SLS delayed due to a fauilty valve again

[Anonymous No.12767356]

No test flight to the Moon this year. Flight has been delated to the end of 2022

NASA delays 2nd test fire of SLS megarocket booster due to valve issue
>NASA's moon megarocket is facing yet another testing delay ahead of the vehicle's expected first flight for the Artemis program.
>For months, NASA personnel have been conducting a series of tests called a "green run" on the first core stage of the agency's massive new rocket, the Space Launch System (SLS). The tests are occurring at the NASA Stennis Space Center in Mississippi ahead of being shipped to Florida for the uncrewed Artemis 1 launch from the NASA Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando.
>In a short update Monday (Feb. 22), NASA said it is "reviewing the performance of a valve on the core stage" of the SLS, forcing the agency to delay the second "hot fire" test. A new date for the hot fire has not yet been announced.
https://www.space.com/nasa-delays-sls-megarocket-2nd-green-run-engine-test

[Anonymous No.12767367]

Boeing Is Delaying America’s Return to Space, NASA Report Says
>Boeing Co.’s construction of the largest rocket in NASA’s history is projected to cost $8.9 billion—double the initial budget. While taxpayer-funded cost overruns are de rigueur when talking about the U.S. military industrial complex, the massive aerospace company is also two years behind schedule, a gap that could widen further, according to an audit by NASA’s inspector general
>What are the reasons for the delay and cost overruns? “Management, technical, and infrastructure issues driven by Boeing’s poor performance,” the inspector general wrote in the report, released Wednesday. NASA “lacks visibility” into the stages’ costs because all three parts of the contract are co-mingled, “contrary to current federal guidance.”
>The un-crewed EM-1 mission was initially slated for December 2017; an EM-2 launch with a crew was set for mid-2021. NASA still plans the EM-1 launch in 2020 but concedes that technical and schedule risks could delay the mission. The EM-2 launch will come “no later than 2023,” the agency said in an email.

https://www.industryweek.com/leadership/article/22026492/boeing-is-delaying-americas-return-to-space-nasa-report-says

[Anonymous No.12767402]

Second prevalve issue delays completion of SLS Core Stage Green Run campaign
>A problem with another one of the eight prevalves in the Artemis 1 Core Stage for NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) has postponed a second test-firing to wrap up the Green Run campaign. The SLS Program’s first flight article has been installed in the B-2 Test Stand at the Stennis Space Center in southern Mississippi since January 2020
>This is the second problem with a prevalve during the Core Stage’s Green Run test campaign that began at the beginning of 2020. The first problem was with the liquid hydrogen (LH2) prevalve for engine number four.
>Fixing the problem with this second balky prevalve will take some time because engineers needed to get “under the hood” access to the vehicle, which was already closed out for the Hot-Fire test when the new problem was discovered. In order to get hands on the prevalve, work access needed to be re-established.
>If this new issue is a recurrence of the similar problem with the Core Stage Main Propulsion System prevalves seen last October, it may have other implications if there’s a generic issue with the prevalve hardware itself. The valves are critical to the safe operation of the stage; they must behave within specifications, fully opening and closing within time limits to ensure proper engine ignition and shutdown conditions.
>NASA said the troubleshooting of the LOX prevalve would help to identify repairs needed. A new date will depend in part on how extensive and invasive the repair work is.
Special tooling was designed, fabricated, and employed to perform the first prevalve repair and could be used again; however, work access to the LOX prevalves may be different than the LH2 prevalves.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/02/prevalve-issue-delays-sls-green-run/

[Anonymous No.12767409]

Cancel SLS.

[Anonymous No.12767443]

>>12767409
This.
It is just welfare for Boeing. The contract is cost-plus. So Boeing makes more money by doing a shittier job.

[Anonymous No.12767662]

>>12767409
Actually Falcon Heavy alone that is already working and proven can carry all the colonization of the Moon. Simple, cheap and reliable tecnology.
I would bet that they would have solved the interface with Orion, faster than Boeing can change the foulty valve.

[Anonymous No.12767685]

>>12767367
>Boeing Is Delaying America’s Return to Space, NASA Report Says
pretty sure spaceX already fixed that like a year ago.

[Anonymous No.12767698]

>>12767685
But they are a private company. They should have at least the resources that government is giving to Boeing.

[Anonymous No.12767711]

>>12767356
Why don't they just rebuild Saturn V?

[Anonymous No.12767743]

>>12767711
The diversity hires and trannies that make up NASA don't know how.

[Anonymous No.12767759]

>>12767698
Why is SLS falling apart in that pic?

[Anonymous No.12767809]

>>12767711
All the tooling is gone and rebuilding it exactly to spec would be stupid anyway.
Revising it with modern manufacturing techniques, materials, and electronics would be so much work that you might as well just start from scratch.

They did do some work on a proposed F-1B engine though, pic related. Ultimately it's pretty foolish to develop any new expendable rocket right now though.

[Anonymous No.12767888]

>>12767711
Is way faster and cheaper to give space x more money, so they can build more falcon heavies that can carry the space program, and give them restricted airspace above boca chica by presidential order, so the FAA stop breaking their balls. But of course that makes too much sense. So the circus will continue and tax payers money will be wasted.

[Anonymous No.12768049]

>>12767888
The owner of the Washington Post won't allow any of that.

[Anonymous No.12768415]

Why the fuck are nasa still using boeing?

[Anonymous No.12768498]

>>12767356
>moon megarocket
It's not a moon megarocket, it's just a moonrocket. Barely so.