Meet The Rocket That's Going To Take Us To The Moon, Mars, and Beyond

Last week, NASA unveiled the design of its new launch vehicle, the deep space capable Space Launch System (SLS).

The vehicle comes at the perfect time. With the Space Shuttle program over, NASA’s astronauts have no way into space save hitching a ride with the Russians. The SLS promises not only to give American astronauts a way into space, but to send them beyond low Earth orbit; asteroids, the moon, and Mars are the first destinations on the list.

Videos by VICE

Not only will the SLS open space, it will be a boon to those of us left on Earth by creating more jobs—many Florida residents were devastated to lose their jobs at the end of the Shuttle program. Additional benefits are less tangible but The new rocket’s capabilities will ensure the United States remains a leader in future space endeavors.

The Apollo-era historian in me (and that’s a pretty huge part of me) can’t help but compare the new rocket with the mammoth Saturn V that took Americans to the moon during the Apollo program. This isn’t much of a stretch. The artist’s concept of the SLS looks strikingly like the Saturn V. The rocket is being touted as the most powerful since the Saturn V’s retirement in 1973. Even the listed benefits of solidifying America’s place as a dominant power in space is reminiscent of the space race era.

So, how does the SLS stack up with the Saturn V?

According to NASA’s official SLS fact sheet, the rocket will go through two stages, a first ‘shakedown’ phase and a second evolved phase (this is where the trips to Mars will come in).

The multistage SLS is set to make its first flight in 2017. This first version will stand 320 feet tall and weigh 5.5 million pounds. The main engine will be the RS25 that served as the core of the Space Shuttle launch system. Flanking the central rocket are two solid boosters same as the Shuttle used—hopefully the O-rings won’t cause problems this time around. This first generation SLS promises to generate 8.4 million pounds of thrust, ten percent more than the Saturn V.

The later ‘evolved’ SLS rocket is more impressive. It uses the same configuration and staging as its predecessor, though liquid fuel may replace the solid fuel in the rocket boosters. This rocket will stand 400 feet high and weigh 6.5 million pounds. It promises a thrust at launch of 9.2 million pounds, 20 percent more than the Saturn V.

The rocket’s power comes from its multiple stages, the clever set up that made the Saturn V such a powerful rocket. The launch is done by firing the first stage only. Once it burns through all its fuel, it falls away and the second stage fires. Likewise with the third. This means that the later stages are lifting increasingly less weight, and by firing higher in the atmosphere or even in space means later stages meet less atmospheric resistance.

Its solid or liquid-fueled boosters add the advantage of giving the SLS at least one reusable element. Like the Shuttle’s, the external tanks can be reused, potentially saving millions of dollars per launch.

The system looks great in principle—it will be nice to extend our reach beyond low Earth orbit for the first time in nearly 40 years. But I can’t help but wonder if this isn’t another case of NASA biting off more than it can chew. When the Space Shuttle was proposed in the late 1970s, the system was similarly innovative compared to its predecessor. It promised an impressive 50 launches a year in addition to unparalleled scientific return. In reality, the Shuttle’s 135 launches have fallen well short the initial launch goal, and I still can’t put my finger on one really good benefit besides spacefoam mattresses and tang.

The SLS is NASA’s answer to President Obama’s urging America to look forward and dream big. But big dreams are harder to justify now than they were 50 years ago. Sure, a lot of people are fascinated with exploring our solar system; Mars, Saturn’s moon, Titan and Jupiter’s Europa are fascinating places worth reaching towards. But more people want to see the America back on its financial feet and a better job market.

The SLS program takes into account NASA’s unsteady budget as development and eventual launches progress. The decision between solid or liquid-fueled boosters will be made based on what is most cost effective at the time—a good way to add flexibility into the program.

But NASA might be too rigid in other respects. The organization has employed a strict “don’t fix what isn’t broken” policy since the early 1960s (banners bearing versions of the motto adorned many contractor’s factories). In the age before automation, when each spacecraft required unique and custom parts, everything was built by hand. This included the launch vehicles. Workers assembled the Saturn V by hand then x-rayed each weld. If a problem like an air bubble was revealed, workers would go back in and fix the weld by hand. The process alternated between x-rays and hand welds until it was perfect.

NASA has never abandoned this process—don’t fix what isn’t broken, right? Unfortunately, hand building rockets is a lengthy process. It takes weeks or months to complete one vehicle rather than days. There are companies out there, such as SpaceX, that are using automation to build rockets just as well but at a far faster pace.

In spite of the obvious benefits to faster production—more launches and staying on schedule—NASA seems reluctant to change. Recently, the organization announced it would rely on commercial companies like SpaceX to build its low Earth orbital capable rockets for access to the space station. The deep space capable vehicles would remain under the watchful eye of NASA.