The Real Reason NASA Developed The SLS Rocket!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 сер 2022
- The Real Reason NASA Developed The SLS Rocket!
Last Video: • NASA Reveals Major New...
► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
► Patreon: / theteslaspace
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Space Race: / theteslaspace
Mars Colonization News and Updates
• Mars Colonization News...
SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates
The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!
► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com
Business Email: derek@ellify.com
#Spacex #Space #mars - Наука та технологія
Who else is hyped for this monday?
okay now friday :(
bad stuff happens on monday, good stuff on fridays. so everyone please don’t be pessimistic
edit again Rip artemis :(
Me ngl
@@jaden-cc5vp first time I’ve been waiting for monday
Heck yeah I'm hyped for it because then they'll release Starship to try and make it up and around. And hopefully Elon show them that you can reuse those booster rockets. A lot of the delays on SLS is because there's parts for it made in all 50 states so every Governor gets a piece of the pie and stands behind it, I love the fact that all the states are producing something and that's jobs for people but all it's doing is driving up the cost and delay of the time.
I am! Monday is National Chop Suey Day!
I can't wait to watch it launch!
The Saturn V had five F-1 engines on its first stage, not four.
The F1 engine development did not start in 1962. The original Rocketdyne F1 engine started in 1955 under a US Airforce contract.
The Saturn V could reach orbit with four, as it happened once that an F1 engine failed. The remaining four engines were powered up to compensate.
@@jessepollard7132
Yes it could reach orbit with 4, and this did happen, was that Apollo 13?
But it could not lift off with only 4 engines. It needed to to be at a certain altitude & speed to attain orbit on 4.
Werner Von Braun decided, in the early preliminary design stage of the Saturn, to go with 5 engines rather than 4 knowing that there would be a weight growth in the payload. This proved correct.
@@briancavanagh7048 yes, but 5 was chosen for a margin of error.
It had 5 damn engines!!! Lol
I work on Artemis, in a role as propulsion test engineer and now as TVC intergration engineer. I can assure you that this vehicle has been absolutely tested every which way. Every engine before core stage intergration endures a full duration test (500s X's 4-10 cycles) then another 500s as an integrated core stage. (Not to count all the other none hotfire tests) They are not "Yolo-ing" this rocket into space at all.
Then why all the failures and delays?
Yeah YOLO is overblown. But still, by far not every potential issue can be tested without actually launching the rocket a few times. Even then, failures can still occur, as the Space shuttle showed.
On the other hand, SLS doesn't need as much testing as Starship in the first place. SLS has advanced abort systems which can save the crew for many cases where something goes wrong with the rocket.
Starship, in comparison, has no launch abort system, and the landing with its "belly flop" maneuver is, no doubt, much more risky than the old and proven non-powered landing method: SLS simply uses a capsule (Orion) which uses parachutes to brake and then falls into the ocean. This method was tested countless times on other capsules and never resulted in a human death.
@@cube2fox very well said. I agree nothing is better than seeing concrete results and tuning them for next flight.
Well yes, it is intensively tested, but it's still undergoing a YOLO yeet, given it permanently discards most of it's hardware during it's only flight.
Just out of interest whats your favourite space film or series as a guy know works in the field? Mines Outland with Sean Connery. I love the tone of emptiness in that film. It’s very unique but you totally get the idea of a working frontier town. There’s also something haunting about the score and I loved the miniatures used on it. For some reason works better then todays CGI.
If I may, you say both Saturn V and space shuttle were built from inception to launch in five years each, but I'm afraid you're not correct on this.
Saturn V was indeed developed in five years, with the C-5 frame announced in January 1962 and the first flight (Apollo 4) taking place in November 1967.
The space shuttle concept, however, dates as far back as 1968 for its announcement and even 1966 for its first study. In 1971, 29 designs were submitted to NASA which selected the one we know and received presidential approval in 1972. Rocketdyne was awarded contract to build the RS-25s in 1971 too. North American Rockwell (orbiter), Morton Thiokol (boosters) and Martin Marietta (external tank) were awarded contract in August 1972. Construction of the first orbiter began in 1974 but was not ready for first flight before 1981, that is 15 years in the making since the inception of the project.
@EXPAT FARMING IN THE PHILIPPINES Actually, NASA has gone backwards since the end of Apollo until now. Even the space shuttle was something beautiful in its time but was not meant to last 30 years with NOTHING else to be complementary or to just outrun it. Shutting the program down was a very sad decision, yet it was certainly preferable than keeping the risk of killing more astronauts, but the most unbelievable part was to shut it down with no direct, viable replacement at hand. It seems that all hopes rely on Artemis I which is really in NASA's interests to succeed. A failure would be catastrophic, and not only to the program but to the whole administration as well.
@Science Revolution Yeah, and Earth is flat, right?
the shuttle concept goes back to the mid 1950s with the X-15.
Tbf, on Apollo 4 and 6 bits were falling off the rocket, hard to compare it to modern developments due to different philosophy.
Plus unlike shuttle and SLS Saturn V pretty much could get as much money as they wanted
@@_mikolaj_ Bits were falling off? Never heard of that, but I'm curious: bits of what?
It was 5 F1 my friend. 5 on the first stage of Saturn V.
The five year cycle was true for the Saturn V, but the Space Shuttle took a great deal longer. The Astronauts walking on the Moon talked about the Space Shuttle, I remember seeing the video of such. But the First space Shuttle launch was not until 1981, so it was far more then a 5 year development cycle from concept to lunch.
He may be mistakenly counting Enterprise Shuttle atmospheric tests as a launch.
Derek I'm proud that you, as a Canadian, are inspired by an American space agency. I think that's the whole point of NASA - to inspire those even beyond the USA's border. Thank you for the video.
Great presentation. Thanks for pulling it together.
Every part of the SLS has been tested to the point of failure. And, like you said, the hardware has flown before - multiple times. Just because they haven’t done an all “up test” before hardly makes the rocket “untested” per se. Moreover, SLS is very much a passion project, from the prospective of the engineers working on it. If I had to chose between mounting a spaceship atop a Saturn V or the SLS, I would pick SLS. Every time. However, if this fails Monday, feel free to make me eat crow.
The passion is on the part of the narcissist politicians pork barreling taxpayer funds into their $pon$ors.
I'd much rather put my life onto a Falcon 9, Starship, or even a New Glenn which hasn't yet been completed.
@@HiroNguy I was merely speaking to the issue of safety. I personally favor SpaceX, but I do want Artemis to succeed.
@@jonathanstein6056 Not sure why people act as if it's a competition.
@@veergauba agreed. We’re all in this together. I want every space venture to succeed.
@@veergauba It is a competition, but one that should have rules, one of which should be *no bribing polytricktians to pick the winners ahead of time.*
I can't help the feeling that I'm watching a rocket that was obsolete before it was completed.
Exactly!
That's because you feel for propaganda.
Great video
"Without getting overly dramatic..." It's impossible to understate what failure would mean after all that has gone into the SLS. Calls to defund NASA would be surpassed only by the hooting and jeers of it's detractors.
yea im very scared about that happening
It could actually be a good thing in the long run, this massive waste of taxpayers money has to stop, a failure would force NASA to find better/cheaper ways of getting to getting to the moon.
It’s a national security issue we must at stay ahead of chicoms
nasa simply sucks. sucks like all bloated government beauracies.
I’ve got my hooter and jeerer all ready! Lol
The Soviet N1 Moon Rocket was also Fairly powerful. Yes, it kept blowing up, but thus far it has had more launches than SLS! Also, with new for the time new engines rather than recycled ones!
Right? At least they TRIED to launch the N-1
Where are you now brother?
I pray 🙏 everything goes smoothly hopefully
4:16 Five. As in Saturn V. Five F-1 engines.
People complain about the SLS using old systems and designed, but no one seamed to have a problem with the Atlas rockets. You know the 1957 rocket design that contained use till 2021 and did things like put rovers on Mars
Because Atlas doesn't leak when it has to go
Be great to see this in action.
3:31 The F1 engines are not the most powerful liquid rocket engines, that goes to the RD 171M. A slight nitpick, but still a very interesting video!
F1 were the most powerful single chamber rocket?
@@pauljcampbell2997 Yes, the F1 is the most powerful single chamber liquid fuel rocket engine built so far.
Tsar Tank, Tsar Bomba, Tsar Boom-Tube.
very happy yet scared knowing that if this mission fails we are basically never going back to the moon
Lol even if it fails someone will get to the moon eventually like spacex 😂 I wouldn't say " never going back" because that's just not true
@@reecechadwick8504 yeah, with fire some falcon heavys with parts into Earth orbit. assemble a lunar lander, command pod and support stage and we're off to the moon.
imagine the boosters strapped to a saturn 5
Great “Faith of the Heart” reference!!!
Caught my ear too, nice subtle touch!
GO FOR IT !
Cool vid bro
I agree!
Uh...the space shuttle was a totally untested space craft launched on 12 April 1981 with a crew on board. Yes some glide test were performed but not to orbit.
I've watched the Saturn 5 launch and I'm looking forward to Monday with SLS. I watch Armstrong and Aldrin walk on the moon, along with all the other Landing missions as well. It's a reason for me to look forward to not only this launch but Autumn is 2 and 3 as well.
4:20 it was called Saturn V, and not Saturn IV for a reason...
I think the Saturn IV was a failed test version.
I’m super excited to this tmrw
Shuttle engines, shuttle solid rocket boosters. Apollo capsule. Oblative heat shield. Aren't we going backwards?
Why reinvent what works.
Your analysis seems bang on.
Amazing
What is so important is that they have to do an untested launch in a hurry, when the rocket will end on a loss no matter if the mission ends successfully or not.
One day, you should do an episode on the N1 rocket
Information on the N1 is rather hard to get from the Russians.
Nice
I hate to say this, but even the main fuel tank looks like it was patched up. I understand that a white coat of paint was not applied to reduce weight, but optics are not good for the public to see paint touch ups all over the fuel tank? It's a BIG risk without a Plan B for Artemis 1...hope it goes well on their second launch attempt for this Friday, Sept. 2,2022
Sept 3, Saturday
Cảm giác như mk đang đc nghe 1 bản nhạc chữa lành vậy đó. Giọng hát của đp rất đặc biệt, nhẹ nhàng tình cảm. Xem video thôi đã hay ntn r, ghen tị vs ekip qaa nghe hát live chắc hay gấp 💯lần lunn
Hopefully they'll release Elon's Starship for launch soon after, since you know the government's got to go first. I love the fact on the SLS is being made by all 50 states but it's slowing things down, and driving prices up. I honestly was hoping for something like this late seventies early 80s.
First comment was made a minute in to the video, oh I hope they get it right. Being born in 1970, I grew up with space magazines talking about us already having a colony on Mars and how much further along we would be in a space program. There's a lot riding on NASA with this one, and yes I watched both space shuttles explode, I was in geek that would get a stomach virus every launch of the Space Shuttle just so I can watch it go up, and I usually recorded them on one of those antique VHS things.
Starship is nowhere near ready. It doesn't have a functioning crew compartment, and the Raptor-2 engines are still having mechanical problems (melting etc.).
Starship has its own problem it has to fix first (remember the big explosion on the bottom). I have high hope for them but Starship also didn't have a smooth ride either.
"they"?
When you're talking about CxP you completely missed that Ares V was a LEO optimized vehicle while SLS is a beyond Earth optimized vehicle. They have completely purposes, also SLS it's human rated while Ares V never intended to be (and couldn't be because of RS-68's). Also the CxP architecture is completely different. Basically they wanted to redo Apollo while Artemis looks much further.
Also why would NASA keep old parts? They wanted to replace eventually new, cheaper and more performing components.
I am amped up for Monday! SLS has to work… if not, we might as well accept seeing a Chinese flag next on the moon.
*SpaceX flag
Exactly! I have my fingers crossed either way
OR just get out of the way and let SpaceX do it.
Good video as usual!
I hoped that the SLS would launch but now, after this video was realesed, we know it didin´t happen.
Sad, but a little predictabable after Nasas slow process.. maybe they should go a little against Spacex's way of working
"NASA is unwavering in their support"
Then why did NASA tell Congress that the current cost of SLS is "unsustainable"?
If Artemis I doesn't go perfectly, the Artemis program is probably going to be canceled. The replacement for SLS, if possible at all, would take so long that you'd probably want to redesign the Orion and other parts as well.
The replacement for it,is going to be SpaceX
Honestly, that might be for the best. Redesigning SLS to incorporate new developments in reusable rockets or even as a fully reusable platform would be better than going forward with building more of a rocket that was obsolete before it even launched for the first time.
Another correction… the Saturn Five used five F-1 engines not four
Profit above progress!
RS-25 were directly transferred from space shuttle to SLS, true. The only modification is that the nozzles must be coated with protective material to withstand the heat from the boosters, which they didn't do on the space shuttle, since they were placed higher than the latter.
You point quite well the fact that everything must be by the book on Artemis I to be able to put astronauts on Artemis II. When you think of it, the space shuttle was even launched with a crew on its very first flight, whereas it had not been tested either. Are astronauts brave or slightly suicidal? ;)
Concerning Challenger, what you say sounds slightly ambiguous. I would just like to stress that it was not an accident due to some failed though well-tested piece of equipment. It was a disaster, not an accident, because it was totally avoidable.
Actually.. the engines also have new APU designs that don’t use hydrazine . And controller units . These new parts were bolted on and caused problems during the first Green Run test.
@@dcb1138 Oh, that's right. Thanks for the correction! :)
Woohoo!
STS 1 was the first shuttle launch ever and it flew manned and successfully. It's not the first time NASA does this.
I have faith in sls… faith of the heart
"Space shuttle of the 1970's" so NASA has gone backwards, truly an epic showing to now be throwing away a 4 billion dollar rocket every launch.
As we all know SLS failed to launch today , not good considering the thing is developed hardware from shuttle
SLS is more well known then this video characterized. The RS-25 engines are the most tested and reliable engines ever built and it's the same for the booster stacks. Proving the viability of the whole package is enough... And the mission went flawlessly.
5:33 PDT!
I really want the SLS to work. It will be fantastic to see on Monday (Tuesday for me) this monster rocket lift off. The fact that the future of human space exploration depends on it is a little terrifying, but I am hoping it will go well! This is NASA after all... ;) Thankfully there is a back-up in the works, however it is not tested either. Basically, our future in space is at a crossroads. Lets all hope the Boffins have their numbers right and everything works. :D
3:14 It should be 10 Billion , not 10 Million on screen !
It’s time for NASA too start building our first Star Ship like The Ones one Star Trek 🤔🤔🤔
well, first you need the necessary physics theories for artificial gravity and an FTL drive. Then about 100 years to turn those into an implementation.
Lets do it! Gods Speed! RL
did i miss something? when did the SLS launch? this was out 2 days prior to when it was scheduled to be launched and like we all seen the launch is now delayed till friday. 10 bucks says it is pushed back further yet. the massive money drain continues.
NASA will get it up and running. They just have to do test on it. Their dealing with massive machines, massive robots realy. Soon may be like transformers.
Note that these side mounted solid rocket boosters are virtually the same identical technology used on the space shuttle project, just with an added section, and one of them has previously flown and been recovered and reprocessed, so tell me again where did this 20 billion or so dollars actually get spent
It's a jobs program, SpaceX is where the real innovation is happening. Seeing as how if it can successfully complete an orbital test it's going to obsolete the SLS overnight.
$20 billion? That's peanuts. Military budget is $801 billion PER YEAR. That's 40 SLS projects PER YEAR. Your priorities are wildly off.
@@aeroripper What innovation?
@@veergauba -- I'm sorry but your question borders on utterly retarded. Please do tell us, where is YOUR ~70 meter / ~230 foot re-usable rocket featuring stages that can land themselves on launch pads that are located on massive bodies of seawater that are constantly in motion? Literally nobody else has a rocket that comes even close to matching the Falcon 9's features and accomplishments. And it hasn't been for lack of trying.
The Falcon 9 now has so many successful launches as well as rocket stage landings that, despite the pain-in-the-ass technical hurdles, it now feels routine. A freakin' rocket launching and then landing like a perfectly balanced pencil on a platform in the Atlantic Ocean now feels routine! And they've successfully reused rocket stages now so many times that it has become a minor chore to count them all. You don't think that's innovation? Heck, you might not believe it's even real (my condolences if that's the case).
Always have a backup plan. Be prepared.
@Science Revolution i want some of what u been drinkin
hmmm the solid rockets are from the space shuttle just one segment longer. The liquid engines are from the space shuttle. I wonder if this is the same SLS program?
Very well done sir. I am with you we should give these people a break. This isn’t internet satellites we are sending people to the moon no small feat indeed. I will be on a boat Saturday afternoon to hopefully see history in the making.
You can do it
I think we should forget all these rockets and just go to the moon in flying saucers.
"Just yoloing it" hahaha
I'm in two minds about what a failure would mean.
So after Artemis 3 how many more decades to we have to wait for human to actually have a moon base because I haven't heard of the next plane
He just mentioned NASA Achilles’ heel politics
Great video as usual...
Unrelated question. The long trip to Mars has one major issue, the lack of gravity. Our astronauts will not fair well without it.
I suggest launching two Starships simultaneously. After the initial burn, tether them by the nose with a long cable. Then spin them up for artificial gravity. I've seen a 3D model of a giant trellis to connect them with a third starship in the middle. But that is a lot of wasted mass. A cable would work great. Course correcting burns are possible mid spin.
Has anyone modeled this or sugested it to Elon?
There's gravity on Mars. There's other videos covering the gravity issues but I recall them being on a planned mining /launch base on the moon where people would be working long term, not so much the several month trip to Mars. There's also interesting ideas for a new engine that could cut the time to Mars down to less than a week. Soon, space station= great - moon base = better - Mars colony = (insert new space language here.)
Granted not perfectly, but it is possible.
You got it wrong ! The REAL reason NASA Developed the SLS is because a very influential and powerful bunch of lawmakers wanted to keep their constituents employed and they didn't care how long it took or how much it would cost. So they pushed it through Congress. Than came along an unstart that did things much quicker and much MUCH cheaper. And it sure looked like his space company was going to put all the old time and very expensive companies to shame. So his business got blacklisted and the FAA got strict orders to delay and delay and DELAY ! So the big joke could claim the title as the most powerful rocket .... if only for a brief period of time. If SLS fails than maybe NASA will get its head out of its butt and spend America's money on a organization that Has shown it's self as not only capable and efficient but also timely in getting things done. AHHH we can only hope !
Hello!
Thrust is measured in meganewtons, not metric tonnes.
definitely watch in 1.25x speed or 1.5x speed
4:16 Actually it had 5 F1 engines
16:00 we are watching the future of human space exploration
Nah... at most we are watching the swan song of NASA human space flight.
Private companies will take it from here.
It took 9 years to develop the Space Shuttle to it's first launch. Not 5 years
Government is meant to be simple and strong. Single - minded. Defend the nation. Defend individual rights of citizens. Gov should not be engaging in grand enterprise.
Says who? Why settle for a idiotic backwards nation of fools with no ambition like yourself?
Rip x-33
and sls time is finally near (i see what you did there)
They're going the Soviet way of rocket testing
whatever doesn't work blows up on the pad, if it gets to orbit it is declared a sucessful test If the astronaut survives it is called a sucessful mission.
.
Return:
Why would NASA want to divulge on the things they do? I mean I don’t think I’ve heard on the very serious things Roscosmos is undergoing.
This question deserves an answer. It would be a great subject for a future video.
Maybe Roscosmos is not doing much at the moment, so not much to hear about, but I'd like to hear that from someone who has researched it. On the other hand, the Chinese are divulging what they are doing, but our press is not reporting it. That should be explained too. Why is the US news media not reporting what China is doing?
for all who worked or knowledgeable in rocket science.... whats stoping us from doing a 4 booster rockets instead of 2?
I call it the Big Orange Joke
NASA will need SpaceX!!!!! SLS cashed it's last check if this candle don't burn Right
What happens when they run out of engines?
Build more. If needed, but it's unlikely they'll be needed.
11:45 40* actually
Stupid idea: launch 3-4 Falcon 9 to put the pieces of the moon train together in orbit. It'll be a third of the price of an SLS.
The only logical and safe thing to do if NASA is insistent on putting a crew on board the second ever SLS and sending them on translunar trajectory is to redesign the entire calendar of the program and to require that that second SLS Mission coincide and correlate directly with the first translator and lunar Landing demonstration of Starship, and require that Starship be capable of crew life support and return to an earth Landing, whether it is true rated or not at that point. This would provide the only possible redundancy and emergency recovery system for the crew of a failed second SLS Mission once it's in translunar insertion. This of course would require some kind of crew transfer system and substantial fuel reserve for maneuvering to Rendezvous in lunar orbit or possibly even in transuner or transverse flight meaning Starship would have to have substantial fuel Reserve and substantial navigation capabilities. NASA, by moving forward in this absurd manner, is literally violating all safety protocols that have ever existed in the Aerospace industry and they're basically telling the world the crew the astronauts themselves are simply tools for evaluation and are fully expendable.
Starship is no way near ready for any of that, so it will just delay Artemis 2 if one is to wait for that. Astronauts are fully expendable - they know that. These missions that push the boundaries of exploration are dangerous. There is a faction in NASA who would prefer to focus on robotic exploration, and they may win out.
@@veergauba Musk wants NASA to continue funding human space exploration. He doesn't want Starship to be the only program trying to colonize other planets. The problem is there isn't a market for human spaceflight that could sustain the development of a vehicle capable of it, so taxpayer money is used to create one.
This is not what the plan is. Starship will not carry astronauts into orbit or back to earth. Orion will be responsible for that. Orion will rendezvous with Starship when they are both docked at the NASA gateway. The crew will transfer to Starship for the lunar landing. The reverse will happen at mission completion, with Orion returning the astronauts to earth.
@@sunitamosesesq clearly you have no reading skills
Hi
Bill Nelson was an astronaut before joining congress. A wannabe John Glenn. But a legitimate space fan.
To justify that budget !!
Only 100 tons?
4:16 *Five, not four.
August 2014 engine sensor failed is SpaceX not nasa
To keep the pigs well fed
NASA is relying on old Space Shuttle components. There were over a million parts on the Shuttle/Orbiter and how many are being reused now for SLS? Somewhat bad to rely on that old system, even though they may have updated many components, which is why it has taken so long? In any event, the best thing they added was the Launch Abort System. Just not sure of the engines after this length of time. I'm sure they have had plenty of tests, but they are very old now. Still, good luck to NASA in getting back to space.
I think SLS manager or whatever his title is Bill Nelson should be required to fly on that Artemis 2 mission
He's the NASA administrator. His job is to funnel taxpayer money between NASA's contractors and congress, while telling the public what a great job NASA's doing (seriously, go watch his recent announcement speech of SLS's roll-out).
SLS is built around flight proven hardware. The engines and SRB’s are old shuttle technology. It will all work….when the bugs are worked out!
But you can't work the bugs out without launch tests. and so far SLS has NEVER passed even a wet dress rehearsal.
Why did you use SpaceX footage?
Dont get me wrong , I am hoping that SLS launches tomorrow but it seems like Nasa is getting it wrong, the only way you can look at launching rockets and cost effective is to make as much of the rocket reusable, the SRB's Corestage , second stage will all burn up on re-entry and gone for ever , the only thing that is supposed to be reusable is the orion space craft but even that is to be determined.
They aren't just taking their time, they are taking out money. Give it it Elon and others.