ReportWire

Tag: Artemis Program

  • NASA launches Artemis rocket on a mission to the moon

    NASA launches Artemis rocket on a mission to the moon

    [ad_1]

    NASA’S new moon rocket lifts off after years of delays


    NASA’S new moon rocket lifts off after years of delays

    01:40

    In a jaw-dropping spectacle, the 322-foot-tall Artemis moon rocket, the most powerful ever built for NASA, finally blasted off Wednesday with an eruption of white-hot fire and an earth-shaking roar, boosting an uncrewed Orion capsule on a long-awaited flight to the moon.

    After multiple delays due to repeated hydrogen fuel leaks, ground system glitches, two hurricanes and back-to-back launch slips, the Space Launch System rocket’s four main engines finally roared to life at 1:47 a.m. EST, followed a few seconds later by ignition of two strap-on solid-fuel boosters.

    111622-launch1.jpg
    The Space Launch System rocket blasts off on the Artemis 1 moon mission, an unpiloted test flight to send an Orion crew capsule around the moon and back.

    NASA


    At that instant, four explosive bolts at the base of each booster detonated to free the SLS from its launch stand and the 5.7-million pound rocket leaped away from pad 39B, propelled skyward by 8.8 million pounds of thrust.

    “Seven, six, five, core stage engine start, three, two one, booster ignition and liftoff of Artemis 1!” exclaimed NASA commentator Derrol Nail from the launch control center. “We rise together back to the moon and beyond!”

    The launching came 43 minutes later than planned because of work to fix an intermittent leak in a hydrogen valve on the rocket’s mobile launch platform and because of a glitch that briefly interrupted radar tracking data. But once the problems were resolved, the final 10 minutes of the countdown ticked off without a hitch and the SLS rocket finally blasted off on its oft-delayed maiden voyage.

    The Boeing-managed rocket hit 70 miles an hour — straight up — in just seven seconds, a stirring spectacle not seen since the last shuttle launch in 2011. And as with the shuttle, the initial moments of liftoff occurred in eerie silence.

    But moments later, a roaring wall of sound reached the nearest observers 4.2 miles from the launch pad, accompanied by ground-shaking earthquake-like tremors.

    Briefly turning night into day as it consumed its propellants, lost weight and accelerated, the SLS put on a dazzling sky show, thrilling thousands of spaceport workers, area residents and tourists who stayed up late to take in the historic launching.

    111622-launch3.jpg
    Spaceport managers and guests take in the Artemis 1 launch from a balcony 4.2 miles from pad 39B. The sky-lighting liftoff was accompanied by a thundering roar and a ground-shaking shock wave reminiscent of space shuttle launchings.

    NASA


    “Well, for once, I might be speechless,” said Launch Director Charlie Blackwell-Thompson, addressing her team in the control room. “I have talked a lot about appreciating the moment you’re in. This is your moment… You have earned your place in history.

    “We are all part of something incredibly special, the first launch of Artemis. The first step in returning our country to the moon and on to Mars. What you have done today will inspire generations to come. So thank you, thank you for your resilience… The harder the climb, the better the view. We showed the Space Coast tonight what a beautiful view it is!”

    While no one was on board for the rocket’s maiden test flight, instrumented mannequins were strapped into the Orion capsule at the top of the SLS to record the vibrations, accelerations, sounds and other environmental factors real astronauts will experience during piloted flights to the moon.

    Eclipsing even NASA’s legendary Apollo Saturn 5 in raw power, the SLS’s Northrop Grumman-built strap-on boosters burned through 5.5 tons of propellant per second propelling the rocket out of the dense lower atmosphere.

    Two minutes and 10 seconds after launch, they burned out and fell away at an altitude of 27 miles, leaving the four Aerojet Rocketdyne RS-25 core stage engines to continue the ascent on their own, generating a combined 2 million pounds of thrust.


    Artemis: America’s New Moonshot | CBS Reports

    21:51

    Firing for another six minutes, the RS-25 engines boosted the SLS to an altitude of about 87 miles before shutting down at a velocity of about 18,300 mph, putting the vehicle into an elliptical orbit with a high point, or apogee, of about 1,100 miles and a low point, or perigee, of just 20 miles or so.

    At that point, the rocket’s upper stage, carrying the Lockheed Martin-built Orion capsule and its European Space Agency-supplied service module, separated from the empty core stage and continued coasting up toward apogee.

    Once there, about 53 minutes after liftoff, the engine powering the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage, or ICPS, fired for about 23 seconds to raise the low point of the orbit from 20 miles to about 115.

    Reaching that low point about 45 minutes later — one hour and 26 minutes after launch — the ICPS was programmed to fire its RL10B engine for a nail-biting 18 minutes, boosting the vehicle’s velocity to about 22,600 mph, more than 10 times faster than a rifle bullet.

    That’s how fast a spacecraft has to go to break free of Earth’s gravity, raising the apogee to a point in space where the moon will be in five days.

    After separating from the ICPS, the Orion capsule will head for an 81-mile-high flyby of the moon Monday and then into a “distant retrograde orbit” carrying the spacecraft farther from Earth — 268,000 miles — than any previous human-rated spacecraft.

    The flight is the first in a series of missions intended to establish a sustained presence on and around the moon with a lunar space station called Gateway and periodic landings near the south pole where ice deposits may be reachable in cold, permanently shadowed craters.

    Future astronauts may be able to “mine” that ice if it’s present and accessible, converting it into air, water and even rocket fuel to vastly reduce the cost of deep space exploration.

    More generally, Artemis astronauts will carry out extended exploration and research to learn more about the moon’s origin and evolution and test the hardware and procedures that will be necessary to eventually send astronauts to Mars.

    artist-orion-moon.jpg
    An artist’s impression of the Artemis 1 Orion capsule passing behind the moon. If all goes well, the Orion will make the first of two close lunar flybys Monday.

    NASA


    The goal of the Artemis 1 mission is to put the Orion spacecraft through its paces, testing its solar power, propulsion, navigation and life support systems before a return to Earth October 11 and a 25,000-mph plunge back into the atmosphere that will subject its protective heat shield to a hellish 5,000 degrees.

    Testing the heat shield and confirming it can protect astronauts returning from deep space is the No. 1 priority of the Artemis 1 mission, an objective that requires the SLS rocket to first send the capsule to the moon.

    If all goes well with the Artemis 1 mission, NASA plans to launch a second SLS rocket in late 2024 to boost four astronauts on a looping free return trajectory around the moon before landing the first woman and the next man on the moon’s surface near the south pole in the Artemis 3 mission.

    That flight, targeted for launch in the 2025-26 timeframe, depends on the readiness of new spacesuits for NASA’s moonwalkers and a lander being built by SpaceX that’s based on the design of the company’s reusable Starship rocket.

    SpaceX is working on the lander under a $2.9 billion contract with NASA, but the company has provided little in the way of details or updates and it’s not yet known when NASA and the California rocket builder will actually be ready for the Artemis 3 lunar landing mission.

    But if the Artemis 1 test flight is successful, NASA can check off its requirement for a super-heavy-lift rocket to get the initial missions off the ground and on to the moon.

    And it hasn’t been easy.

    The huge rocket was first rolled to the launch pad for a “wet dress-rehearsal” fueling test in March, some 244 days ago. But four attempts to fuel the vehicle were derailed by elusive hydrogen leaks and a series of unrelated problems with ground equipment.

    More leaks derailed two launch tries in August and September. After on-pad repairs, a successful tanking test was finally carried out in mid September, but an approaching hurricane — Ian — forced NASA to forgo a third launch attempt and to instead haul the rocket back to the shelter of the Vehicle Assembly Building.

    111622-launch2.jpg
    Another look at Wednesday’s spectacular Artemis 1 launch.

    NASA


    It was hauled back out to the pad November 3 and after riding out Hurricane Nicole on its seaside firing stand, NASA clear the rocket for a third launch try Wednesday. And this time around, for the first time in the Artemis 1 launch campaign, the countdown finally made it all the way to zero for the first time.

    Congress ordered NASA to build the Space Launch System rocket in the wake of the space shuttle’s 2011 retirement, requiring the agency to use left-over shuttle components and existing technology where possible in a bid to keep costs down.

    But management miscues and technical problems led to delays and billions in cost overruns. According to NASA’s Inspector General, the U.S. space agency “is projected to spend $93 billion on the Artemis (moon program) up to FY 2025.”

    “We also project the current production and operations cost of a single SLS/Orion system at $4.1 billion per launch for Artemis 1 through 4, although the Agency’s ongoing initiatives aimed at increasing affordability seek to reduce that cost.”

    Among the causes listed as contributing to the SLS’s astronomical price tag: the use of sole-source, cost-plus contracts “and the fact that except for the Orion capsule, its subsystems and the supporting launch facilities, all components are expendable and ‘single use’ unlike emerging commercial space flight systems.”

    In stark contrast to SpaceX’s commitment to fully reusable rockets, everything but the Orion crew capsule is discarded after a single use. As SpaceX founder Musk likes to point out, that’s like flying a 747 jumbo jet from New York to Los Angeles and then throwing the airplane away.

    “That is a concern,” Paul Martin, the NASA inspector general, said in an interview with CBS News. “This is an expendable, single-use system unlike some of the launch systems that are out there in the commercial side of the house, where there are multiple uses. This is a single-use system. And so the $4.1 billion per flight … concerns us enough that in our reports, we said we see that as unsustainable.”

    But the SLS has two near-term advantages: flight-tested “human-rated” components and the ability to launch 30 to 50 tons to the moon in a single flight.

    SpaceX’s Super Heavy-Starship rocket, which SLS critics say is a more affordable option, is twice as powerful and is fully reusable.

    But it hasn’t flown yet and even when it does, it will require multiple Starship tanker flights to refuel the moon-bound spacecraft before it leaves Earth orbit. Robotically refueling such massive rockets in space with cryogenic propellants has never been attempted.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NASA fuels Artemis rocket for third attempt to launch to the moon

    NASA fuels Artemis rocket for third attempt to launch to the moon

    [ad_1]

    After repeated fuel leaks, two hurricanes and a pair of launch delays, engineers refueled NASA’s $4.1 billion Space Launch System rocket for a third launch try early Wednesday. The Artemis 1 launch would kick off a long-awaited maiden flight to send an uncrewed Orion capsule to circle the moon.

    A two-hour launch window opens at 1:04 a.m. EST.

    Using a slower, so-called “kindler, gentler” fueling procedure to minimize pressure spikes that contributed to earlier leaks, the launch team began loading 730,000 gallons of ultra-cold liquid oxygen and hydrogen fuel for the SLS core stage at 3:55 p.m. EST.

    111522-padview1108p.jpg
    The Space Launch System rocket, poised for blastoff from pad 39B at the Kennedy Space Center.

    NASA


    Engineers were optimistic the new procedures would ensure a smooth transition from slow to “fast fill,” the point during earlier fueling attempts when a sharp ramp-up in pressure caused leakage in quick-disconnect umbilical seals at the base of the rocket’s core stage.

    “We are more confident than we have ever been in our loading procedures and how to do it in such a way that puts the least amount of pressure on the seals,” said Jeremy Parsons, deputy manager of Exploration Ground Systems at the Kennedy Space Center.

    “We’re allowed to have a momentary transient as we up (the) pressure, because … it would just be for a short time period. And that’s really the worst case that we saw during (the most recent) tanking test. So feeling pretty good right now about that going into it.”

    This time around, the rocket’s tanks were filled without incident. But late in the countdown, a valve used to replenish hydrogen in the core stage developed an intermittent leak. A three-man “red crew” was sent to the pad to tighten bolts around the valve in a bid to minimize the leakage and keep the countdown on track.

    Engineers remained hopeful the 322-foot-tall SLS’s four hydrogen-fueled main engines could ignite on time at 1:04 a.m. Wednesday, followed seconds later by ignition of two upgraded shuttle-heritage solid-fuel boosters.


    Artemis: America’s New Moonshot | CBS Reports

    21:51

    At that instant, computer commands will be sent to detonate four massive explosive bolts at the base of each booster, freeing the 5.7-million pound SLS to climb away atop 8.8 million pounds of thrust, briefly turning night into day as it roars skyward on a slightly northeasterly trajectory.

    Rapidly accelerating as it consumes propellant and loses weight, the SLS was expected to be moving faster than sound less that one minute after liftoff. One minute after that, the two strap-on boosters were expected to burn out and fall away leaving the four engines powering the core stage to continue the climb to space.

    Eight minutes after liftoff, the flight plan called for the the SLS second stage and the attached Orion capsule to separate from the core stage in an initial elliptical orbit tilted 34 degrees to the equator. The core stage, meanwhile, will be left to fall back into the atmosphere to break up over an unpopulated stretch of the Indian Ocean.

    Two critical “burns” were required of the single engine powering the Interim Cryogenic Propulsions Stage, or ICPS: one to raise the low point of the initial orbit and a second to propel the Orion out of Earth’s gravitational clutch and on to the moon. The 18-minute-long trans-lunar injection, or TLI, burn was expected about 90 minutes after launch.

    The Orion capsule was expected to separate from the ICPS about two hours after launch, voyaging on to the moon for a 60-mile-high flyby Monday, using lunar gravity to fling it into a distant orbit that will carry it farther from Earth than any human-rated spacecraft.

    The Artemis 1 mission is the first in a series of SLS/Orion flights intended to establish a sustained presence on and around the moon with a lunar space station called Gateway and periodic landings near the south pole where ice deposits may be reachable in cold, permanently shadowed craters.

    Future astronauts may be able to “mine” that ice if it’s present and accessible, converting it into air, water and even rocket fuel to vastly reduce the cost of deep space exploration.

    More generally, Artemis astronauts will carry out extended exploration and research to learn more about the moon’s origin and evolution and test the hardware and procedures that will be necessary before sending astronauts to Mars.

    090822-tsmu-clark.jpg
    Oxygen and hydrogen fuel lines enter the Space Launch System rocket’s core stage through retractable umbilicals extending from protective housings known as tail service masts (left). Leaking seals in quick-disconnect fittings where the umbilicals attach to the core stage triggered multiple delays during the rocket’s testing. Engineers were optimistic revised fueling procedures will prevent problematic leaks during fueling Wednesday.

    NASA


    The goal of the Artemis 1 mission is to put the Orion spacecraft through its paces, testing its solar power, propulsion, navigation and life support systems before a return to Earth December 11 and a 25,000-mph plunge back into the atmosphere that will subject its protective heat shield to a hellish 5,000 degrees.

    Testing the heat shield and confirming it can protect astronauts returning from deep space is the No. 1 priority of the Artemis 1 mission.

    If all goes well with Artemis 1, NASA plans to launch a second SLS rocket in late 2024 to boost four astronauts on a looping free-return trajectory around the moon before landing the first woman and the next man on the lunar surface near the south pole in the Artemis 3 mission.

    That flight, targeted for launch in the 2025-26 timeframe, depends on the readiness of new spacesuits for NASA’s moonwalkers and a lander being built by SpaceX that’s based on the design of the company’s reusable Starship rocket.

    SpaceX is working on the lander under a $2.9 billion contract with NASA, but the company has provided little in the way of details or updates and it’s not yet known when NASA and the California rocket builder will actually be ready for the Artemis 3 lunar landing mission.

    But if the Artemis 1 test flight is successful, NASA can check off its requirement for a super-heavy-lift rocket to get the initial missions off the ground and on to the moon.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NASA’s Artemis moon rocket makes it through critical fueling test despite hydrogen leak

    NASA’s Artemis moon rocket makes it through critical fueling test despite hydrogen leak

    [ad_1]

    NASA’s leak-plagued Space Launch System moon rocket ran into initially worrisome problems during a fueling test Wednesday, but engineers “managed” a fresh leak in a fitting that derailed a Sept. 3 launch try and were able to fill the huge booster with a full load of 750,000 gallons of supercold propellants.

    They also carried out two other critical tests, verifying their ability to properly chill the rocket’s four hydrogen-fueled engines as required for flight and successfully pressurizing the core stage hydrogen tank to flight levels.

    Launch Director Charlie Blackwell-Thompson would not speculate on whether NASA might press ahead toward a September 27 launch date as earlier discussed, saying she wanted her team to review data from the test before drawing any conclusions. But she said she was “extremely encouraged by the test today.”

    092122-padview5.jpg
    NASA’s Space Launch System mega rocket atop pad 39B at the Kennedy Space Center Wednesday. Engineers carried out a full-scale fueling test to verify repairs to fix a hydrogen leak that derailed a September 3 launch try, yet another leak cropped up in the same system. This time around, engineers were able to use different flow rates and pressures to fully fuel the giant rocket.

    NASA


    “I don’t like to get ahead of the data, so I’d like the team to have the opportunity to go look at it to see if there are changes we need to make to our loading procedures, our timelines or if we’re good as is,” she said.

    The discussion could prove challenging given the seal blamed for the earlier launch delay was replaced and the same system, at least initially, leaked again Wednesday.

    But even if the team concludes September 27 is a viable target for the rocket’s maiden flight, it might not be enough. The Space Force Eastern Range, which oversees all military and civilian launches from Florida, has not yet ruled on a request from NASA to waive a requirement to inspect batteries in the rocket’s self-destruct system.

    The batteries cannot be accessed at the launch pad and without a waiver, NASA will be forced to haul the 332-foot-tall SLS rocket back to the Kennedy Space Center’s iconic Vehicle Assembly Building, delaying launch for a month or more.

    The long-awaited Artemis 1 mission is designed to send an unpiloted Orion crew capsule on a 40-day voyage around the moon and back to pave the way for the first piloted Artemis mission in 2024. If all goes well, NASA plans to land two astronauts near the moon’s south pole in the 2025-26 timeframe, the first in a sustained series of missions.

    But engineers have been bedeviled by elusive hydrogen leaks and other issues during the rocket’s run-up to launch. Already years behind schedule and billions over budget, the SLS rocket was first hauled out to launch pad 39B on March 17 for a fueling test to clear the way for launch. But back-to-back scrubs were ordered April 3 and 4 because of multiple unrelated problems.

    092122-umbilical1.jpg
    Liquid oxygen and hydrogen propellants flow into the Space Launch System’s huge core stage through retractable 8-inch-wide lines that extend from two so-called tail service mast umbilicals (at left) to quick-disconnect fittings attached to the side of the booster. A leak in the hydrogen fitting caused initial problems during a fueling test Wednesday, but engineers were able to re-seat a suspect seal and successfully load the rocket with propellants.

    NASA


    A third test on April 14 was called off because of a hydrogen leak near the core stage fuel line quick-disconnect, and the rocket was rolled back to the VAB for servicing. It returned to the launch pad in early June only to suffer more problems during a June 20 fueling test, when engineers were unable to cool the rocket’s engines because of a stuck valve in a different system.

    The rocket was returned to the VAB for repairs in early July and hauled back to the pad in mid-August for what NASA hoped would be its maiden flight. But a launch try on August 29 was called off because of more hydrogen issues and again on September 3 when the 8-inch quick-disconnect fitting leaked.

    In the wake of the second launch scrub, NASA managers opted to take the fitting apart at the launch pad, replace an internal seal, re-assemble the hardware and carry out a fueling test to verify the seal’s integrity. Hydrogen leaks typically show up only when the plumbing is exposed to cryogenic temperature — minus 423 degrees Fahrenheit in this case, 

    092122-venting.jpg
    Oxygen vapor billows from vents in the side of the Space Launch System rocket as propellants were loaded into the booster’s upper stage.

    NASA


    The repair work was completed last week and the test began normally enough Wednesday, with oxygen and hydrogen flowing into separate core stage tanks at low rates. In an effort to ease the thermal shock when transitioning to “fast fill” mode, the loading sequence was slowed down and flow rates reduced to ease stresses on the hardware.

    But when the flow rate and pressures increased, sensors detected an immediate buildup of gaseous hydrogen in a containment housing around the just-repaired quick-disconnect fitting, indicating a leak. Sensors detected concentrations of up to 7%, well above the 4% safety limit.

    Engineers then opted to warm up the fittings before restarting the hydrogen flow in hopes of coaxing the internal seal to “re-seat” itself. When flow resumed, a leak was still present, but it was well below the 4% threshold and engineers were able to press ahead, eventually topping off the hydrogen tank with a full load of 730,000 gallons.

    A close examination of sensor data showed that in a reversal of the initially observed behavior, the leak rate went down as pressure increased. That’s how the fitting is designed to operate, suggesting efforts to re-seat the seal were at least partially successful.

    With the core stage hydrogen and oxygen tanks full, engineers pressed ahead with loading the SLS rocket’s upper stage and in the meantime carried out the pressurization and engine cooling tests.

    Another hydrogen leak was reported near a 4-inch quick-disconnect fitting used for the cooling test. While engineers already had agreed to press ahead with the observed concentration, it would have halted an actual launch countdown. No word yet on what impact, if any, that issue might have on launch planning.

    [ad_2]

    Source link