empty mass85,270 kg (187,990 lb)
Gross mass979,452 kg (2,159,322 lb)
Engines4 RS-25D/E [21]
Thrust7,440 kN (1,670,000 lbf)
Specific impulse363 s (3.56 km/s) (sea level)
452 s (4.43 km/s) (vacuum)
Burn time480 seconds
FuelLH2 / LOX
Second stage (Block 1) – ICPS
Length13.7 m (45 ft)
Diameter5 m (16 ft)
Empty mass3,490 kg (7,690 lb)
Gross mass30,710 kg (67,700 lb)
Engines1 RL10B-2
Thrust110.1 kN (24,800 lbf)
Specific impulse462 s (4.53 km/s)
Burn time1125 seconds
FuelLH2 / LOX
Second stage (Block 1B, Block 2) – Exploration Upper Stage
Length17.6 m (58 ft)
Diameter8.4 m (28 ft)
Engines4 RL10
Thrust440 kN (99,000 lbf)
FuelLH2 / LOX

The initial variant of SLS, Block 1, was required by the U.S. Congress to lift a payload of 70 t (69 long tons; 77 short tons)[29] to low Earth orbit (LEO), but it was later planned to exceed that requirement with a rated payload capacity of 95 t (93 long tons; 105 short tons).[30] As of 22 December 2019, this variant is planned to launch Artemis 1, Artemis 2, Artemis 3, and Europa Clipper.[31] The later Block 1B is intended to debut the Exploration Upper Stage and launch the notional Artemis 4 through Artemis 7.[32] Block 2 is planned to replace the initial Shuttle-derived boosters with advanced boosters and would have a LEO capability of more than 130 t (130 long tons; 140 short tons), again as required by Congress.[29] Block 2 is intended to enable crewed launches to Mars.[26] As of 2018 SLS was planned to have the world's highest-ever total LEO payload capability,[33][34] but not the world's highest ever injection mass.[35][36][37] The SLS is planned to launch the Orion spacecraft and use the ground operations and launch facilities at NASA's iconic Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The rocket will use the Launch Complex 39B at the Kennedy Space Center. The rocket's first launch is currently scheduled for November 2021.

Vehicle description

The SLS is a Space Shuttle-derived launch vehicle, with the first stage of the rocket being powered by one central core stage and two outboard boosters. The upper stage is being developed from the Block 1 variant to a Block 2 variant, the Exploration Upper Stage.

Core stage

The Space Launch System's core stage contains the Main Propulsion System (MPS) of the rocket. It is 65 metres (212 ft) long by 8.4 metres (27.6 ft) in diameter and fuels the four RS-25 rocket engines at its base.[20][21][38] The core stage is structurally and visually similar to the Space Shuttle external tank,[27][39] containing the liquid hydrogen fuel and liquid oxygen oxidizer. Initial flights are planned to use modified RS-25D engines left over from the Space Shuttle program.[40] However, Space Shuttle main engines are reusable, so later flights are planned to switch to a different version of the engine not designed for reuse, as it will be cheaper.[41]

The core stage is fabricated at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility[42] and is common across all currently planned evolutions of the SLS to avoid the need for redesigns to meet varying requirements.[38][43][44][45]

Block 1 and 1B boosters

Blocks 1 and 1B of the SLS are planned to use two five-segment Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs). These new SRBs are derived from the four-segment Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, with the addition of a center booster segment, new avionics, and lighter insulation.[46] The five-segment SRBs provide approximately 25% more total impulse than the Shuttle SRB, but will no longer be recovered after use.[47][48]

Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension program

The stock of SLS boosters is limited by the number of casings left over from the Shuttle program, since they modify flown boosters to add an additional segment. There are enough to last through eight flights of the SLS, but a replacement will be required for further flights.[49] On 2 March 2019, the Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) program was announced. This program will use new solid rocket boosters built by Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems for further SLS flights. These boosters would be derived from the composite-casing SRBs in development for the OmegA launch vehicle, and are projected to increase Block 1B's payload to TLI by 3–4 tonnes, which is still 1 ton below the payload capacity of Block 2.[50]

ICPS - Block 1

The Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) is planned to fly on Artemis 1. It is a stretched and human rated Delta IV 5 metres (16 ft) Delta Cryogenic Second Stage (DCSS) powered by a single RL10B-2.[51][52] Block 1 is intended to be capable of lifting 95 tonnes to LEO in this configuration if the ICPS is considered part of the payload.[13] Artemis 1 is to be launched into an initial 1,800 by −93 kilometres (1,118 by −58 mi) suborbital trajectory to ensure safe disposal of the core stage. ICPS will then perform an orbital insertion burn at apogee and a subsequent translunar injection burn to send Orion towards the moon.[53] The ICPS for Artemis 1 was delivered by ULA to NASA about July 2017,[54] and was housed at Kennedy Space Centre as of November 2018.[55] As of February 2020, ICPS (not EUS) is planned for Artemis 1, 2, and 3.[56] ICPS will now be human-rated for the crewed Artemis-2 flight.[56]

EUS - Block 1B and 2

The Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) is planned to fly on Artemis 4. Similar to the S-IVB, the EUS will complete the SLS ascent phase and then re-ignite to send its payload to destinations beyond low-Earth orbit.[57] It is expected to be used by Block 1B and Block 2, share the core stage diameter of 8.4 meters, and be powered by four RL10 engines.[58]

Payload carrying capacity
See also: Super heavy-lift launch vehicle § Comparison
SLS variant Payload mass to...
Low Earth orbit (LEO) Trans-lunar injection (TLI) Heliocentric orbit (HCO)
Block 1 95 t (93 long tons; 105 short tons)[13] 26 t (26 long tons; 29 short tons)[13]
Block 1B 105 t (103 long tons; 116 short tons)[59] 40 t [60]
Block 2 130 t (130 long tons; 140 short tons) [14] 45 t [60] 45 t (44 long tons; 50 short tons) [13]

Resilience

The SLS is planned to have the ability to tolerate a minimum of 13 tanking cycles due to launch scrubs and other launch delays before launch. The assembled rocket is to be able to remain at the launch pad for at least 180 days and can remain in a stacked configuration for at least 200 days.[61]

Development history
Planned evolution of the Space Launch System, 2018 (not shown is a Block 1 Cargo that Europa Clipper may launch on)

Program history

During the joint Senate-NASA presentation in September 2011, it was stated that the SLS program had a projected development cost of US$18 billion through 2017, with US$10 billion for the SLS rocket, US$6 billion for the Orion spacecraft and US$2 billion for upgrades to the launch pad and other facilities at Kennedy Space Center.[62][63] These costs and schedule were considered optimistic in an independent 2011 cost assessment report by Booz Allen Hamilton for NASA.[64]

An internal 2011 NASA document estimated the cost of the program through 2025 to total at least $41 billion for four 95-tonne launches (1 uncrewed, 3 crewed),[65][66] with the 130-tonne version ready no earlier than 2030.[67]

The Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) estimated unit costs for Block 0 at US$1.6 billion and Block 1 at US$1.86 billion in 2010.[68] However, since these estimates were made the Block 0 SLS vehicle was dropped in late 2011, and the design was not completed.[69]

In September 2012, an SLS deputy project manager stated that US$500 million per launch is a reasonable target cost for SLS.[70]

In 2013, the Space Review estimated the cost per launch at US$5 billion, depending on the rate of launches.[71][72] NASA announced in 2013 that the European Space Agency (ESA) will build the Orion service module.[73]

In 2011, NASA announced an "Advanced Booster Competition", to be decided in 2015, which would select whose boosters would be used for Block 2 of the SLS.[74][21][75]

Several companies proposed boosters for this competition:

  • Aerojet, in partnership with Teledyne Brown, offered a booster powered by three new AJ1E6 LOX/RP-1 oxidizer-rich staged combustion engines, each producing 4,900 kN (1,100,000 lbf) thrust using a single turbopump to supply dual combustion chambers.[76] On 14 February 2013, Aerojet was awarded a US$23.3 million, 30-month contract to build a 2,400 kN (550,000 lbf) main injector and thrust chamber.[77]
  • Alliant Techsystems (ATK) proposed an advanced SRB nicknamed "Dark Knight", which would switch to a lighter composite case, use a more energetic propellant, and reduce the number of segments from five to four.[78]

In 2013, the manager of NASA's SLS advanced development office indicated that all three approaches were viable.[80]

However, this competition was planned for a development plan in which Block 1A would be followed by Block 2A, with upgraded boosters. NASA canceled Block 1A and the planned competition in April 2014.[81][82] Due to this cancellation, it was reported in February 2015 that SLS is expected to fly with the original five-segment SRB until at least the late 2020s. This decision was vindicated as a later study found that the advanced booster would have resulted in unsuitably high acceleration.[83] The overly powerful booster would need modifications to Launch Pad 39B (LC-39B), its flame trench, and Mobile Launcher, which are being evaluated.[81]

In August 2014, as the SLS program passed its Key Decision Point C review and entered full development, costs from February 2014 until its planned launch in September 2018 were estimated at US$7.021 billion.[84] Ground systems modifications and construction would require an additional US$1.8 billion over the same time period.[85]

In October 2018, NASA's inspector general reported that the Boeing core stage contract had made up 40% of the US$11.9 billion spent on SLS as of August 2018. By 2021, core stages were expected to have cost a total of US$8.9 billion, which is twice the initially planned amount.[86]

In December 2018, NASA estimated that yearly budgets for SLS will range from US$2.1 to US$2.3 billion between 2019 and 2023.[87]

In March 2019, the Trump Administration released its Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request for NASA. This budget did not include any money for the Block 1B and Block 2 variants of SLS. It was therefore uncertain whether these future variants of SLS will be developed, but congressional action restored this funding in the passed budget.[88] Several launches previously planned for the SLS Block 1B are now expected to fly on commercial launcher vehicles such as Falcon Heavy, New Glenn, OmegA, and Vulcan.[89] However, the request for a budget increase of US$1.6 billion towards SLS, Orion, and crewed landers along with the launch manifest seem to indicate support of the development of Block 1B, debuting Artemis 3. The Block 1B will be used mainly for co-manifested crew transfers and logistical needs rather than constructing the Gateway. An uncrewed Block 1B is planned to launch the Lunar Surface Asset in 2028, the first lunar outpost of the Artemis program. Block 2 development will most likely start in the late 2020s after NASA is regularly visiting the lunar surface and shifts focus towards Mars.[90]

Blue Origin submitted a proposal to replace the Exploration Upper Stage with an alternative to be designed and fabricated by the company, but it was rejected by NASA in November 2019 on multiple grounds. These included lower performance compared to the existing EUS design, unsuitability of the proposal to current ground infrastructure, and unacceptable acceleration in regards to Orion components.[91]

Funding history

For fiscal years 2011 through 2020, the SLS program had expended funding totaling US$18.648 billion in nominal dollars. This is equivalent to US$20.314 billion in 2020 dollars using the NASA New Start Inflation Indices.[92]

For fiscal year 2021, US$2.257 billion.[1]

Fiscal Year Funding (nominal, in millions) Funding (In US$2020, in millions)[92] Status
2011 US$1,536.1 US$1,819.9 Actual[9]
(Formal SLS Program reporting excludes the Fiscal 2011 budget.)[93]
2012 US$1,497.5 US$1,755.5 Actual[8]
2013 US$1,414.9 US$1,634.1 Actual[7]
2014 US$1,600.0 US$1,812.3 Actual[6]
2015 US$1,678.6 US$1,863.8 Actual[5]
2016 US$1,971.9 US$2,159.6 Actual[4]
2017 US$2,127.1 US$2,286.8 Actual[3]
2018 US$2,150.0 US$2,256.6 Actual[2]
2019 US$2,144.0 US$2,199.9 Actual[1]
2020 US$2,525.8 US$2,525.8 Enacted[1]
2021 US$2,585.9 US$2,585.9 Enacted
2011–2020 Total: US$18,648 M Total: US$20,314 M

On top of this, the costs to assemble, integrate, prepare and launch the SLS and its payloads are funded separately under Exploration Ground Systems,[94] currently about US$600 million[95] per year.

Excluded from the above SLS costs are:

  • Costs of payloads for the SLS (such as Orion crew capsule)
  • Costs of the predecessor Ares V / Cargo Launch Vehicle (funded from 2008 to 2010)[96]
  • Costs for the Ares I / Crew Launch Vehicle (funded from 2006 to 2010, a total of US$4.8 billion[96][97] in development that included the 5-segment Solid Rocket Boosters that will be used on the SLS)

Included in the above SLS costs are:

  • Costs of the interim Upper Stage for the SLS, the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) for SLS, which includes a US$412 million contract [98]
  • Costs of the future Upper Stage for the SLS, the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) (funded at US$85 million in 2016,[99] US$300 million in 2017,[100] US$300 million in 2018,[101] and US$150 million in 2019 [102])

Per launch costs

The per launch costs for SLS have varied widely, partly due to uncertainty over how much the program will expend during development and testing before the operational launches begin, and partly due to various agencies using differing cost measures (for example, a marginal cost per one additional launch, which ignores development and annual recurring fixed costs vs. total cost per launch, including recurring costs but excluding development); but also based on differing purposes for which the cost estimates were developed.

There are no official NASA estimates for how much SLS will cost per launch, nor for the SLS program annual recurring costs once operational. Cost per launch is not a straightforward figure to estimate as it depends heavily on how many launches occur per year.[10] For example, similarly, the Space Shuttle was estimated (in 2012 dollars) to cost US$576 million per launch had it been able to achieve 7 launches per year, while the marginal cost of adding a single additional launch in a given year was estimated to be less than half of that, at just US$252 million of marginal cost. However, at the rate that it actually flew, the cost in the end was US$1.64 billion per Space Shuttle launch, including development.[103]:III−490

NASA associate administrator William H. Gerstenmaier said in 2017 that there would be no official per flight cost estimates of any variety provided by NASA for SLS.[104] Other bodies, such as the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the NASA Office of Inspector General, the Senate Appropriations Committee, and the White House Office of Management and Budget have put out cost per launch figures, however.

Several internal NASA programs and project concept study reports have released proposed budgets that include future SLS launches. For example, a concept study report for a space telescope was advised by NASA HQ in 2019 to budget US$500 million for an SLS launch in 2035 .[105] Another study in 2019 also proposing a space telescope assumed a budget for their launch of US$650 million in current day dollars, or US$925 million for when the launch would occur, which is also in the "mid-2030s".[106]

Europa Clipper is a NASA scientific mission that was required by Congress to launch on the SLS. Oversight bodies both internal and external to NASA disagreed with this requirement. First, NASA's Inspector General office published a report in May 2019[107][108] that stated Europa Clipper would need to give up US$876 million for the "marginal cost" of its SLS launch. Then, in an addendum to the letter published in August 2019, increased the estimate and stated that switching to a commercial rocket would actually save over US$1 billion. (although this savings may have included a portion of costs related to the delay in launch schedule; a commercial alternative could launch sooner than SLS) A JCL (Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level) analysis cited in that letter put the cost savings at US$700 million, with SLS at US$1.05 billion per launch and the commercial alternative at US$350 million.[109][110]

Finally, a letter from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to the Senate Appropriations Committee in October 2019 revealed that SLS's total cost to the taxpayer was estimated at "over US$2 billion" per launch after development is complete (program development has cost US$20 billion to date in 2020 dollars).[11] The letter urged Congress to remove this requirement, in agreement with the NASA Inspector General, adding that using a commercial launch vehicle for Europa Clipper instead of SLS would save US$1.5 billion overall. NASA did not deny this US$2 billion cost of launch and an agency spokesperson stated it "is working to bring down the cost of a single SLS launch in a given year as the agency continues negotiations with Boeing on the long-term production contract and efforts to finalize contracts and costs for other elements of the rocket".[10] This OMB figure is dependant on the rate of construction, so building more SLS rockets faster could decrease the per-unit cost.[10] For example, Exploration Ground Systems – whose only role is to support, assemble, integrate, and launch SLS – has separately budgeted fixed costs of US$600 million per year on facilities, spread across however many rockets launch that year.[95] Then NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine shared informally that he disagrees with the US$2 billion figure since the marginal cost of an SLS launch should decrease after the first few, and is expected to end up around US$800 million to US$900 million, although contract negotiations were only just beginning for those later cores.[111]

On 1 May 2020, NASA awarded a contract extension to Aerojet Rocketdyne to manufacture 18 additional RS-25 engines with associated services for US$1.79 billion, bringing the total RS-25 contract value to almost US$3.5 billion.[112]

Constellation

From 2009 to 2011, three full-duration static fire tests of five-segment SRBs were conducted under the Constellation Program, including tests at low and high core temperatures, to validate performance at extreme temperatures.[113][114][115] The 5-segment SRB would be carried over to SLS.[81]

Early SLS
The Artemis 1 SLS core stage being loaded onto the Pegasus barge.
The Green Run testing will be the first top-to-bottom integrated testing of the stage's systems prior to its maiden flight.

During the early development of the SLS a number of configurations were considered, including a Block 0 variant with three main engines,[38] a Block 1A variant with upgraded boosters instead of the improved second stage,[38] and a Block 2 with five main engines and the Earth Departure Stage, with up to three J-2X engines.[45] In February 2015, it was determined that these concepts would exceed the congressionally mandated Block 1 and Block 1B baseline payloads.[81]

On 14 September 2011, NASA announced the new launch system,[116] which is intended to take the agency's astronauts farther into space than ever before and provide the cornerstone for future U.S. human space exploration efforts in combination with the Orion spacecraft.[117][118][119]

On 31 July 2013, the SLS passed the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The review included not only the rocket and boosters but also ground support and logistical arrangements.[120] On 7 August 2014, the SLS Block 1 passed a milestone known as Key Decision Point C and entered full-scale development, with an estimated launch date of November 2018.[84][121]

In 2013, NASA and Boeing analyzed the performance of several EUS engine options. The analysis was based on a second-stage usable propellant load of 105 metric tons, and compared stages with four RL10 engines, two RL60 engines, or one J-2X engine.[122]

In 2014, NASA also considered using the European Vinci instead of the RL10. The Vinci offers the same specific impulse but with 64% greater thrust, which would allow for the same performance at lower cost.[123][124]

Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems has completed full-duration static fire tests of the five-segment SRBs. Qualification Motor 1 (QM-1) was tested on 10 March 2015.[125] Qualification Motor 2 (QM-2) was successfully tested on 28 June 2016.

SLS History

As of 2020, three SLS versions are planned: Block 1, Block 1B, and Block 2. Each will use the same core stage with four main engines, but Block 1B will feature the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS), and Block 2 will combine the EUS with upgraded boosters.[29][59][126]

In mid-November 2014, construction of the first core stage hardware began using a new welding system in the South Vertical Assembly Building at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility.[127] Between 2015 and 2017, NASA test fired RS-25 engines in preparation for use on SLS.[41]

As of late 2015, the SLS program was stated to have a 70% confidence level for the first crewed Orion flight by 2023,[128][129][130] and as of 2020, NASA is continuing to project 2023.[131] While the SLS/Orion combination can do a lunar flyby mission, as is planned for Artemis 2 in 2023,[131] the SLS/Orion has insufficient capacity to get the heavy Orion capsule into low lunar orbit and return to Earth.[132]

A test article build for the core stage began on 5 January 2016 and was expected to be completed in late January 2016. Once completed the test article was to be sent to ensure structural integrity at Marshall Space Flight Center. A structural test article of the ICPS was delivered in 2015.[133] the core stage for Artemis 1 completed assembly in November 2019.

The first core stage left Michoud for comprehensive testing at Stennis in January 2020.[134] The static firing test program at Stennis Space Center, known as the Green Run, will operate all the core stage systems simultaneously for the first time.[135][136] Test 7 (of 8), the wet dress rehearsal, was carried out in December 2020 and the hot fire (test 8) took place on 16 January 2021, but shut down earlier than expected,[137] about 67 seconds in total rather than the desired eight minutes. The reason for the early shutdown was later reported to be because of conservative test commit criteria on the thrust vector control system, specific only for ground testing and not for flight. If this scenario occurred during a flight, the rocket would have continued to fly normally. There was no sign of damage to the core stage or the engines, contrary to initial concerns.[138]

The intended uncrewed first flight of SLS has slipped multiple times: originally from late 2016 [139][140][141] to October 2017,[142] then to November 2018,[143] then to 2019,[144] then to June 2020,[145] then to April 2021,[146] and most recently to November 2021.[17]

Criticism
NASA moved out US$889 million of costs relating to SLS boosters, but did not update the SLS budget to match, a March 2020 Inspector General report found. This kept the budget overrun to 15% by FY 2019.[147]:22 At 30%, NASA would have to notify Congress and stop funding unless Congress reapproves and provides additional funding.[147]:21–23 The Inspector General report found that were it not for this "masking" of cost, the overrun would be 33% by FY 2019.[147]:iv,23 The GAO separately stated "NASA's current approach for reporting cost growth misrepresents the cost performance of the program".[148]:19–20

The SLS has been criticized on the basis of program cost, lack of commercial involvement, and the non-competitive nature of a vehicle legislated to use Space Shuttle components.

In 2009, the Augustine commission proposed a commercial 75 t (74 long tons; 83 short tons) launcher with lower operating costs, and noted that a 40–60 t (39–59 long tons; 44–66 short tons) launcher was the minimum required to support lunar exploration.[149]

In 2011–2012, the Space Access Society, Space Frontier Foundation and The Planetary Society called for the cancellation of the project, arguing that SLS will consume the funds for other projects from the NASA budget.[150][151][152] U.S. Representative Dana Rohrabacher and others proposed that an orbital propellant depot should be developed and the Commercial Crew Development program accelerated instead.[150][153][154][155][156] A NASA study that was not publicly released[157][158] and another from the Georgia Institute of Technology showed this option to be possibly cheaper.[159][160] In 2012, the United Launch Alliance also suggested using existing rockets with on-orbit assembly and propellant depots as needed. The lack of competition in the SLS design was highlighted.[161][162][163][164][165] In the summer of 2019, a former ULA employee claimed that Boeing, NASA's prime contractor for SLS, viewed orbital refueling technology as a threat to SLS and blocked further investment in it.[166]

In 2011, Mars Society/Mars Direct founder Robert Zubrin suggested that a heavy lift vehicle could be developed for US$5 billion on fixed-price requests for proposal.[167]

In 2010, SpaceX's CEO Elon Musk claimed that his company could build a launch vehicle in the 140- to 150-tonne payload range for US$2.5 billion, or US$300 million (in 2010 dollars) per launch, not including a potential upper-stage upgrade.[168][169] In the early 2010s, SpaceX went on to start development of SpaceX Starship, a planned fully reusable super-heavy launch system. Reusability is claimed to allow the lowest-cost super-heavy launcher ever made.[170] If the price per launch and payload capabilities for the Starship are anywhere near Musk's claimed capabilities, the rocket will be substantially cheaper than the SLS.[171]

In 2011, Rep. Tom McClintock and other groups called on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate possible violations of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), arguing that Congressional mandates forcing NASA to use Space Shuttle components for SLS are de facto non-competitive, single source requirements assuring contracts to existing Shuttle suppliers.[151][172][173] Opponents of the heavy launch vehicle have critically used the name "Senate launch system".[51] The Competitive Space Task Force, in September 2011, said that the new government launcher directly violates NASA's charter, the Space Act, and the 1998 Commercial Space Act requirements for NASA to pursue the "fullest possible engagement of commercial providers" and to "seek and encourage, to the maximum extent possible, the fullest commercial use of space".[150]

In 2013, Chris Kraft, the NASA mission control leader from the Apollo era, expressed his criticism of the system as well.[174] Lori Garver, former NASA Deputy Administrator, has called for canceling the launch vehicle alongside the Mars 2020 rover.[175] Phil Plait has voiced his criticism of SLS in light of ongoing budget tradeoffs between the Commercial Crew Development and SLS budgets, also referring to earlier critiques by Garver.[176]

In 2019, the Government Accountability Office found that NASA had awarded Boeing over US$200 million for service with ratings of good to excellent despite cost overruns and delays. As of 2019, the maiden launch of SLS was expected in 2021.[177][178] NASA continued to expect that the first orbital launch would be in 2021 as late as May 2020.[179]

On 1 May 2020, NASA awarded a US$1.79 billion contract extension for the manufacture of 18 additional RS-25 engines. Ars Technica, in an article published on the same day, highlighted that over the entire RS-25 contract the price of each engine works out to US$146 million and that the total price for the four expendable engines used in each SLS launch will be more than US$580 million. They critically commented that for the cost of just one engine, six more powerful RD-180 engines could be purchased, or nearly an entire Falcon Heavy launch with two thirds of the SLS lift capacity.[112][180]

Former NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden, who oversaw the initial design and development of the SLS, also voiced his criticism of the program in an interview with Politico in September 2020. Bolden said that the "SLS will go away because at some point commercial entities are going to catch up". Bolden further stated "commercial entities are really going to build a heavy-lift launch vehicle sort of like SLS that they will be able to fly for a much cheaper price than NASA can do SLS".[181]

Planned launches
Main article: List of Space Launch System launches
Flight No. Date / time (UTC) Configuration Payload Orbit Outcome
1 November 2021[179] Block 1 Crew
TLI Planned
Uncrewed Maiden flight of the SLS, carrying the Artemis 1 mission hardware and cubesats for ten missions in the CubeSat Launch Initiative (CSLI), and three missions in the Cube Quest Challenge.[182][183] The payloads will be sent on a trans-lunar injection trajectory.[184][185]
2 August 2023 Block 1 Crew
TLI Planned
Crewed, lunar flyby. Carrying the Artemis 2 mission hardware, along with numerous cubesats to be selected through the CSLI.[186][187]
3 October 2024 Block 1 Crew[188]
Selenocentric Planned
Crewed lunar rendezvous and landing. Carrying the Artemis 3 mission hardware.[189]
4 2025[lower-alpha 1] Block 1 Cargo[lower-alpha 1]
Jovian Planned
Carrying the Europa Clipper spacecraft to Jupiter via a direct Hohmann transfer orbit.[192]
  1. As of 2019, it is mandated for launch aboard the Block 1 Cargo in 2025,[189][190][191] though may alternatively launch on a Block 1B Cargo.[192][193][194]
  • RS-25D engine testing at Stennis Space Center.
  • SLS Mobile Launcher
  • The Core Stage for the Space Launch System rocket for Artemis I
  • The Space Launch System Core Stage rolling out of the Michoud Facility for shipping to Stennis.
  • SRB segment
  • ICPS on the move
  • Block 1 configuration
  • Block 1B configuration
  • Block 2 configuration

See also

References

Notes
  1. This is for the Block 1 launch vehicle alone and does not include the Orion capsule or service module costs.[10]

Citations
  1. "FY 2021 President's Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. DEXP-4. Retrieved 10 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  2. "FY 2020 President's Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. DEXP-4. Retrieved 10 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  3. "FY 2019 President's Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. DEXP-20. Retrieved 10 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  4. "FY 2018 President's Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. EXP-22. Retrieved 10 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  5. "FY 2018 Budget Estimates" (PDF). NASA. p. BUD-3. Retrieved 16 December 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  6. "FY 2016 Presidents Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. BUD-5. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  7. "FY 2015 Presidents Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. BUD-5. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  8. "FY 2014 Presidents Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. BUD-8. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  9. "FY 2013 Presidents Budget Request Summary" (PDF). NASA. p. BUD-4. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  10. Berger, Eric (8 November 2019). "NASA does not deny the "over US$2 billion" cost of a single SLS launch". Ars Technica. "The White House number appears to include both the "marginal" cost of building a single SLS rocket as well as the "fixed" costs of maintaining a standing army of thousands of employees and hundreds of suppliers across the country. Building a second SLS rocket each year would make the per-unit cost "significantly less". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  11. Vought, Russell T. "Letter to the Chair and Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee with respect to 10 of the FY 2020 annual appropriations bills" (PDF). whitehouse.gov. p. 7. estimated cost of over US$2 billion per launch for the SLS once development is complete This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  12. "White House warns Congress about Artemis funding". SpaceNews. 7 November 2019. Retrieved 13 November 2019.
  13. Harbaugh, Jennifer (9 July 2018). "The Great Escape: SLS Provides Power for Missions to the Moon". NASA. Retrieved 4 September 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  14. Creech, Stephen (April 2014). "NASA's Space Launch System: A Capability for Deep Space Exploration" (PDF). NASA. p. 2. Retrieved 4 September 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  15. Mohon, Lee (16 March 2015). "Space Launch System (SLS) Overview". NASA. Retrieved 6 July 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  16. "SLS Lift Capabilities and Configurations" (PDF). NASA. 29 April 2020. Retrieved 20 January 2021. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  17. Clark, Stephen (1 May 2020). "Hopeful for launch next year, NASA aims to resume SLS operations within weeks". Retrieved 3 May 2020.
  18. Harbaugh, Jennifer (17 July 2020). "Stacking the Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters". NASA. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
  19. Redden, Jeremy J. "SLS Booster Development" (PDF). NASA Technical Reports Server. Retrieved 1 October 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  20. Harbaugh, Jennifer (9 December 2019). "NASA, Public Marks Assembly of SLS Stage with Artemis Day". nasa.gov. NASA. Retrieved 10 December 2019. NASA and the Michoud team will shortly send the first fully assembled, 212-foot-tall core stage...27.6-feet-in-diameter tanks and barrels. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  21. "space launch system" (PDF). nasa.gov. 2012. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 August 2012. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  22. Siceloff, Steven (12 April 2015). "SLS Carries Deep Space Potential". nasa.gov. Retrieved 2 January 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  23. "World's Most Powerful Deep Space Rocket Set To Launch In 2018". iflscience.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  24. Chiles, James R. "Bigger Than Saturn, Bound for Deep Space". airspacemag.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  25. "Finally, some details about how NASA actually plans to get to Mars". arstechnica.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  26. Gebhardt, Chris (6 April 2017). "NASA finally sets goals, missions for SLS – eyes multi-step plan to Mars". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 21 August 2017.
  27. Stephen Clark (31 March 2011). "NASA to set exploration architecture this summer". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
  28. Dwayne Day (25 November 2013). "Burning thunder".
  29. "The NASA Authorization Act of 2010". Featured Legislation. U,S. Senate. 15 July 2010. Archived from the original on 10 April 2011. Retrieved 26 May 2011. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  30. Harbaugh, Jennifer (2 May 2018). "The Great Escape: SLS Provides Power for Missions to the Moon". nasa.gov. NASA. Retrieved 22 December 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  31. Gebhardt, Chris (15 August 2019). "Eastern Range updates 'Drive to 48' launches per year status". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 6 January 2020. NASA, on the other hand, will have to add this capability to their SLS rocket, and Mr. Rosati said NASA is tracking that debut for the Artemis 3 mission in 2023.
  32. "Space Launch System". aerospaceguide.net.
  33. Harbaugh, Jennifer (12 May 2017). "NASA Continues Testing, Manufacturing World's Most Powerful Rocket". nasa.gov. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  34. Wall, Mike (16 August 2016). "Yes, NASA's New Megarocket Will Be More Powerful Than the Saturn V". Space.com. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
  35. The Congress of the United States. Congressional Budget Office, October 2006, pp. X,1,4,9. "The Apollo Saturn V launch vehicle had a lift capability of 140 metric tons to low Earth orbit" This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  36. Wells, Jane (26 January 2016). "Boeing builds the most powerful rocket ever made". cnbc.com.
  37. Wood, Anthony (25 July 2015). "Most powerful rocket ever edges closer to lift-off". New Atlas. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
  38. Chris Bergin (4 October 2011). "SLS trades lean towards opening with four RS-25s on the core stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  39. Chris Bergin (14 September 2011). "SLS finally announced by NASA – Forward path taking shape". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  40. Sloss, Philip. "NASA ready to power up the RS-25 engines for SLS". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 10 March 2015.
  41. Campbell, Lloyd (25 March 2017). "NASA conducts 13th test of Space Launch System RS-25 engine". SpaceflightInsider.com. Retrieved 29 April 2017.
  42. "NASA's Space Launch System Core Stage Passes Major Milestone, Ready to Start Construction". Space Travel. 27 December 2012.
  43. Chris Bergin (25 April 2011). "SLS planning focuses on dual phase approach opening with SD HLV". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  44. Bergin, Chris (16 June 2011). "Managers SLS announcement after SD HLV victory". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  45. Bergin, Chris (23 February 2012). "Acronyms to Ascent – SLS managers create development milestone roadmap". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  46. OUR TO FIVE: ENGINEER DETAILS CHANGES MADE TO SLS BOOSTER Jan 2016
  47. Priskos, Alex. "Five-segment Solid Rocket Motor Development Status" (PDF). ntrs.nasa.gov. NASA. Retrieved 11 March 2015. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  48. "Space Launch System: How to launch NASA's new monster rocket". NASASpaceFlight.com. 20 February 2012. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  49. Bergin, Chris (8 May 2018). "SLS requires Advanced Boosters by flight nine due to lack of Shuttle heritage components". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  50. Tobias, Mark E.; Griffin, David R.; McMillin, Joshua E.; Haws, Terry D.; Fuller, Micheal E. (2 March 2019). "Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) for Space Launch System (SLS)" (PDF). NASA Technical Reports Server. NASA. Retrieved 15 November 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  51. Rosenberg, Zach. "Delta second stage chosen as SLS interim". Flight International, May 8, 2012.
  52. Henry, Kim (30 October 2014). "Getting to Know You, Rocket Edition: Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage". nasa.gov. Retrieved 25 July 2020.
  53. "Space Launch System Data Sheet". SpaceLaunchReport.com. Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  54. SLS Upper Stage set to take up residence in the former home of ISS modules July 2017
  55. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  56. Upper Stage RL10s arrive at Stennis for upcoming SLS launches Feb 2020
  57. "SLS prepares for PDR – Evolution eyes Dual-Use Upper Stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 12 March 2015.
  58. "NASA confirms EUS for SLS Block 1B design and EM-2 flight". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 24 July 2014.
  59. "Space Launch System" (PDF). NASA Facts. NASA. 11 October 2017. FS-2017-09-92-MSFC. Retrieved 4 September 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  60. "Space Launch System Lift Capabilities and Configurations" (PDF). This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  61. "SLS to be robust in the face of scrubs, launch delays and pad stays". NASASpaceFlight.com. 4 April 2012. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  62. Marcia Smith (14 September 2011). "New NASA Crew Transportation System to Cost $18 Billion Through 2017". Space Policy Online. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  63. Bill Nelson, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Charles F. Bolden (14 September 2011). Future of NASA Space Program. Washington, D.C.: Cspan.org.
  64. Booz Allen Hamilton (19 August 2011). "Independent Cost Assessment of the Space Launch System, Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle and 21st Century Ground Systems Programs: Executive Summary of Final Report" (PDF). nasa.gov. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  65. Andy Paszior (7 September 2011). "White House Experiences Sticker Shock Over NASA's Plans". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 22 February 2015.
  66. "ESD Integration, Budget Availability Scenarios" (PDF). Space Policy Online. 19 August 2011. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  67. Marcia Smith (9 September 2011). "The NASA Numbers Behind That WSJ Article". Space Policy Online. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  68. "HEFT Phase I Closeout" (PDF). nasawatch.com. September 2010. p. 69.
  69. Chris Bergin (4 October 2011). "SLS trades lean towards opening with four RS-25s on the core stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 16 September 2013.
  70. "NASA's huge new rocket may cost US$500 million per launch". NBC News. 12 September 2012.
  71. Lee Roop (29 July 2013). "NASA defends Space Launch System against charge it 'is draining the lifeblood' of space program". al.com. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  72. John Strickland (15 July 2013). "Revisiting SLS/Orion launch costs". The Space Review. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  73. NASA Content Administrator, ed. (12 April 2015) [January 16, 2013]. "NASA Signs Agreement for a European-Provided Orion Service Module". nasa.gov. Archived from the original on 18 January 2013. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  74. Keith Cowing (14 September 2011). "NASA's New Space Launch System Announced – Destination TBD". SpaceRef. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  75. Frank Morring (17 June 2011). "NASA Will Compete Space Launch System Boosters". Aviation Week. Retrieved 20 June 2011.
  76. "NASA's Space Launch System: Partnering For Tomorrow" (PDF). NASA. Retrieved 12 March 2013. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  77. Rachel Kraft (14 February 2013). "NASA Awards Final Space Launch System Advanced Booster Contract". NASA. Retrieved 19 February 2013. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  78. "The Dark Knights – ATK's Advanced Boosters for SLS revealed". NASASpaceFlight.com. 14 January 2013.
  79. Lee Hutchinson (15 April 2013). "New F-1B rocket engine upgrades Apollo-era design with 1.8M lbs of thrust". Ars Technica. Retrieved 15 April 2013.
  80. "SLS Block II drives hydrocarbon engine research". thespacereview.com. 14 January 2013.
  81. Bergin, Chris. "Advanced Boosters progress towards a solid future for SLS". NasaSpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 25 February 2015.
  82. "Second SLS Mission Might Not Carry Crew". SpaceNews. 21 May 2014. Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  83. "Wind Tunnel testing conducted on SLS configurations, including Block 1B". NASASpaceFlight.com. July 2012.
  84. Foust, Jeff (27 August 2014). "SLS Debut Likely To Slip to 2018". SpaceNews. Retrieved 12 March 2015.
  85. Davis, Jason. "NASA Budget Lists Timelines, Costs and Risks for First SLS Flight". The Planetary Society. Retrieved 11 March 2015.
  86. "NASA'S MANAGEMENT OF THE SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM STAGES CONTRACT" (PDF). oig.nasa.gov. NASA Office of Inspector General Office of Audits. 10 October 2018. Retrieved 14 October 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  87. "NASA FY 2019 Budget Estimates" (PDF). nasa.gov. p. BUD-2. Retrieved 16 December 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  88. Smith, Rich (26 March 2019). "Is NASA Preparing to Cancel Its Space Launch System?". The Motley Fool. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
  89. "NASA FY 2019 Budget Overview" (PDF). Quote: "Supports launch of the Power and Propulsion Element on a commercial launch vehicle as the first component of the LOP–Gateway, (page 14) This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  90. "Space Launch Report". www.spacelaunchreport.com. Retrieved 22 May 2019.
  91. Berger, Eric (5 November 2019). "NASA rejects Blue Origin's offer of a cheaper upper stage for the SLS rocket". Ars Technica. Retrieved 19 December 2019.
  92. "NASA FY19 Inflation Tables - to be utilized in FY20". NASA. p. Inflation Table. Retrieved 10 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  93. "NASA, Assessments of Major Projects" (PDF). General Accounting Office. March 2016. p. 63. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  94. "NASA's Ground Systems Development and Operations Program Completes Preliminary Design Review". NASA. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  95. NASA FY2021 budget estimates
  96. "Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Estimates" (PDF). NASA. p. v. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  97. "FY 2008 Budget Estimates" (PDF). NASA. p. ESMD-14. Retrieved 23 June 2016. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  98. "Definitive Contract NNM12AA82C". govtribe.com. Retrieved 16 December 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  99. "Consolidated Appropriations Act 2016" (PDF). house.gov. p. 183. Retrieved 16 December 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  100. "NASA outlines plan for 2024 lunar landing". SpaceNews. 1 May 2019. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
  101. Berger, Eric (20 May 2019). "NASA's full Artemis plan revealed: 37 launches and a lunar outpost". Ars Technica. Retrieved 20 May 2019.
  102. Sloss, Philip. "Amid competing priorities, Boeing redesigns NASA SLS Exploration Upper Stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 25 July 2020.
  103. Jenkins, Dennis R. (2016). Space Shuttle: Developing an Icon – 1972 –2013. Specialty Press. ISBN 978-1-58007-249-6.
  104. Berger, Eric (20 October 2017). "NASA chooses not to tell Congress how much deep space missions cost". arstechnica.com. Retrieved 16 December 2018.
  105. "Origins Space Telescope Mission Concept Study Report" (PDF). 11 October 2019. p. ES-11. Retrieved 14 May 2020. The launch cost (US$500 million for the SLS launch vehicle, as advised by NASA Headquarters) is also included. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  106. "Habitable Exoplanet Observatory Final Report" (PDF). 25 August 2019. Retrieved 11 May 2020. Section 9-11 9.4.1 Basis of estimate, page 281
  107. "MANAGEMENT OF NASA'S EUROPA MISSION" (PDF). oig.nasa.gov. 29 May 2019. Retrieved 8 November 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  108. Foust, Jeff (29 May 2019). "Inspector general report warns of cost and schedule problems for Europa Clipper". SpaceNews. Retrieved 20 January 2021.
  109. "Follow-up to May 2019 Audit of Europa Mission - Congressional Launch Vehicle Mandate" (PDF). oig.nasa.gov. 27 August 2019. Retrieved 20 January 2021. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  110. Foust, Jeff (28 August 2019). "NASA inspector general asks Congress for Europa Clipper launch flexibility". SpaceNews. Retrieved 20 January 2021.
  111. Town Hall with Administrator Bridenstine and NASA's New HEO Associate Administrator Douglas Loverro (YouTube). NASA. 3 December 2019. Event occurs at 24:58. Retrieved 20 January 2021. "I do not agree with the US$2 billion number, it is far less than that. I would also say that the number comes way down when you buy more than one or two. And so I think at the end we're going to be, you know, in the US$800 million to US$900 million range - I don't know, honestly. We've recently just begun negotiations on what number three through whatever - we don't have to buy any quite frankly, but we intend to. But we're looking at what we could negotiate to get the best price for the American taxpayper, which is my obligation as the head of NASA". This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  112. "NASA Commits to Future Artemis Missions with More SLS Rocket Engines" (Press release). NASA. 1 May 2020. Retrieved 4 May 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  113. "NASA and ATK Successfully Test Ares First Stage Motor". NASA. 10 September 2009. Retrieved 30 January 2012. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  114. "NASA and ATK Successfully Test Five-Segment Solid Rocket Motor". NASA. 31 August 2010. Retrieved 30 January 2012. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  115. "NASA Successfully Tests Five-Segment Solid Rocket Motor". NASA. 31 August 2010. Retrieved 8 September 2011. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  116. "NASA Announces Key Decision For Next Deep Space Transportation System". NASA. 24 May 2011. Retrieved 26 January 2012. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  117. "NASA Announces Design For New Deep Space Exploration System". NASA. 14 September 2011. Retrieved 14 September 2011. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  118. "Press Conference on the Future of NASA Space Program". C-Span. 14 September 2011. Retrieved 14 September 2011.
  119. Kenneth Chang (14 September 2011). "NASA Unveils New Rocket Design". The New York Times. Retrieved 14 September 2011.
  120. "NASA's Space Launch System Program PDR: Answers to the Acronym". NASA. 1 August 2013. Retrieved 3 August 2013. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  121. "NASA Completes Key Review of World's Most Powerful Rocket in Support". NASA. Retrieved 26 October 2015. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  122. Chris Gebhardt (13 November 2013). "SLS upper stage proposals reveal increasing payload-to-destination options". NASASpaceFlight.com.
  123. David Todd (3 June 2013). "SLS design may ditch J-2X upper stage engine for four RL-10 engines". Seradata. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016.
  124. David Todd (7 November 2014). "Next Steps for SLS: Europe's Vinci is a contender for Exploration Upper-Stage Engine". Seradata. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016.
  125. Bergin, Chris (10 March 2015). "QM-1 shakes Utah with two minutes of thunder". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 10 March 2015.
  126. Karl Tate (16 September 2011). "Space Launch System: NASA's Giant Rocket Explained". Space.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  127. "SLS Engine Section Barrel Hot off the Vertical Weld Center at Michoud". NASA. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  128. Foust, Jeff (16 September 2015). "First Crewed Orion Mission May Slip to 2023". SpaceNews. Retrieved 23 June 2016.
  129. Clark, Stephen (16 September 2015). "Orion spacecraft may not fly with astronauts until 2023". spaceflightnow.com. Retrieved 23 June 2016.
  130. Clark, Smith (1 May 2014). "Mikulski "Deeply Troubled" by NASA's Budget Request; SLS Won't Use 70 Percent JCL". spacepolicyonline.com. Retrieved 23 June 2016.
  131. "Report No. IG-20-018: NASA's Management of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program" (PDF). Office of Inspector General (United States). NASA. 16 July 2020. Retrieved 17 July 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  132. Berger, Eric (16 August 2020). "Could a Dragon spacecraft fly humans to the Moon? It's complicated". Ars Technica. Retrieved 17 August 2020. At 26.5 tons, Orion and its Service Module are very heavy. Because of this girth, NASA's Space Launch System rocket cannot even get Orion all the way into low lunar orbit with enough maneuvering capability to get back to Earth.
  133. "All Four Engines Are Attached to the SLS Core Stage for Artemis I Mission". nasa.gov. Retrieved 12 November 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  134. Rincon, Paul (9 January 2020). "Nasa Moon rocket core leaves for testing". Retrieved 9 January 2020.
  135. "Boeing, NASA getting ready for SLS Core Stage Green Run campaign ahead of Stennis arrival". NASASpaceFlight.com. 14 December 2019. Retrieved 9 January 2020.
  136. "NASA Will Have 8 Minute Hold Down Test in 2020". Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  137. Foust, Jeff (16 January 2021). "Green Run hotfire test ends early". SpaceNews. Retrieved 17 January 2021.
  138. Rincon, Paul (20 January 2021). "SLS: Nasa finds cause of 'megarocket' test shutdown". BBC News. Retrieved 20 January 2021.
  139. "Public Law 111–267 111th Congress, 42 USC 18322. SEC. 302 (c) (2) 42 USC 18323. SEC. 303 (a) (2)" (PDF). 11 October 2010. pp. 11–12. Retrieved 14 September 2020. 42 USC 18322. SEC. 302 SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM AS FOLLOW-ON LAUNCH VEHICLE TO THE SPACE SHUTTLE ... (c) MINIMUM CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS (1) IN GENERAL — The Space Launch System developed pursuant to subsection (b) shall be designed to have, at a minimum, the following: (A) The initial capability of the core elements, without an upper stage, of lifting payloads weighing between 70 tons and 100 tons into low-Earth orbit in preparation for transit for missions beyond low Earth orbit ... (2) FLEXIBILITY ... (Deadline) Developmental work and testing of the core elements and the upper stage should proceed in parallel subject to appro-priations. Priority should be placed on the core elements with the goal for operational capability for the core elements not later than December 31, 2016 ... 42 USC 18323. SEC. 303 MULTI-PURPOSE CREW VEHICLE (a) INITIATION OF DEVELOPMENT (1) IN GENERAL — The Administrator shall continue the development of a multi-purpose crew vehicle to be available as soon as practicable, and no later than for use with the Space Launch System ... (2) GOAL FOR OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY. It shall be the goal to achieve full operational capability for the transportation vehicle developed pursuant to this subsection by not later than December 31, 2016. For purposes of meeting such goal, the Administrator may undertake a test of the transportation vehicle at the ISS before that date.
  140. "S.3729 - National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2010". United States Congress. 11 October 2010. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  141. Davis, Jason (3 October 2016). "To Mars, with a monster rocket: How politicians and engineers created NASA's Space Launch System". The Planetary Society. Retrieved 14 September 2020.
  142. Harwood, William (14 September 2011). "NASA unveils new super rocket for manned flights beyond Earth orbit". CBS News. Retrieved 14 September 2020.
  143. Foust, Jeff (13 April 2017). "NASA inspector general foresees additional SLS/Orion delays". SpaceNews. Retrieved 14 September 2020.
  144. Clark, Stephen (28 April 2017). "NASA confirms first flight of Space Launch System will slip to 2019". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 29 April 2017.
  145. Clark, Stephen (20 November 2017). "NASA expects first Space Launch System flight to slip into 2020". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 24 May 2018.
  146. Gebhardt, Chris (21 February 2020). "SLS debut slips to April 2021, KSC teams working through launch sims". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 21 February 2020.
  147. "NASA'S MANAGEMENT OF SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM PROGRAMCOSTS AND CONTRACTS" (PDF). NASA - Office of Inspector General - Office of Audits. 10 March 2020. Retrieved 14 September 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  148. "NASA HUMAN SPACE EXPLORATIONPersistent Delays and Cost Growth Reinforce Concerns over Management of Programs" (PDF). GAO. Retrieved 15 September 2020. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  149. Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee; Augustine, Austin; Chyba, Kennel; Bejmuk, Crawley; Lyles, Chiao; Greason, Ride (October 2009). "Seeking A Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of A Great Nation" (PDF). NASA. Retrieved 15 April 2010. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  150. Henry Vanderbilt (15 September 2011). "Impossibly High NASA Development Costs Are Heart of the Matter". moonandback.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  151. Ferris Valyn (15 September 2011). "Monster Rocket Will Eat America's Space Program". Space Frontier Foundation. Archived from the original on 6 October 2011. Retrieved 16 September 2011.
  152. "Statement before the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology US House of Representatives Hearing: A Review of the NASA's Space Launch System" (PDF). The Planetary Society. 12 July 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 March 2012. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  153. Rohrabacher, Dana (14 September 2011). "Nothing New or Innovative, Including It's Astronomical Price Tag". Archived from the original on 24 September 2011. Retrieved 14 September 2011. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  154. "Rohrabacher calls for "emergency" funding for CCDev". parabolicarc.com. 24 August 2011. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  155. Jeff Foust (15 September 2011). "A monster rocket, or just a monster?". The Space Review.
  156. Jeff Foust (1 November 2011). "Can NASA develop a heavy-lift rocket?". The Space Review.
  157. Mohney, Doug (21 October 2011). "Did NASA Hide In-space Fuel Depots To Get a Heavy Lift Rocket?". Satellite Spotlight. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
  158. "Propellant Depot Requirements Study" (PDF). HAT Technical Interchange Meeting. 21 July 2011.
  159. Cowing, Keith (12 October 2011). "Internal NASA Studies Show Cheaper and Faster Alternatives to the Space Launch System". SpaceRef. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
  160. "Near Term Space Exploration with Commercial Launch Vehicles Plus Propellant Depot" (PDF). Georgia Institute of Technology / National Institute of Aerospace. 2011.
  161. "Affordable Exploration Architecture" (PDF). United Launch Alliance. 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 October 2012.
  162. Grant Bonin (6 June 2011). "Human spaceflight for less: the case for smaller launch vehicles, revisited". The Space Review.
  163. Robert Zubrin (14 May 2011). "How We Can Fly to Mars in This Decade — And on the Cheap". Mars Society. Archived from the original on 19 March 2012.
  164. Rick Tumlinson (15 September 2011). "The Senate Launch System – Destiny, Decision, and Disaster". Huffington Post.
  165. Andrew Gasser (24 October 2011). "Propellant depots: the fiscally responsible and feasible alternative to SLS". The Space Review.
  166. Eric Berger (1 August 2019). "The SLS rocket may have curbed development of on-orbit refueling for a decade".
  167. Alan Boyle (7 December 2011). "Is the case for Mars facing a crisis?". MSNBC. Archived from the original on 7 January 2012.
  168. John K. Strickland, Jr. "The SpaceX Falcon Heavy Booster: Why Is It Important?". National Space Society. Retrieved 4 January 2012.
  169. "NASA Studies Scaled-Up Falcon, Merlin". Aviation Week. 2 December 2010. Archived from the original on 27 July 2012.
  170. "Spacex BFR to be lower cost than Falcon 1 at US$7 million per launch". nextbigfuture.com. Retrieved 17 January 2019.
  171. Bergin, Chris (29 August 2014). "Battle of the Heavyweight Rockets – SLS could face Exploration Class rival". NASAspaceflight.com. Retrieved 16 May 2019.
  172. "Congressman, Space Frontier Foundation, And Tea Party In Space Call For NASA SLS Investigation". moonandback.com. 4 October 2011. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  173. "The Senate Launch System". Competitive Space. 4 October 2011. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  174. "NASA veteran Chris Kraft upfront with criticism". August 2013.
  175. "Garver: NASA Should Cancel SLS and Mars 2020 Rover". Space News. January 2014.
  176. "Why NASA Still Can't Put Humans in Space: Congress Is Starving It of Needed Funds". 2015.
  177. "New Report Finds Nasa Awarded Boeing Large Fees Despite SLS Launch Slips". ArsTechnica. 2019.
  178. "Space News: Contractors continue to win award fees despite SLS and Orion delays". Space News. 2019.
  179. "Hopeful for launch next year, NASA aims to resume SLS operations within weeks". SpaceflightNow.com. 2 May 2020. Retrieved 2 May 2020.
  180. Berger, Eric (1 May 2020). "NASA will pay a staggering 146 million for each SLS rocket engine". Ars Technica. Retrieved 4 May 2020.
  181. "Bolden talks expectations for Biden's space policy". Politico. 2020.
  182. Foust, Jeff (21 May 2019). "In 2020, NASA Will Send Living Things to Deep Space for First Time Since Apollo". Space.com. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. BioSentinel is one of 13 cubesats flying aboard the Artemis 1 mission, which is currently targeted for mid-2020. [...] The other 12 cubesats flying aboard Artemis 1 are a diverse lot. For example, the Lunar Flashlight and Lunar IceCube missions will hunt for signs of water ice on the moon, and Near-Earth Asteroid Scout will use a solar sail to rendezvous with a space rock.
  183. Northon, Karen (9 June 2017). "Three DIY CubeSats Score Rides on Exploration Mission-1". National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has awarded rides for three small spacecraft on the agency's newest rocket, and $20,000 each in prize money, to the winning teams of citizen solvers competing in the semi-final round of the agency’s Cube Quest Challenge.
  184. Crane, Aimee (11 June 2019). "Artemis 1 Flight Control Team Simulates Mission Scenarios". National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. ...after the Space Launch System performs the Trans-Lunar Injection burn that sends the spacecraft out of Earth orbit and toward the Moon.
  185. Clark, Stephen (22 July 2019). "First moon-bound Orion crew capsule declared complete, major tests remain". SpaceflightNow. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. The Artemis 1 mission profile. Credit: NASA [...] The Artemis 1 mission will send the Orion spacecraft into a distant retrograde lunar orbit and back...
  186. Hill, Denise (6 August 2019). "NASA's CubeSat Launch Initiative Opens Call for Payloads on Artemis 2 Mission". National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. NASA is seeking proposals from U.S. small satellite developers to fly their CubeSat missions as secondary payloads aboard the SLS on the Artemis 2 mission under the agency's CubeSat Launch Initiative (CSLI).
  187. Klotz, Irene (5 August 2019). "NASA Scouting Cubesats For Artemis-2 Mission". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. NASA on Aug. 5 released a solicitation for cubesats to ride along with the first crewed flight of the Space Launch System rocket and Orion capsule, with the caveat that selected projects fill strategic knowledge gaps for future lunar and Mars exploration.
  188. Loff, Sarah (15 October 2019). "NASA Commits to Future Artemis Missions With More SLS Rocket Stages". NASA. Retrieved 16 October 2019. Quote:"NASA aims to use the first EUS on the Artemis IV mission"
  189. Grush, Loren (22 May 2018). "The first three missions of NASA's next big rocket will have to settle for a less-powerful ride". The Verge. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. But now NASA is going to fly all three missions — EM-1, EM-2, and Europa Clipper — on Block 1. [...] According to the memo, NASA will aim to have the second platform ready for a Block 1B launch in the beginning of 2024.
  190. Sloss, Philip (7 May 2019). "NASA puts SLS Europa Clipper option in the wind tunnel". NASASpaceFlight.com. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. Data was collected during several hundred supersonic test runs in the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel at Langley of a scale model of the Block 1 Cargo vehicle that is the currently mandated booster for the upcoming Europa Clipper mission.
  191. Sloss, Philip (11 September 2018). "NASA updates Lunar Gateway plans". NASASpaceFlight.com. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. Although U.S. federal appropriations bills enacted into law for the last three fiscal years mandate a Europa Clipper launch on SLS and "no later than 2022," the presentations to the HEO committee show that launch on a Block 1 Cargo vehicle in 2023.
  192. Sloss, Philip (25 May 2018). "NASA digging into SLS Block 1 revival plans after getting second Mobile Launcher money". NASASpaceFlight.com. Archived from the original on 6 August 2019. Retrieved 6 August 2019. In the wake of ML-2 funding and the change in direction, NASA began looking at "Jupiter Direct" trajectories with Block 1 again. NASA's early analyses of launch windows for Europa Clipper in 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025 indicate that direct trajectories are feasible for SLS Block 1.
  193. Foust, Jeff (10 May 2018). "House bill keeps Europa Clipper on track despite launch vehicle uncertainties". SpaceNews. Retrieved 6 August 2019. He added that both the original Block 1 version of SLS, as well as the Block 1B with the more powerful Exploration Upper Stage, are the only vehicles with C3 values high enough to allow for a direct trajectory for the six-ton Europa Clipper spacecraft. The less-powerful Block 1 is still sufficient, he said, mitigating concerns about any delays in the development of the Block 1B.
  194. Gebhardt, Chris (3 November 2017). "Europa Clipper's launch date dependent on SLS Mobile Launcher readiness". NASASpaceFlight.com. Archived from the original on 7 August 2019. Retrieved 7 August 2019. The mission will be the first cargo flight of the SLS and will likely – though not confirmed – be the first SLS Block 1B launch.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.