Space Launch System

The Space Launch System (SLS) is a super heavy-lift expendable launch vehicle, which has been under development by NASA in the United States since its announcement in 2011. It will be the primary launch vehicle of NASA's deep space exploration plans,[20][21] including the planned crewed lunar flights of the Artemis program and a possible follow-on human mission to Mars.[22][23][24] 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 cancelation 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.[25][26]

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 after development [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
  • Block 1: 95,000 kg (209,000 lb) [13]
  • Block 2: 130,000 kg (290,000 lb) [14]
Payload to Moon
  • Block 1: > 26,000 kg (57,000 lb) [15]
  • Block 1B Crew: 34,000–37,000 kg (75,000–82,000 lb)
  • Block 1B Cargo: 37,000–40,000 kg (82,000–88,000 lb)
  • Block 2: > 45,000 kg (99,000 lb)
Launch history
StatusNovember 2021 [16]
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) [17]
Gross mass1,600,000 lb (730,000 kg) [17]
Thrust16,000 kN (3,600,000 lbf)
Total thrust32,000 kN (7,200,000 lbf)
Specific impulse269 s (2.64 km/s)
Burn time126 seconds
FuelPBAN, APCP
First stage (Block 1, 1B, 2) – Core stage
Length65 m (212 ft)[18]
Diameter8.4 m (27.6 ft)[18]
Empty mass85,270 kg (187,990 lb)
Gross mass979,452 kg (2,159,322 lb)
Engines4 RS-25D/E[19]
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 seconds (4.53 km/s)
Burn time1125 seconds
FuelLH2 / LOX
Second stage (Block 1B, Block 2) – Exploration Upper Stage
Diameter8.4 m (28 ft)
Engines4 RL10
Thrust440 kN (99,000 lbf)
FuelLH2 / LOX
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).

The initial variant of SLS, Block 1, was required by the US Congress to lift a payload of 70 tonnes (69 long tons; 77 short tons)[27] to low Earth orbit (LEO), but it was later planned to exceed that requirement with a rated payload capacity of 95 tonnes (93 long tons; 105 short tons).[28] As of 22 December 2019, this variant is planned to launch Artemis 1, Artemis 2, Artemis 3, and Europa Clipper.[29] The later Block 1B is intended to debut the Exploration Upper Stage and launch the notional Artemis 4 through Artemis 7.[30] Block 2 is planned to replace the initial Shuttle-derived boosters with advanced boosters and would have a LEO capability of more than 130 tonnes (130 long tons; 140 short tons), again as required by Congress.[27] Block 2 is intended to enable crewed launches to Mars.[24] SLS is to have the world's highest-ever total thrust at launch,[31][32] but not the world's highest ever payload mass.[33][34][35] The SLS is planned to launch the Orion spacecraft and use the ground operations and launch facilities at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

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.[18][19][36] The core stage is structurally and visually similar to the Space Shuttle external tank,[25][37] 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.[38] 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.[39]

The core stage is fabricated at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility[40] and is common across all currently planned evolutions of the SLS to avoid the need for redesigns to meet varying requirements.[36][41][42][43]

Boosters

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.[44] The five-segment SRBs provide approximately 25% more total impulse than the Shuttle SRB, but will no longer be recovered after use.[45][46]

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.[47] 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.[48]

Upper stage

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.[49][50] 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.[51] The ICPS for Artemis 1 was delivered by ULA to NASA about July 2017,[52] and was housed at Kennedy Space Centre as of November 2018.[53] As of February 2020, ICPS (not EUS) is planned for Artemis 1, 2, and 3.[54] ICPS will now be human-rated for the crewed Artemis-2 flight.[54]

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.[55] 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.[56]

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 tonnes (93 long tons; 105 short tons)[13] 26 tonnes (26 long tons; 29 short tons)[13]
Block 1B 105 tonnes (103 long tons; 116 short tons)[57] 40 t[58]
Block 2 130 tonnes (130 long tons; 140 short tons)[14] 45 t [58] 45 tonnes (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.[59]

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.[60][61] These costs and schedule were considered optimistic in an independent 2011 cost assessment report by Booz Allen Hamilton for NASA.[62]

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),[63][64] with the 130-tonne version ready no earlier than 2030.[65]

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.[66] However, since these estimates were made the Block 0 SLS vehicle was dropped in late 2011, and the design was not completed.[67]

In September 2012, an SLS deputy project manager stated that US$500 million per launch is a reasonable target cost for SLS.[68]

In 2013, the Space Review estimated the cost per launch at US$5 billion, depending on the rate of launches.[69][70] NASA announced in 2013 that the European Space Agency will build the Orion service module.[71]

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.[72][19][73]

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.[74] On 14 February 2013, Aerojet was awarded a $23.3 million, 30-month contract to build a 2,400 kN (550,000 lbf) main injector and thrust chamber.[75]
  • 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.[76]
  • Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne and Dynetics proposed a liquid-fueled booster named Pyrios.[77]

In 2013, the manager of NASA's SLS advanced development office indicated that all three approaches were viable.[78]

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.[79][80] 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.[81] The overly powerful booster would need modifications to Launch Pad 39B, its flame trench, and Mobile Launcher, which are being evaluated.[79]

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.[82] Ground systems modifications and construction would require an additional US$1.8 billion over the same time period.[83]

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 initial planned amount.[84]

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.[85]

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.[86] 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.[87] 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.[88]

In May 2019, NASA's Office of Audits reported that the SLS Block 1's marginal cost per launch is to be at least US$876 million.[89] By comparison, a Saturn V launch cost roughly $1.23 billion in 2016 dollars.[90][91] A letter from the White House to the Senate Appropriations Committee revealed that the SLS's cost per launch is estimated at "over US$2 billion" after development.[92] NASA did not deny this cost 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".[93]

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.[94]

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.[95]

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

Fiscal Year Funding (nominal, in millions) Funding (In US$ 2020, in millions)[95] Status
2011 $1,536.1 $1,819.9 Actual[9]
(Formal SLS Program reporting excludes the Fiscal 2011 budget.)[96]
2012 $1,497.5 $1,755.5 Actual[8]
2013 $1,414.9 $1,634.1 Actual[7]
2014 $1,600.0 $1,812.3 Actual[6]
2015 $1,678.6 $1,863.8 Actual[5]
2016 $1,971.9 $2,159.6 Actual[4]
2017 $2,127.1 $2,286.8 Actual[3]
2018 $2,150.0 $2,256.6 Actual[2]
2019 $2,144.0 $2,199.9 Actual[1]
2020 $2,525.8 $2,525.8 Enacted[1]
2011–2020 Total: $18,648 M Total: $20,314 M

Excluded from the prior SLS costs are:

  • Costs of the predecessor Ares V / Cargo Launch Vehicle (funded from 2008 to 2010)[97]
  • Costs for the Ares I / Crew Launch Vehicle (funded from 2006 to 2010, a total of US$4.8 billion[97][98] in development that included the 5-segment Solid Rocket Boosters that will be used on the SLS)
  • Costs to assemble, integrate, prepare and launch the SLS and its payloads such as Orion (funded under the NASA Ground Operations Project,[99] currently about US$400 million[6] per year)
  • Costs of payloads for the SLS (such as Orion)

Included in the prior 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[100]
  • Costs of the future Upper Stage for the SLS, the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) (funded at US$85 million in 2016,[101] US$300 million in 2017,[102] US$300 million in 2018,[103] and US$150 million in 2019[104])

There are no current NASA estimates for the average costs per flight of SLS, nor for the SLS program recurring yearly costs once operational. In 2016, the projected annual cost for Orion, SLS, and ground systems was US$2 billion or less.[105] NASA associate administrator William H. Gerstenmaier has said that per flight cost estimates will not be provided by NASA.[106]

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.[107]

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.[108][109][110] The 5-segment SRB would be carried over to SLS.[79]

Early SLS

During the early development of the SLS a number of configurations were considered, including a Block 0 variant with three main engines,[36] a Block 1A variant with upgraded boosters instead of the improved second stage,[36] and a Block 2 with five main engines and the Earth Departure Stage, with up to three J-2X engines.[43] In February 2015, it was determined that these concepts would exceed the congressionally mandated Block 1 and Block 1B baseline payloads.[79]

On 14 September 2011, NASA announced the new launch system,[111] which is intended to take the agency's astronauts farther into space than ever before and provide the cornerstone for future US human space exploration efforts in combination with the Orion spacecraft.[112][113][114]

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.[115] 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.[82][116]

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.[117]

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.[118][119]

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.[120] Qualification Motor 2 (QM-2) was successfully tested on 28 June 2016.

Current 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.

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.[27][57][121]

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.[122] Between 2015 and 2017, NASA test fired RS-25 engines in preparation for use on SLS.[39]

As of late 2015, the SLS program was stated to have a 70% confidence level for the first crewed Orion flight by 2023.[123][124][125]

Confidence article builds for the core stage began on 5 January 2016 and were expected to be completed in late January of that year. Once completed the test articles will be sent to ensure structural integrity at Marshall Spaceflight Center. A structural test article of the ICPS was delivered in 2015, with the core stage for Artemis 1 completing assembly in November 2019.[126]

The intended first flight of SLS has slipped multiple times: originally from October 2016[127] to October 2017,[128] to November 2018,[129] then to 2019,[130] then to June 2020,[131] then to April 2021,[132] and most recently to November 2021.[16]

The first core stage left Michoud for comprehensive testing at Stennis in January 2020.[133] The static firing test program at Stennis, known as the Green Run, will operate all the core stage systems simultaneously for the first time.[134][135]

Criticism

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 tonnes (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.[136]

In 2011–2012, the Space Access Society, Space Frontier Foundation and The Planetary Society called for cancellation of the project, arguing that SLS will consume the funds for other projects from the NASA budget.[137][138][139] U.S. Representative Dana Rohrabacher and others proposed that an orbital propellant depot should be developed and the Commercial Crew Development program accelerated instead.[137][140][141][142][143] A NASA study that was not publicly released[144][145] and another from the Georgia Institute of Technology showed this option to be possibly cheaper.[146][147] 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.[148][149][150][151][152] 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.[153]

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.[154]

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.[155][156] 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.[157] 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.[158]

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.[138][159][160] Opponents of the heavy launch vehicle have critically used the name "Senate launch system".[49] 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".[137]

In 2013, Chris Kraft, the NASA mission control leader from the Apollo era, expressed his criticism of the system as well.[161] Lori Garver, former NASA Deputy Administrator, has called for canceling the launch vehicle alongside Mars 2020 rover.[162] Phil Plait has voiced his criticism of SLS in light of ongoing budget tradeoffs between Commercial Crew Development and SLS budget, also referring to earlier critique by Garver.[163]

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 is expected in 2021.[164][165]

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.[107][166]

Planned launches
Main article: List of Space Launch System launches
Flight No. Date / time (UTC) Configuration Payload Orbit Outcome
1 November 2021[167] 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 (CLSI), and three missions in the Cube Quest Challenge.[168][169] The payloads will be sent on a trans-lunar injection trajectory.[170][171]
2 2023[172] Block 1 Crew
TLI Planned
Crewed, lunar flyby. Carrying the Artemis 2 mission hardware, along with numerous cubesats to be selected through the CSLI.[173][174]
3 2024 Block 1 Crew[175]
Selenocentric Planned
Crewed lunar rendezvous and landing. Carrying the Artemis 3 mission hardware.[176]
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.[179]
  1. As of 2019, it is mandated for launch aboard the Block 1 Cargo in 2025,[176][177][178][172] though may alternatively launch on a Block 1B Cargo.[179][180][181]
  • 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 $2 billion" cost of a single SLS launch". arstechnica. 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.
  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 $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.com. 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. Clark, Stephen (1 May 2020). "Hopeful for launch next year, NASA aims to resume SLS operations within weeks". Retrieved 3 May 2020.
  17. Harbaugh, Jennifer (17 July 2020). "Stacking the Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters". NASA. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
  18. 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.
  19. "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.
  20. 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.
  21. "World's Most Powerful Deep Space Rocket Set To Launch In 2018". Iflscience.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  22. Chiles, James R. "Bigger Than Saturn, Bound for Deep Space". airspacemag.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  23. "Finally, some details about how NASA actually plans to get to Mars". arstechnica.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
  24. Gebhardt, Chris (6 April 2017). "NASA finally sets goals, missions for SLS – eyes multi-step plan to Mars". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 21 August 2017.
  25. Stephen Clark (31 March 2011). "NASA to set exploration architecture this summer". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
  26. Dwayne Day (25 November 2013). "Burning thunder".
  27. "The NASA Authorization Act of 2010". Featured Legislation. Washington, D.C., United States: United States 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.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. "Space Launch System". aerospaceguide.net.
  31. 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.
  32. Wall, Mike (16 August 2016). "Yes, NASA's New Megarocket Will Be More Powerful Than the Saturn V". Space.com. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
  33. 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.
  34. Wells, Jane (26 January 2016). "Boeing builds the most powerful rocket ever made". cnbc.com.
  35. Wood, Anthony (25 July 2015). "Most powerful rocket ever edges closer to lift-off". New Atlas. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
  36. Chris Bergin (4 October 2011). "SLS trades lean towards opening with four RS-25s on the core stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  37. Chris Bergin (14 September 2011). "SLS finally announced by NASA – Forward path taking shape". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  38. Sloss, Philip. "NASA ready to power up the RS-25 engines for SLS". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 10 March 2015.
  39. Campbell, Lloyd (25 March 2017). "NASA conducts 13th test of Space Launch System RS-25 engine". SpaceflightInsider.com. Retrieved 29 April 2017.
  40. "NASA's Space Launch System Core Stage Passes Major Milestone, Ready to Start Construction". Space Travel. 27 December 2012.
  41. Chris Bergin (25 April 2011). "SLS planning focuses on dual phase approach opening with SD HLV". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  42. Bergin, Chris (16 June 2011). "Managers SLS announcement after SD HLV victory". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  43. Bergin, Chris (23 February 2012). "Acronyms to Ascent – SLS managers create development milestone roadmap". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  44. OUR TO FIVE: ENGINEER DETAILS CHANGES MADE TO SLS BOOSTER Jan 2016
  45. 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.
  46. "Space Launch System: How to launch NASA's new monster rocket". NASASpaceflight.com. 20 February 2012. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  47. 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.
  48. 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.
  49. Rosenberg, Zach. "Delta second stage chosen as SLS interim". Flight International, May 8, 2012.
  50. Henry, Kim (30 October 2014). "Getting to Know You, Rocket Edition: Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage". nasa.gov. Retrieved 25 July 2020.
  51. "Space Launch System Data Sheet". SpaceLaunchReport.com. Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  52. SLS Upper Stage set to take up residence in the former home of ISS modules July 2017
  53. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  54. Upper Stage RL10s arrive at Stennis for upcoming SLS launches Feb 2020
  55. "SLS prepares for PDR – Evolution eyes Dual-Use Upper Stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 12 March 2015.
  56. "NASA confirms EUS for SLS Block 1B design and EM-2 flight". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 24 July 2014.
  57. "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.
  58. "Space Launch System Lift Capabilities and Configurations" (PDF). This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  59. "SLS to be robust in the face of scrubs, launch delays and pad stays". NASASpaceFlight.com. 4 April 2012. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
  60. Marcia Smith (14 September 2011). "New NASA Crew Transportation System to Cost $18 Billion Through 2017". Space Policy Online. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  61. Bill Nelson, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Charles F. Bolden (14 September 2011). Future of NASA Space Program. Washington, D.C.: Cspan.org.
  62. 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.
  63. Andy Paszior (7 September 2011). "White House Experiences Sticker Shock Over NASA's Plans". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 22 February 2015.
  64. "ESD Integration, Budget Availability Scenarios" (PDF). Space Policy Online. 19 August 2011. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  65. Marcia Smith (9 September 2011). "The NASA Numbers Behind That WSJ Article". Space Policy Online. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  66. "HEFT Phase I Closeout" (PDF). nasawatch.com. September 2010. p. 69.
  67. Chris Bergin (4 October 2011). "SLS trades lean towards opening with four RS-25s on the core stage". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 16 September 2013.
  68. "NASA's huge new rocket may cost $500 million per launch". NBC News. 12 September 2012.
  69. 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.
  70. John Strickland (15 July 2013). "Revisiting SLS/Orion launch costs". The Space Review. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  71. 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.
  72. Keith Cowing (14 September 2011). "NASA's New Space Launch System Announced – Destination TBD". SpaceRef. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  73. Frank Morring (17 June 2011). "NASA Will Compete Space Launch System Boosters". Aviation Week. Retrieved 20 June 2011.
  74. "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.
  75. 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.
  76. "The Dark Knights – ATK's Advanced Boosters for SLS revealed". NASASpaceFlight.com. 14 January 2013.
  77. 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.
  78. "SLS Block II drives hydrocarbon engine research". thespacereview.com. 14 January 2013.
  79. Bergin, Chris. "Advanced Boosters progress towards a solid future for SLS". NasaSpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 25 February 2015.
  80. "Second SLS Mission Might Not Carry Crew". spacenews.com. 21 May 2014. Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  81. "Wind Tunnel testing conducted on SLS configurations, including Block 1B". NASASpaceFlight.com. July 2012.
  82. Foust, Jeff (27 August 2014). "SLS Debut Likely To Slip to 2018". SpaceNews.com. Retrieved 12 March 2015.
  83. Davis, Jason. "NASA Budget Lists Timelines, Costs and Risks for First SLS Flight". The Planetary Society. Retrieved 11 March 2015.
  84. "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.
  85. "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.
  86. Smith, Rich (26 March 2019). "Is NASA Preparing to Cancel Its Space Launch System?". The Motley Fool. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
  87. "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.
  88. "Space Launch Report". www.spacelaunchreport.com. Retrieved 22 May 2019.
  89. "MANAGEMENT OF NASA'S EUROPA MISSION" (PDF). oig.nasa.gov. Retrieved 8 November 2019. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  90. "SP-4221 The Space Shuttle Decision- Chapter 6: ECONOMICS AND THE SHUTTLE". NASA. Retrieved 15 January 2011. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  91. "Apollo Program Budget Appropriations". NASA. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  92. "NASA does not deny the "over $2 billion" cost of a single SLS launch" (PDF). Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  93. BERGER, ERIC. "NASA does not deny the "over $2 billion" cost of a single SLS launch". arstechnica. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  94. 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.
  95. "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.
  96. "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.
  97. "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.
  98. "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.
  99. "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.
  100. "Definitive Contract NNM12AA82C". govtribe.com. Retrieved 16 December 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  101. "Consolidated Appropriations Act 2016" (PDF). house.gov. p. 183. Retrieved 16 December 2018.
  102. "NASA outlines plan for 2024 lunar landing". SpaceNews.com. 1 May 2019. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
  103. Berger, Eric (20 May 2019). "NASA's full Artemis plan revealed: 37 launches and a lunar outpost". Ars Technica. Retrieved 20 May 2019.
  104. Sloss, Philip. "Amid competing priorities, Boeing redesigns NASA SLS Exploration Upper Stage". NASA Spaceflight. Retrieved 25 July 2020.
  105. Berger, Eric (19 August 2016). "How much will SLS and Orion cost to fly? Finally some answers". arstechnica.com. Retrieved 16 December 2018.
  106. Berger, Eric (20 October 2017). "NASA chooses not to tell Congress how much deep space missions cost". arstechnica.com. Retrieved 16 December 2018.
  107. "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.
  108. "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.
  109. "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.
  110. "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.
  111. "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.
  112. "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.
  113. "Press Conference on the Future of NASA Space Program". C-Span. 14 September 2011. Retrieved 14 September 2011.
  114. Kenneth Chang (14 September 2011). "NASA Unveils New Rocket Design". The New York Times. Retrieved 14 September 2011.
  115. "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.
  116. "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.
  117. Chris Gebhardt (13 November 2013). "SLS upper stage proposals reveal increasing payload-to-destination options". NASASpaceFlight.com.
  118. 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.
  119. 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.
  120. Bergin, Chris (10 March 2015). "QM-1 shakes Utah with two minutes of thunder". NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 10 March 2015.
  121. Karl Tate (16 September 2011). "Space Launch System: NASA's Giant Rocket Explained". Space.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  122. "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.
  123. Foust, Jeff (16 September 2015). "First Crewed Orion Mission May Slip to 2023". SpaceNews.com. Retrieved 23 June 2016.
  124. Clark, Stephen (16 September 2015). "Orion spacecraft may not fly with astronauts until 2023". spaceflightnow.com. Retrieved 23 June 2016.
  125. 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.
  126. "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.
  127. https://www.planetary.org/articles/20161003-horizon-goal-part-4
  128. https://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/home/spacenews/files/8ef7f2e7f3ddec1c1a67085fd26c335b-336.html
  129. https://spacenews.com/nasa-inspector-general-foresees-additional-slsorion-delays/
  130. Clark, Stephen (28 April 2017). "NASA confirms first flight of Space Launch System will slip to 2019". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 29 April 2017.
  131. Clark, Stephen (20 November 2017). "NASA expects first Space Launch System flight to slip into 2020". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 24 May 2018.
  132. Gebhardt, Chris (21 February 2020). "SLS debut slips to April 2021, KSC teams working through launch sims". NASASpaceFlight. Retrieved 21 February 2020.
  133. Rincon, Paul (9 January 2020). "Nasa Moon rocket core leaves for testing". Retrieved 9 January 2020.
  134. "Boeing, NASA getting ready for SLS Core Stage Green Run campaign ahead of Stennis arrival". NASASpaceFlight.com. 14 December 2019. Retrieved 9 January 2020.
  135. "NASA Will Have 8 Minute Hold Down Test in 2020". Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  136. 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.
  137. Henry Vanderbilt (15 September 2011). "Impossibly High NASA Development Costs Are Heart of the Matter". moonandback.com. Retrieved 26 January 2012.
  138. 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.
  139. "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.
  140. 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.
  141. "Rohrabacher calls for "emergency" funding for CCDev". parabolicarc.com. 24 August 2011. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  142. Jeff Foust (15 September 2011). "A monster rocket, or just a monster?". The Space Review.
  143. Jeff Foust (1 November 2011). "Can NASA develop a heavy-lift rocket?". The Space Review.
  144. Mohney, Doug (21 October 2011). "Did NASA Hide In-space Fuel Depots To Get a Heavy Lift Rocket?". Satellite Spotlight. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
  145. "Propellant Depot Requirements Study" (PDF). HAT Technical Interchange Meeting. 21 July 2011.
  146. Cowing, Keith (12 October 2011). "Internal NASA Studies Show Cheaper and Faster Alternatives to the Space Launch System". SpaceRef.com. Retrieved 10 November 2011.
  147. "Near Term Space Exploration with Commercial Launch Vehicles Plus Propellant Depot" (PDF). Georgia Institute of Technology / National Institute of Aerospace. 2011.
  148. "Affordable Exploration Architecture" (PDF). United Launch Alliance. 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 21, 2012.
  149. Grant Bonin (6 June 2011). "Human spaceflight for less: the case for smaller launch vehicles, revisited". The Space Review.
  150. 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.
  151. Rick Tumlinson (15 September 2011). "The Senate Launch System – Destiny, Decision, and Disaster". Huffington Post.
  152. Andrew Gasser (24 October 2011). "Propellant depots: the fiscally responsible and feasible alternative to SLS". The Space Review.
  153. Eric Berger (1 August 2019). "The SLS rocket may have curbed development of on-orbit refueling for a decade".
  154. Alan Boyle (7 December 2011). "Is the case for Mars facing a crisis?". MSNBC. Archived from the original on 7 January 2012.
  155. John K. Strickland, Jr. "The SpaceX Falcon Heavy Booster: Why Is It Important?". National Space Society. Retrieved 4 January 2012.
  156. "NASA Studies Scaled-Up Falcon, Merlin". Aviation Week. 2 December 2010. Archived from the original on 27 July 2012.
  157. "Spacex BFR to be lower cost than Falcon 1 at $7 million per launch". nextbigfuture.com. Retrieved 17 January 2019.
  158. Bergin, Chris (29 August 2014). "Battle of the Heavyweight Rockets – SLS could face Exploration Class rival". NASAspaceflight.com. Retrieved 16 May 2019.
  159. "Congressman, Space Frontier Foundation, And Tea Party In Space Call For NASA SLS Investigation". moonandback.com. 4 October 2011. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  160. "The Senate Launch System". Competitive Space. 4 October 2011. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  161. "NASA veteran Chris Kraft upfront with criticism". August 2013.
  162. "Garver: NASA Should Cancel SLS and Mars 2020 Rover". Space News. January 2014.
  163. "Why NASA Still Can't Put Humans in Space: Congress Is Starving It of Needed Funds". 2015.
  164. "New Report Finds Nasa Awarded Boeing Large Fees Despite SLS Launch Slips". ArsTechnica. 2019.
  165. "Space News: Contractors continue to win award fees despite SLS and Orion delays". Space News. 2019.
  166. Berger, Eric (1 May 2020). "NASA will pay a staggering 46 million for each SLS rocket engine". Ars Technica. Retrieved 4 May 2020.
  167. "Hopeful for launch next year, NASA aims to resume SLS operations within weeks". spaceflightnow.com. 2 May 2020. Retrieved 2 May 2020.
  168. 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.
  169. 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.
  170. 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.
  171. 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...
  172. UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL LAUNCH MANIFEST
  173. 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).
  174. 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.
  175. 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"
  176. 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.
  177. 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.
  178. 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.
  179. 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.
  180. 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.
  181. 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.

Sources
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.