Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Announcement: New Space Launch System - NASA Administrator Explains

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
4,191
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Sep 14, 2011

Former Shuttle Cdr. Charles Bolden reveals NASA's plans for a new as the Space Launch System (SLS) -- based on a heavy-lift rocket bigger than the Saturn V -- that could take crews to Mars, asteroids, back to the Moon, and beyond.

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (VideoFromSpace)

  • why the hell use SRM? because people will lose their job? and a overdue overbuget capsule? Just contract SpaceX to do this!, we will have the rocket 3 times cheaper and two times faster! And another point...I thought space exploration is for exploring space not creating jobs.

  • @thewebmaster93 Tell your Congress-people.

  • Big? Maybe bigger distances and bigger fuel consumption. Still same old tech. Boeing conducted some high voltage experiments and could lose gravity on objects but you guys still rocking rockets.

  • @Matu1 We hear you. Many readers are disappointed that emphasis on science, private commercial development and technological innovation has apparently taken a smaller role.

  • @VideoFromSpace

    Why is it like that? Is there a link to black projects?

  • @Matu1 No link that we know of. This is a large, public, jobs-oriented, Congressionally mandated project. It will succeed or fail in full public view. It is based on 40 year-old technologies, so we doubt there could be any worthwhile spy stuff involved at all.

see all

All Comments (34)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @PeXis

    I agree. The SLS is a pointless endevour. There are many disposable heavy launch systems in development or able to be put on the drawing board if requested. NASA does not need to build a heavy system. Every launch company around today should be capable of that. What they need to focus on is making true reusable technoligies feasable. Even if its just a flyback booster piggybacking up a 2nd stage, its still an advancement.

  • Thiokol Corporation and Lockheed Martin FAILED us with Shuttle. So why we are dealing with the same contractors with SLS is a total slap in the face to all people who care about progress.

    If you buy a car and it ends up costing over 20 time what the dealer told it would cost and blows up 1/65 times you use it, are you going to buy from the same car company? If you did, you would be stupid. So why do we do it? Campaign contributions by the above contractors.

  • Hmmmm REALLY??

  • @1:22

  • @wussup331

    Oh man i failed and i am embarresed because of my memory, but ill hook you up with link to know why.

    thecrit com/2008/06/30/boeing-develops­-anti-gravity-propulsion/

  • @Matu1 what experiment did boeing do? have you got any links or info?

  • @thewebmaster93 FUCK space X, those things are dangerous pieces of shit. I've seen the demo vids, that's why they are cheap, to many fucking failures.

  • ITs amazing to hear the public front vs. what is said behind "closed doors". The SLS is the 21st century version of the "90 day report". Too expensive so it will fail at the door.

  • @djmikeyvans I'm ready for nothing to happen because Elenin is not dangerous at all.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more