Scrubbed Artemis 1 Launch Raises Concerns About Unfinished Rehearsals

On Monday, NASA failed in its first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission without a crew, as engineers struggled to resolve an engine cooling problem. The result is not surprising, given that NASA was unable to complete a single wet suit test, of which four were attempted earlier in the year. The space agency appears to be winging it, with the failed launch attempt effectively serving as the fifth wetsuit rehearsal, in what is a worrying sign. NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) was supposed to fly Monday morning, but instead we’re wondering about the state of the program as a whole. NASA will provide more updates on the rocket later this afternoon, including whether a launch is possible on Friday or Monday, or whether the 322-foot-tall (98-meter) rocket will have to make the now-famous 4 miles ( 6, 4 km) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. The unflyable SLS rover is critical to NASA’s Artemis program, which seeks a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. For the Artemis 1 mission, an uncrewed Orion rocket will be sent on a multi-week mission to the Moon and back. A successful integrated test of SLS and Orion would set the stage for a crewed Artemis 2 mission in about two years and a crewed mission to land on the lunar surface later this decade. A Friday launch looks unlikely, and not just because of the bleak weather forecast. NASA’s launch attempt on Monday didn’t come close to succeeding, with the countdown clock ticking no more than T-40 minutes. An “engine bleed” problem prevented one of the rocket’s four RS-25 engines from reaching the ultra-cold temperature required for launch, resulting in the rub. Thousands of spectators had gathered near the launch site, as had hundreds of reporters. Vice President Kamala Harris was also in attendance at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Everyone left disappointed, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to admit that a launch on Monday was always going to be unlikely. With ground teams failing to complete a full wetsuit rehearsal, it seemed hard to believe that NASA would get everything right on the first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission.
G/O Media may receive a commission Indeed, problems began almost immediately early Monday morning, with the threat of lightning delaying tank operations by nearly an hour. Working under an accelerated schedule, ground teams proceeded with the six-hour refueling process. A problem arose when the team switched from the slow to the fast tank, with a leaking 8-inch inlet valve causing elevated hydrogen readings. The leak was resolved by resetting the slow fill and going through the process again, allowing the center stage hydrogen tank to be fully filled. However, when using the propellant to cool the four RS-25 engines, the team found that one of the engines – engine number three – refused to cool to the extremely low temperatures required. Engineers worked through previously established troubleshooting guidelines in an attempt to get more liquid hydrogen into the engine. They tried to increase the pressure in the tank, but this led to the detection of another problem: an apparently leaking vent valve located between the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen tanks. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Mike Sarafin, director of the Artemis mission at NASA, said that engineers “wanted to increase the pressure in the tank to restore the hydrogen leak,” but “the vent valve was not cooperating.” That was the last straw, and the team “decided it was appropriate to call the rub because we just weren’t going to make the two-hour window,” Sarafin said, adding that “it was one of those times where I just knew we needed more time ». He insisted that the problem was not with the engine itself, but rather with the “venting system that thermally regulates the engine.” The engine bleed issue is one of the unknowns that was not tested during wet dress rehearsals. After the final wet suit was completed in June, NASA officials said 90 percent of all test objectives were met, while not disclosing details about the remaining 10 percent. The final wetsuit was not completed due to an unresolved hydrogen leak linked to a faulty quick-connect fitting. For that rehearsal, NASA officials hoped to run the countdown clock to T-10 seconds, but it never got past T-29 seconds, leaving much of the final launch stage in doubt. After partially completing the third wet dress in April, SLS was sent back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs, returning to Launch Pad 39B in early June. In the four trials, engineers noted a number of seemingly minor problems, a list that included faulty vent fans on the portable launcher, an incorrectly set manual vent valve, excessively cold temperatures and frost during propellant loading, a small hydrogen leak in the service mast tail umbilical, problems with the nitrogen gas supplier and a faulty helium check valve that had to be replaced. That said, it was during the fourth liquid dress that the SLS was finally fully loaded with propellants, with over 755,000 gallons of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen added to the two stages of the rocket. Despite falling short of 10 percent of the test’s goals, Tom Whitmeyer, NASA’s director of exploration systems, said “we think we had a really successful rehearsal” and that there were risks to running a fifth test run. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration systems development, echoed that earlier sentiment, saying another wetsuit rehearsal was not needed. “We would have done another round of circulation and return,” he said, and that would have created further risks, including attrition. “We won’t know until we know, but we also won’t know until we try,” Free added. “We felt we were in the best position to try.” Keith Cowing, editor of NASAWatch.com and a former rocket scientist at NASA, said the space agency treated Artemis 1’s first launch attempt as essentially its fifth wet dress rehearsal. Cowing, who spoke to me by phone, said NASA should have done all the required testing beforehand to avoid these new problems. “These things happen,” Cowing said. “But this is legacy material, with different pieces of rockets that have flown in the past.” By legacy hardware, Cowing is referring to the fact that the current SLS configuration “uses existing hardware from the Space Shuttle inventory as much as possible to save costs and accelerate the schedule,” according to NASA. These components include the main stage boosters and engines, along with the Integrated Spacecraft and Payload component. “NASA should not expect everything to work as expected, as there will be problems with integration,” Cowing told me. To which he added: “Tests are good and should be done methodically, so when you finally try to launch, you know what you’ve tried — instead of using launch attempts as de facto wet dresses.” Cowing is concerned about the state of the program and the already archaic nature of the SLS. Unlike SpaceX rockets, which can be modified and repaired on the launch pad, the SLS must return to the vehicle assembly building for hardware adjustments (this may be the case with the aforementioned leaking vent valve, but we’ll have to wait for official word from NASA). And at an estimated cost of $4.1 billion per launch, Cowing predicts SLS launches will be rare events, citing NASA’s inspector general, Paul Martin, who earlier this year described the price tag as “unsustainable.” NASA officials are likely feeling the pressure, hence the desire to finally get the SLS off the ground. It makes for some uncomfortable theater, though, with Monday’s scrub being a good example. The chances of a launch were extremely low (at least that’s how I assessed it), yet NASA had no qualms about publicizing the event and inviting a host of dignitaries and celebrities. The megarocket doesn’t look ready for launch, but NASA is doing its best to convince us that it is. Unfortunately, the “pretend” launch attempt from earlier this week likely won’t be the last.

title: “Scrubbed Artemis 1 Launch Raises Concerns About Unfinished Rehearsals Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-20” author: “Jessica Brown”

On Monday, NASA failed in its first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission without a crew, as engineers struggled to resolve an engine cooling problem. The result is not surprising, given that NASA was unable to complete a single wet suit test, of which four were attempted earlier in the year. The space agency appears to be winging it, with the failed launch attempt effectively serving as the fifth wetsuit rehearsal, in what is a worrying sign. NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) was supposed to fly Monday morning, but instead we’re wondering about the state of the program as a whole. NASA will provide more updates on the rocket later this afternoon, including whether a launch is possible on Friday or Monday, or whether the 322-foot-tall (98-meter) rocket will have to make the now-famous 4 miles ( 6, 4 km) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. The unflyable SLS rover is critical to NASA’s Artemis program, which seeks a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. For the Artemis 1 mission, an uncrewed Orion rocket will be sent on a multi-week mission to the Moon and back. A successful integrated test of SLS and Orion would set the stage for a crewed Artemis 2 mission in about two years and a crewed mission to land on the lunar surface later this decade. A Friday launch looks unlikely, and not just because of the bleak weather forecast. NASA’s launch attempt on Monday didn’t come close to succeeding, with the countdown clock ticking no more than T-40 minutes. An “engine bleed” problem prevented one of the rocket’s four RS-25 engines from reaching the ultra-cold temperature required for launch, resulting in the rub. Thousands of spectators had gathered near the launch site, as had hundreds of reporters. Vice President Kamala Harris was also in attendance at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Everyone left disappointed, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to admit that a launch on Monday was always going to be unlikely. With ground teams failing to complete a full wetsuit rehearsal, it seemed hard to believe that NASA would get everything right on the first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission.
G/O Media may receive a commission Indeed, problems began almost immediately early Monday morning, with the threat of lightning delaying tank operations by nearly an hour. Working under an accelerated schedule, ground teams proceeded with the six-hour refueling process. A problem arose when the team switched from the slow to the fast tank, with a leaking 8-inch inlet valve causing elevated hydrogen readings. The leak was resolved by resetting the slow fill and going through the process again, allowing the center stage hydrogen tank to be fully filled. However, when using the propellant to cool the four RS-25 engines, the team found that one of the engines – engine number three – refused to cool to the extremely low temperatures required. Engineers worked through previously established troubleshooting guidelines in an attempt to get more liquid hydrogen into the engine. They tried to increase the pressure in the tank, but this led to the detection of another problem: an apparently leaking vent valve located between the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen tanks. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Mike Sarafin, director of the Artemis mission at NASA, said that engineers “wanted to increase the pressure in the tank to restore the hydrogen leak,” but “the vent valve was not cooperating.” That was the last straw, and the team “decided it was appropriate to call the rub because we just weren’t going to make the two-hour window,” Sarafin said, adding that “it was one of those times where I just knew we needed more time ». He insisted that the problem was not with the engine itself, but rather with the “venting system that thermally regulates the engine.” The engine bleed issue is one of the unknowns that was not tested during wet dress rehearsals. After the final wet suit was completed in June, NASA officials said 90 percent of all test objectives were met, while not disclosing details about the remaining 10 percent. The final wetsuit was not completed due to an unresolved hydrogen leak linked to a faulty quick-connect fitting. For that rehearsal, NASA officials hoped to run the countdown clock to T-10 seconds, but it never got past T-29 seconds, leaving much of the final launch stage in doubt. After partially completing the third wet dress in April, SLS was sent back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs, returning to Launch Pad 39B in early June. In the four trials, engineers noted a number of seemingly minor problems, a list that included faulty vent fans on the portable launcher, an incorrectly set manual vent valve, excessively cold temperatures and frost during propellant loading, a small hydrogen leak in the service mast tail umbilical, problems with the nitrogen gas supplier and a faulty helium check valve that had to be replaced. That said, it was during the fourth liquid dress that the SLS was finally fully loaded with propellants, with over 755,000 gallons of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen added to the two stages of the rocket. Despite falling short of 10 percent of the test’s goals, Tom Whitmeyer, NASA’s director of exploration systems, said “we think we had a really successful rehearsal” and that there were risks to running a fifth test run. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration systems development, echoed that earlier sentiment, saying another wetsuit rehearsal was not needed. “We would have done another round of circulation and return,” he said, and that would have created further risks, including attrition. “We won’t know until we know, but we also won’t know until we try,” Free added. “We felt we were in the best position to try.” Keith Cowing, editor of NASAWatch.com and a former rocket scientist at NASA, said the space agency treated Artemis 1’s first launch attempt as essentially its fifth wet dress rehearsal. Cowing, who spoke to me by phone, said NASA should have done all the required testing beforehand to avoid these new problems. “These things happen,” Cowing said. “But this is legacy material, with different pieces of rockets that have flown in the past.” By legacy hardware, Cowing is referring to the fact that the current SLS configuration “uses existing hardware from the Space Shuttle inventory as much as possible to save costs and accelerate the schedule,” according to NASA. These components include the main stage boosters and engines, along with the Integrated Spacecraft and Payload component. “NASA should not expect everything to work as expected, as there will be problems with integration,” Cowing told me. To which he added: “Tests are good and should be done methodically, so when you finally try to launch, you know what you’ve tried — instead of using launch attempts as de facto wet dresses.” Cowing is concerned about the state of the program and the already archaic nature of the SLS. Unlike SpaceX rockets, which can be modified and repaired on the launch pad, the SLS must return to the vehicle assembly building for hardware adjustments (this may be the case with the aforementioned leaking vent valve, but we’ll have to wait for official word from NASA). And at an estimated cost of $4.1 billion per launch, Cowing predicts SLS launches will be rare events, citing NASA’s inspector general, Paul Martin, who earlier this year described the price tag as “unsustainable.” NASA officials are likely feeling the pressure, hence the desire to finally get the SLS off the ground. It makes for some uncomfortable theater, though, with Monday’s scrub being a good example. The chances of a launch were extremely low (at least that’s how I assessed it), yet NASA had no qualms about publicizing the event and inviting a host of dignitaries and celebrities. The megarocket doesn’t look ready for launch, but NASA is doing its best to convince us that it is. Unfortunately, the “pretend” launch attempt from earlier this week likely won’t be the last.

title: “Scrubbed Artemis 1 Launch Raises Concerns About Unfinished Rehearsals Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-02” author: “Rose Rivas”

On Monday, NASA failed in its first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission without a crew, as engineers struggled to resolve an engine cooling problem. The result is not surprising, given that NASA was unable to complete a single wet suit test, of which four were attempted earlier in the year. The space agency appears to be winging it, with the failed launch attempt effectively serving as the fifth wetsuit rehearsal, in what is a worrying sign. NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) was supposed to fly Monday morning, but instead we’re wondering about the state of the program as a whole. NASA will provide more updates on the rocket later this afternoon, including whether a launch is possible on Friday or Monday, or whether the 322-foot-tall (98-meter) rocket will have to make the now-famous 4 miles ( 6, 4 km) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. The unflyable SLS rover is critical to NASA’s Artemis program, which seeks a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. For the Artemis 1 mission, an uncrewed Orion rocket will be sent on a multi-week mission to the Moon and back. A successful integrated test of SLS and Orion would set the stage for a crewed Artemis 2 mission in about two years and a crewed mission to land on the lunar surface later this decade. A Friday launch looks unlikely, and not just because of the bleak weather forecast. NASA’s launch attempt on Monday didn’t come close to succeeding, with the countdown clock ticking no more than T-40 minutes. An “engine bleed” problem prevented one of the rocket’s four RS-25 engines from reaching the ultra-cold temperature required for launch, resulting in the rub. Thousands of spectators had gathered near the launch site, as had hundreds of reporters. Vice President Kamala Harris was also in attendance at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Everyone left disappointed, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to admit that a launch on Monday was always going to be unlikely. With ground teams failing to complete a full wetsuit rehearsal, it seemed hard to believe that NASA would get everything right on the first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission.
G/O Media may receive a commission Indeed, problems began almost immediately early Monday morning, with the threat of lightning delaying tank operations by nearly an hour. Working under an accelerated schedule, ground teams proceeded with the six-hour refueling process. A problem arose when the team switched from the slow to the fast tank, with a leaking 8-inch inlet valve causing elevated hydrogen readings. The leak was resolved by resetting the slow fill and going through the process again, allowing the center stage hydrogen tank to be fully filled. However, when using the propellant to cool the four RS-25 engines, the team found that one of the engines – engine number three – refused to cool to the extremely low temperatures required. Engineers worked through previously established troubleshooting guidelines in an attempt to get more liquid hydrogen into the engine. They tried to increase the pressure in the tank, but this led to the detection of another problem: an apparently leaking vent valve located between the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen tanks. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Mike Sarafin, director of the Artemis mission at NASA, said that engineers “wanted to increase the pressure in the tank to restore the hydrogen leak,” but “the vent valve was not cooperating.” That was the last straw, and the team “decided it was appropriate to call the rub because we just weren’t going to make the two-hour window,” Sarafin said, adding that “it was one of those times where I just knew we needed more time ». He insisted that the problem was not with the engine itself, but rather with the “venting system that thermally regulates the engine.” The engine bleed issue is one of the unknowns that was not tested during wet dress rehearsals. After the final wet suit was completed in June, NASA officials said 90 percent of all test objectives were met, while not disclosing details about the remaining 10 percent. The final wetsuit was not completed due to an unresolved hydrogen leak linked to a faulty quick-connect fitting. For that rehearsal, NASA officials hoped to run the countdown clock to T-10 seconds, but it never got past T-29 seconds, leaving much of the final launch stage in doubt. After partially completing the third wet dress in April, SLS was sent back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs, returning to Launch Pad 39B in early June. In the four trials, engineers noted a number of seemingly minor problems, a list that included faulty vent fans on the portable launcher, an incorrectly set manual vent valve, excessively cold temperatures and frost during propellant loading, a small hydrogen leak in the service mast tail umbilical, problems with the nitrogen gas supplier and a faulty helium check valve that had to be replaced. That said, it was during the fourth liquid dress that the SLS was finally fully loaded with propellants, with over 755,000 gallons of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen added to the two stages of the rocket. Despite falling short of 10 percent of the test’s goals, Tom Whitmeyer, NASA’s director of exploration systems, said “we think we had a really successful rehearsal” and that there were risks to running a fifth test run. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration systems development, echoed that earlier sentiment, saying another wetsuit rehearsal was not needed. “We would have done another round of circulation and return,” he said, and that would have created further risks, including attrition. “We won’t know until we know, but we also won’t know until we try,” Free added. “We felt we were in the best position to try.” Keith Cowing, editor of NASAWatch.com and a former rocket scientist at NASA, said the space agency treated Artemis 1’s first launch attempt as essentially its fifth wet dress rehearsal. Cowing, who spoke to me by phone, said NASA should have done all the required testing beforehand to avoid these new problems. “These things happen,” Cowing said. “But this is legacy material, with different pieces of rockets that have flown in the past.” By legacy hardware, Cowing is referring to the fact that the current SLS configuration “uses existing hardware from the Space Shuttle inventory as much as possible to save costs and accelerate the schedule,” according to NASA. These components include the main stage boosters and engines, along with the Integrated Spacecraft and Payload component. “NASA should not expect everything to work as expected, as there will be problems with integration,” Cowing told me. To which he added: “Tests are good and should be done methodically, so when you finally try to launch, you know what you’ve tried — instead of using launch attempts as de facto wet dresses.” Cowing is concerned about the state of the program and the already archaic nature of the SLS. Unlike SpaceX rockets, which can be modified and repaired on the launch pad, the SLS must return to the vehicle assembly building for hardware adjustments (this may be the case with the aforementioned leaking vent valve, but we’ll have to wait for official word from NASA). And at an estimated cost of $4.1 billion per launch, Cowing predicts SLS launches will be rare events, citing NASA’s inspector general, Paul Martin, who earlier this year described the price tag as “unsustainable.” NASA officials are likely feeling the pressure, hence the desire to finally get the SLS off the ground. It makes for some uncomfortable theater, though, with Monday’s scrub being a good example. The chances of a launch were extremely low (at least that’s how I assessed it), yet NASA had no qualms about publicizing the event and inviting a host of dignitaries and celebrities. The megarocket doesn’t look ready for launch, but NASA is doing its best to convince us that it is. Unfortunately, the “pretend” launch attempt from earlier this week likely won’t be the last.

title: “Scrubbed Artemis 1 Launch Raises Concerns About Unfinished Rehearsals Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-06” author: “Josephine Sutton”

On Monday, NASA failed in its first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission without a crew, as engineers struggled to resolve an engine cooling problem. The result is not surprising, given that NASA was unable to complete a single wet suit test, of which four were attempted earlier in the year. The space agency appears to be winging it, with the failed launch attempt effectively serving as the fifth wetsuit rehearsal, in what is a worrying sign. NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) was supposed to fly Monday morning, but instead we’re wondering about the state of the program as a whole. NASA will provide more updates on the rocket later this afternoon, including whether a launch is possible on Friday or Monday, or whether the 322-foot-tall (98-meter) rocket will have to make the now-famous 4 miles ( 6, 4 km) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. The unflyable SLS rover is critical to NASA’s Artemis program, which seeks a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. For the Artemis 1 mission, an uncrewed Orion rocket will be sent on a multi-week mission to the Moon and back. A successful integrated test of SLS and Orion would set the stage for a crewed Artemis 2 mission in about two years and a crewed mission to land on the lunar surface later this decade. A Friday launch looks unlikely, and not just because of the bleak weather forecast. NASA’s launch attempt on Monday didn’t come close to succeeding, with the countdown clock ticking no more than T-40 minutes. An “engine bleed” problem prevented one of the rocket’s four RS-25 engines from reaching the ultra-cold temperature required for launch, resulting in the rub. Thousands of spectators had gathered near the launch site, as had hundreds of reporters. Vice President Kamala Harris was also in attendance at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Everyone left disappointed, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to admit that a launch on Monday was always going to be unlikely. With ground teams failing to complete a full wetsuit rehearsal, it seemed hard to believe that NASA would get everything right on the first attempt to launch the Artemis 1 mission.
G/O Media may receive a commission Indeed, problems began almost immediately early Monday morning, with the threat of lightning delaying tank operations by nearly an hour. Working under an accelerated schedule, ground teams proceeded with the six-hour refueling process. A problem arose when the team switched from the slow to the fast tank, with a leaking 8-inch inlet valve causing elevated hydrogen readings. The leak was resolved by resetting the slow fill and going through the process again, allowing the center stage hydrogen tank to be fully filled. However, when using the propellant to cool the four RS-25 engines, the team found that one of the engines – engine number three – refused to cool to the extremely low temperatures required. Engineers worked through previously established troubleshooting guidelines in an attempt to get more liquid hydrogen into the engine. They tried to increase the pressure in the tank, but this led to the detection of another problem: an apparently leaking vent valve located between the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen tanks. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Mike Sarafin, director of the Artemis mission at NASA, said that engineers “wanted to increase the pressure in the tank to restore the hydrogen leak,” but “the vent valve was not cooperating.” That was the last straw, and the team “decided it was appropriate to call the rub because we just weren’t going to make the two-hour window,” Sarafin said, adding that “it was one of those times where I just knew we needed more time ». He insisted that the problem was not with the engine itself, but rather with the “venting system that thermally regulates the engine.” The engine bleed issue is one of the unknowns that was not tested during wet dress rehearsals. After the final wet suit was completed in June, NASA officials said 90 percent of all test objectives were met, while not disclosing details about the remaining 10 percent. The final wetsuit was not completed due to an unresolved hydrogen leak linked to a faulty quick-connect fitting. For that rehearsal, NASA officials hoped to run the countdown clock to T-10 seconds, but it never got past T-29 seconds, leaving much of the final launch stage in doubt. After partially completing the third wet dress in April, SLS was sent back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs, returning to Launch Pad 39B in early June. In the four trials, engineers noted a number of seemingly minor problems, a list that included faulty vent fans on the portable launcher, an incorrectly set manual vent valve, excessively cold temperatures and frost during propellant loading, a small hydrogen leak in the service mast tail umbilical, problems with the nitrogen gas supplier and a faulty helium check valve that had to be replaced. That said, it was during the fourth liquid dress that the SLS was finally fully loaded with propellants, with over 755,000 gallons of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen added to the two stages of the rocket. Despite falling short of 10 percent of the test’s goals, Tom Whitmeyer, NASA’s director of exploration systems, said “we think we had a really successful rehearsal” and that there were risks to running a fifth test run. Speaking to reporters yesterday, Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration systems development, echoed that earlier sentiment, saying another wetsuit rehearsal was not needed. “We would have done another round of circulation and return,” he said, and that would have created further risks, including attrition. “We won’t know until we know, but we also won’t know until we try,” Free added. “We felt we were in the best position to try.” Keith Cowing, editor of NASAWatch.com and a former rocket scientist at NASA, said the space agency treated Artemis 1’s first launch attempt as essentially its fifth wet dress rehearsal. Cowing, who spoke to me by phone, said NASA should have done all the required testing beforehand to avoid these new problems. “These things happen,” Cowing said. “But this is legacy material, with different pieces of rockets that have flown in the past.” By legacy hardware, Cowing is referring to the fact that the current SLS configuration “uses existing hardware from the Space Shuttle inventory as much as possible to save costs and accelerate the schedule,” according to NASA. These components include the main stage boosters and engines, along with the Integrated Spacecraft and Payload component. “NASA should not expect everything to work as expected, as there will be problems with integration,” Cowing told me. To which he added: “Tests are good and should be done methodically, so when you finally try to launch, you know what you’ve tried — instead of using launch attempts as de facto wet dresses.” Cowing is concerned about the state of the program and the already archaic nature of the SLS. Unlike SpaceX rockets, which can be modified and repaired on the launch pad, the SLS must return to the vehicle assembly building for hardware adjustments (this may be the case with the aforementioned leaking vent valve, but we’ll have to wait for official word from NASA). And at an estimated cost of $4.1 billion per launch, Cowing predicts SLS launches will be rare events, citing NASA’s inspector general, Paul Martin, who earlier this year described the price tag as “unsustainable.” NASA officials are likely feeling the pressure, hence the desire to finally get the SLS off the ground. It makes for some uncomfortable theater, though, with Monday’s scrub being a good example. The chances of a launch were extremely low (at least that’s how I assessed it), yet NASA had no qualms about publicizing the event and inviting a host of dignitaries and celebrities. The megarocket doesn’t look ready for launch, but NASA is doing its best to convince us that it is. Unfortunately, the “pretend” launch attempt from earlier this week likely won’t be the last.