To read this post please scroll down.

 

Readers! A November fund-raising drive!

 

It is unfortunately time for another November fund-raising campaign to support my work here at Behind the Black. I really dislike doing these, but 2025 is so far turning out to be a very poor year for donations and subscriptions, the worst since 2020. I very much need your support for this webpage to survive.

 

And I think I provide real value. Fifteen years ago I said SLS was garbage and should be cancelled. Almost a decade ago I said Orion was a lie and a bad idea. As early as 1998, long before almost anyone else, I predicted in my first book, Genesis: The Story of Apollo 8, that private enterprise and freedom would conquer the solar system, not government. Very early in the COVID panic and continuing throughout I noted that every policy put forth by the government (masks, social distancing, lockdowns, jab mandates) was wrong, misguided, and did more harm than good. In planetary science, while everyone else in the media still thinks Mars has no water, I have been reporting the real results from the orbiters now for more than five years, that Mars is in fact a planet largely covered with ice.

 

I could continue with numerous other examples. If you want to know what others will discover a decade hence, read what I write here at Behind the Black. And if you read my most recent book, Conscious Choice, you will find out what is going to happen in space in the next century.

 

 

This last claim might sound like hubris on my part, but I base it on my overall track record.

 

So please consider donating or subscribing to Behind the Black, either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. I could really use the support at this time. There are five ways of doing so:

 

1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.

 

2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. Takes about a 10% cut.
 

3. A Paypal Donation or subscription, which takes about a 15% cut:

 

4. Donate by check. I get whatever you donate. Make the check payable to Robert Zimmerman and mail it to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.


The coming final flight of the shuttle’s solid rocket booster segments

Link here. As NASA begins the assembly process for its first long-delayed SLS launch sometime in the next year. the article at the link outlines in detail the space shuttle history of the many reused segments used to build the rocket’s two solid rocket boosters.

All together, the Artemis I solid rocket booster segments previously helped launch 40 space shuttle missions dating back 30 years.

The oldest cylinder, which will fly as part of the booster mounted on the right side of the SLS core stage, first lifted off on the STS-31 mission with the Hubble Space Telescope on April 24, 1990. It was then used for six more shuttle flights, including Endeavour’s debut on STS-49 in 1992 and STS-95 in 1998, which lifted off with Mercury astronaut and senator John Glenn as part of its crew.

Other notable missions that are part of the Artemis 1 boosters’ legacy include: STS-71, which marked the first shuttle docking with the Russian space station Mir in 1995; STS-93, which deployed the Chandra X-ray Observatory and marked the first spaceflight commanded by a woman, Eileen Collins, in 1999; STS-114, the return to flight after the loss of the space shuttle Columbia in 2005; and STS-133, the final launch of the space shuttle Discovery in 2011.

The hardware also includes new components, including the two forward domes, two cylinders and four stiffeners.

This first SLS launch however will be the last time these segments will fly. Unlike the shuttle, NASA is making no effort to recover and reuse these boosters.

The shuttle effort to reuse these booster segments was never really very cost effective, so not reusing them on SLS might actually save money. Those savings however are chicken feed when compared to SLS’s overall cost. The problem really is with SLS’s fundamental design: cumbersome, slow, expensive, and difficult to use.

Genesis cover

On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.

 

The print edition can be purchased at Amazon or from any other book seller. If you want an autographed copy the price is $60 for the hardback and $45 for the paperback, plus $8 shipping for each. Go here for purchasing details. The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.


The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
 

"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News

3 comments

  • sippin_bourbon

    I have been looking, but not yet found, a good argument for why the expendable SLS system is better.

    I mean, big. Okay. Lots lift, yes. But why so committed to this design.

    I know the argument here. It’s for jobs in congressional districts/states. But what argument is being made from their side on why this is better?

  • Dick Eagleson

    The argument has always been that SLS is necessary to do deep space missions. The expense and severe production limitation are ignored or hand-waved away. There has never been any argument that SLS is better than some alternative because there is nothing that can put as much mass into LEO. SH-Starship, will, of course, exceed SLS’s LEO payload numbers but SH-Starship seems to be “that which we do not acknowledge” around MSFC and Boeing. Also unacknowledged, or hand-waved away, is that a pair of FHs can also put more mass into LEO than SLS and at a small fraction of the latter’s cost, even if both FHs are also totally expended in the process.

    SLS isn’t going to die of logic or it would have succumbed long since. It’s going to die of terminal irrelevance once SH-Starship is operational – assuming it doesn’t die first due to a massive test failure.

  • Edward

    sippin_bourbon,

    When SLS was started, the commercial cargo program was not yet proved, and many had doubts that a commercial company could be capable of getting a spacecraft to successfully berth at a space station, much less be able to keep astronauts alive in space. Thus Orion-SLS was better than anything available.

    The current Commercial Crew spacecraft are not designed for deep space work, so there is not enough confidence that they could be used for that purpose. So far, this makes Orion-SLS better. (I find it so very ironic that Boeing, with its decades of experience, including ISS manufacture (prime contractor), was the company that had trouble docking to the ISS. No wonder NASA is so disappointed in them.)

    On the other hand, it all depends upon what “better” means. The Block 2 version of SLS is meant to carry more to low Earth orbit than Starship. That could make SLS “better” than Starship. Since this capacity was one of Congress’s requirements, there is a possibility that Congress could fund SLS even after the less expensive Starship becomes operational.

    In the meantime, I consider SLS to be the U.S. equivalent of (or response to) Russia’s Energia, which flew a grand total of two times. If SLS beats that, would it make SLS better than Energia?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *