/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12771161
>stand aside

>>12517326
can you imagine? so silly! haha

>>12275442
>Why did NASA hate the shuttle c when it was choosing a program to replace the shuttle
Shuttle C came before the Shuttle needed replacing, but a technical reason for not resurrecting it could be payload limitations. Whatever payload the Shuttle C have to carry must fit in a payload bay off the side of the tank. That bay is limited in size due to aerodynamic and load limits, and thus limits how big the payloads can be. Shuttle C was expected to carry 45t to LEO and maybe that can increase to 60t, but that's still below the most basic version of SLS. The bay could be redesigned to be placed on top of the tank, but that would require the tank to be redesigned and that's already along the SLS development path. At that point it would be simpler to go for a pure traditional stack of a rocket rather than this weird side-cart rocket configuration.

>>12267893
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ptPdlVAwFg

>>11403698
>It's truly incredible what sunk cost can do

>>11334167
>nasa
>doable timescale

>NASA needs a rocket larger than anything flying currently
>something to help establish putting people on the moon
>doesn't have the development money to make new parts
>plans to use preexisting parts to speed up development time and reduce costs
>was unpopular at first
>government tried to kill it but came back with a vengeance
>finished ahead of schedule and below budget
>flew prototype moon capsules
>put NASA on track to the moon
>loved and fondly remembered by every spaceflight fan
>it feels good to be the Saturn I
pic unrelated

>>10994268
>No vehicle has components on it which do nothing.

>>10992055
>Here's your rocket bro

>>10940235
>They get delayed by a year every year

Do you think that when the SLS gets cancelled there will be an investigation on how the project was so poorly managed? Do you think there will be any repercussions to those directly involved? Do you think that all of SLS will be quietly swept away to avoid a scandal?

I think that nothing will come of SLS being cancelled. The US government has shown to not really care if management of NASA is poor. For example, after Challenger, various engineers have been fired (along with one of the guys who was the most vocal about not launching), but nothing was really done about the people who actually made the decision to launch Challenger. Once the SLS gets ended, all problems related to it would be quietly dismissed while moving on to other projects.

>NASA needed a rocket larger than anything else it was flying
>will be used to establish new missions towards putting boots on the moon
>even though NASA could barely get people into LEO
>NASA couldn't afford to make new parts
>spare parts from other rockets are used to make development faster and cheaper
>was nearly cancelled but came back with a vengeance
>developed and flown faster than estimated
>helped NASA send people to the moon
>remembered fondly by spaceflight fans
>feels good to be the Saturn I
>pic unrelated