NASA reshuffles dates for Artemis I launch attempt

NASA has once again pushed back the launch of the Artemis I mission to send the SLS rocket and Orion capsule beyond the Moon. Last week the agency said it was targeting September 23 at the earliest, and September 27 as a potential backup if the launch has to be scrubbed for the third time. Now NASA has said a cryogenic …

[Tom Chiverton 1]

"critics will renew calls for NASA to retire from making rockets"

Depends, do you think Artemis is intended to actual build a functioning rocket, or just provide reasonably cheap employment for thousands of thousands of people who'd otherwise be out of a job and costing (more) money ?

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Cos in this economy rocket engineers would forced to beg on the street.

If NASA are paying enough to attract engineers from the real world they are causing worker shortages and inflation. Cancellation of SLS is equivalent to building a new Caltech

[usbac]

The last time I did some rough calculations, I came to the conclusion that NASA could have paid all of the workers (their own, and the contractors workforce) a decent wage to stay home and do nothing, and still would have saved a lot of money. I think the using up of expensive materials and supplies, is what makes the number work.

Just think of what could have been accomplished with things like open source projects, if all of the engineers and software developers could have spent their time doing useful stuff while getting paid by NASA to "not build spacecraft".

[Anonymous Coward]

" that NASA could have ...

... paid all of the workers (their own, and the contractors workforce) a decent wage to stay home and do nothing, and still would have saved a lot of money"

I see. And also rename themselves the National Arse Sitting Agency, while they were at it?

:-D

[Anonymous Coward]

Close, but no cigar

The critics you get are common people. The Senators and Representatives who have people employed in their states and districts keep it going (and legislate to that effect). The contractors make sure the campaign contributions flow to them.

It's worse in the defense industry. For example, the $1.7t (trillion, not billion) F-35 program is being increased rather than canceled because of politics.

[spuck]

Re: Close, but no cigar

SLS = Senate Launch System

As long as there are parts of the SLS built in my state by my constituents, it is a great program for the country.

[Anonymous Coward]

Reading the corner cutting...

Let's hope this isn't management speak, heading for another 1986 Challenger Disaster.

There really is no point cutting corners and rushing, blowing it up on the pad, because that would be the end of Artemis for sure.

[Richard 12]

Re: Reading the corner cutting...

There are some who aren't entirely convinced that would be a bad thing, per se.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Reading the corner cutting...

If i read the article correctly, the concern is that the battery to the "deliberately blow up just after the pad" system won't work - so you would have to rely on it blowing itself up.

[Mayday]

Re: Reading the corner cutting...

"you would have to rely on it blowing itself up"

In he right place and time too. Let's say the thing takes a wrong turn and points itself at Titusville or Orlando and flight control can't resume correct navigation. You'll want to blow it up deliberately well before it gets to an urban centre rather than hope it manages to do it itself on its own before it hits something.

[Potemkine!]

critics will renew calls for NASA to retire from making rockets

Does NASA make rockets directly or ask subcontractors to do it? By any chance, would Boeing be involved? Because that may explain a lot.

== Bring us Dabbsy back! ==

[EnviableOne]

ULA (that makes the SLS) is a joint venture with Boeing and Lockheed Martin Space

Northrop Grumman and Aerojet Rocketdyne are also contributing suppliers.

so rather than attracting campaign finance in Texas and California, SLS brings it in across like 30 states