r/ArtemisProgram • u/jadebenn • 7d ago
Image NASA Released a Photo (Accidentally) Containing EUS Hardware
15
u/jimhillhouse 7d ago
one wants to know how bad of a odious mess Isaacman has created in canceling the Exploration Upper Stage and Mobile Launch Platform 2 programs, one need only go and read, “The Space Launch System Utilizing the Centaur-V Upper Stage”, by Donahoe, Jackson, Green, et al.. Apparently, neither Isaacman, his Brain Trust, NASA, nor Boeing have gone beyond conceptual notions of how to integrate the Centaur V to the SLS Core Stage, much less how a Centaur V-SLS combo will fly, its natural frequency, the structural issues, the aerodynamic qualities, the... one could go on ad nausium, but the point is clear. As autumn approaches in 2026, Isaacman has set the stage for a multi-year delay in excess of 4 years in landing an Artemis crew on the Moon as those many issues, nevermind the ones unknown, are discovered and then resolved.
1
1
u/FrankyPi 2d ago
Artemis 4 will use the last ICPS, so SLS won't be the bottleneck for it, but HLS probably will. Artemis V is in question since it is the first mission supposed to use the SLS rated Centaur V.
6
u/CT-4242 7d ago
It’s literally across the aisle from where the photographer took the picture. Like there’s not many angles for them to get that picture without having EUS stuff in the background. The alternatives are uhhh not photogenic.
9
u/jadebenn 7d ago
I kinda doubt they'd have shown it here if it was an option, though. They really don't like talking about Block 1B these days.
1
u/sevgonlernassau 6d ago
They could put a tarp on it like they did before. Though less need for tarps if they got congressional approval for the Pecan Island SpaceX factory.
8
u/-Poultrygeist- 7d ago
What is EUS?
26
u/BubblyMoose3597 7d ago
Exploration Upper Stage
Basicly, the second stage of the SLS that was on development, would make the rocket more capable on his payload to Lower Earth Orbit and specially in Trans Lunar Inyections, but also was very expensive.
Administrator of NASA canceled, senate didnt.
-1
u/mclumber1 7d ago
It wasn't a sustainable upper stage program (neither was the ICPS). The new upper stage, that is based on the Vulcan upper stage is sustainable.
15
u/me_myself_ai 7d ago
Oh good so the anti-constitutional impoundment is prolly NBD
-2
u/redstercoolpanda 7d ago
You can agree with the fact that EUS was not a good program, and disagree with the way that the current admin went about removing it.
8
u/BubblyMoose3597 6d ago
I am not american, but if i am not wrong, until the next budget is not made, NASA or any institution cant cancel a project.
I don't know if you follow the military world (I do; I'm an officer), but the Pentagon has tried to halt acquisitions of equipment it no longer wants (tanks), decommission existing equipment (A-10 aircraft), or eliminate failed acquisition or development programs (littoral combat ships, etc.).
The US Congress and Senate rejected all of these requests (some made by high-ranking officers on the Armaments Committee: "We don't want any more M1 Abrams.") or ministerial orders and simply allocated funding to the program they wanted.
Furthermore, the law specified project usage requirements (availability percentage, flight hours, etc.) to leave officials and the government with zero room to at least mitigate the financial impact on the Department of Defense (Secretary of the Air Force, Army, or Navy) of using that equipment very little.
When the matter reaches the Senate, we'll see if the EUS dies or if the Lunar Injection Centaur V gets funding.
Keep in mind that NASA... It doesn't even have an authorized budget allocation for the second stage of Centaur V.
This is a move by Jared Isaacman to try to overcome the power of Capitol Hill, which is what controls NASA (with disastrous results).
-3
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
“Anti constitutional” your senate has been giving these contracts to feed the aerospace lobbyists billions and billions, it’s bad when NASA finally tries to do something against it?
8
u/jadebenn 7d ago
Exploration Upper Stage. It was the new upper stage slated to replace the ICPS (current upper stage) on the Artemis Space Launch System rocket before NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman suddenly declared a change in direction about six months ago.
Administrator Isaacman claims that the program was terminated for being late and overbudget, but given that ICPS was itself an adoption of a "commercial" upper stage and it took several years longer to adapt than projected EUS availability (ICPS took 6 years, EUS was projected for late 2028 according to the OIG report), he is either ignorant of the rocket's history or lying about his motives.
1
u/Qualified-Astronomer 7d ago
He’s the head of NASA he has access to this information. Show some charitabilitty
18
u/jadebenn 7d ago
I don't see why I should when he won't give straight answers for this stuff whenever he's pressed on it. What was the rationale? The studies? We used to actually get the papers and presentations showing the pros and cons of architectural changes on NTRS. The current administrator seems to think "transparency" means posting on X, instead of explaining the logic behind his decisions.
12
u/F9-0021 7d ago
Lol, the head of NASA is an appointed position. It could be a complete idiot, or in this case, someone with an agenda and conflicts of interest. Just because he has access to the information doesn't mean he's acting in good faith.
-5
u/Qualified-Astronomer 7d ago
I’ve seen interviews of the guy, he seems pretty innocent. Just some guy who used to fly planes, went to space and now wants to be in charge of space. Doesn’t strike me as some evil guy with an agenda.
I know people say he’s in Elons pocket but he also gave Artemis 3 to Jeff Bezos company who Elon fucking hates so idts. He also emphasizes how NASA should try to do things private companies rnt doinglike nuclear propulsion so he’s not someone that wants to funnel money into private companies because he wants NASA to do stuff as well
3
u/firerulesthesky 5d ago
I don’t think he is evil, but he isn’t afraid to bend the truth or lie by omission. The ‘I’m trying to tell the truth by not answering your question’ moment comes to mind during his confirmation. Not to mention his Athena write up that he walked back when it was leaked only to push to implement it as administrator.
-1
u/BubblyMoose3597 7d ago
Trump wanted to cancel the rocket and the GAO warned about the crazy cost of the SLS 1B.
Didnt came from nowhere.
-4
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
You’re right, the entire program is bullshit, they should have cut the losses as quickly as possible.
Saying EUS was projected to be ready after 6 years and 3 billion dollars is not a good look on your part. 3 billion for an upper stage?
It’s more efficient to launch them without any upper stage and make Starship tug it to the Moon. It will ironically take less refueling launches for Starship HLS this way.
5
u/jadebenn 6d ago edited 6d ago
If no upper stage was an option, Isaacman wouldn't be talking about Centaur V, he would've just killed EUS without a replacement. They still need one, even for Starship.
6
u/PhotoGladiator 7d ago
I posted this in the other sub:
For anyone curious as to what is visible in the background, here is a breakdown.
STAs for EUS LOX, LH2, and Midbody. And a partial LOX tank which I think was flight? There is more as well (forward adaptor STA and interstage stuff), but it is blocked by the ring segment tool.
But yes, a lot more work was completed on this stage when Issacman aggressively pulled the plug on it, and he is not very keen on people knowing that more was done.
-4
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
4 years passed and 2 billion spent and they haven’t even started assembly of the combined structure? Good call from NASA to cut it loose.
8
u/jadebenn 6d ago
STA would've been done around now according to the original schedule before work stoppage. Where's the Centaur V integration work? You really think that's going to be bending metal this year?
-1
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
Oh so it’s okay to take 4 years and 2 billion dollars for one expendable upper stage?
No, I’m instead of the opinion that SLS upper stages should straight up be cancelled and Starship should be giving it a tug from LEO to LLO. Heck, that way we can even start launching on Vulcan later instead of SLS.
5
u/jadebenn 6d ago
Again: If Isaacman could've gotten away using an architecture without an SLS upper stage, he absolutely would've. It's not on the table.
2
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
Maybe for now, because some people don’t have belief in Starship, Blue Origin etc. would certainly protest against it.
Then again, given how much the SLS has been delayed so far, and how much money it has wasted (due to architectural issues), is it really a bad decision to cut the losses and switch to that architecture even if it means a schedule slip for a year or two? Artemis 4 doesn’t even need to be delayed.
3
u/jadebenn 6d ago
It's my understanding that the SpaceX architecture needs Orion insertion into HEO, which you can't get with the core alone.
2
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
Then we might be referring to different things.
I’m referring to this, basically sending Orion to LEO to dock with the refueled Starship and Starship can tug it to LLO.
2
u/FrankyPi 2d ago edited 2d ago
It can, but then it won't have enough performance left to return to orbit. HLS departure orbit isn't from HEO for no reason, it's because it doesn't have enough performance to complete the mission (with acceptable margin) if it departs from deeper in Earth's gravity well. The parameters used in linked proposal are severely overestimating its performance, most notably dry mass isn't anywhere near 120 tons.
1
u/fighter-bomber 2d ago
The linked proposal is already down to 11 or so refuels from, I think 18? You can easily add a few more refuels and you’re still well below the amount needed in the original plan, while being able to tug Orion all the way from LEO to LLO.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/Royal_Platform_6754 7d ago
Isn't this a structural test article?
9
u/jadebenn 7d ago edited 7d ago
These are the STA tanks. Flight article tanks were behind them in flow.
There were some pics of one of the flight tanks a few months back... Would need to find the link. It was during Artemis 3 core rollout from MAF.
12
u/jadebenn 7d ago edited 7d ago
Also worth noting that this is after 6 months of doing literally nothing. Imagine where they'd be in the assembly process if Isaacman hadn't issued a stop work.
1
u/Decronym 7d ago edited 1d ago
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| DMLS | Selective Laser Melting additive manufacture, also Direct Metal Laser Sintering |
| EUS | Exploration Upper Stage |
| FCC | Federal Communications Commission |
| (Iron/steel) Face-Centered Cubic crystalline structure | |
| GAO | (US) Government Accountability Office |
| HEO | High Earth Orbit (above 35780km) |
| Highly Elliptical Orbit | |
| Human Exploration and Operations (see HEOMD) | |
| HEOMD | Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, NASA |
| ICPS | Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage |
| ITAR | (US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| LH2 | Liquid Hydrogen |
| LLO | Low Lunar Orbit (below 100km) |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| MAF | Michoud Assembly Facility, Louisiana |
| MEO | Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km) |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| Selective Laser Sintering, contrast DMLS | |
| STA | Special Temporary Authorization (issued by FCC for up to 6 months) |
| Structural Test Article |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| apogee | Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest) |
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
[Thread #459 for this sub, first seen 26th Aug 2026, 08:42] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
0
u/fighter-bomber 6d ago
You’re telling me all they managed to do in 4 years was assembling the tanks separately?
-1
u/ContributionEasy6513 5d ago
Ok? Nothing SpaceX couldn't knock out in a couple of hours.
Hard to know if the program is going intentionally slow flying under the radar to keep it going until the next administration or what.
64
u/theChaosBeast 7d ago
I don't think they release accidentally anything if the photo was taken inside a workshop. They have analyzed it well and decided that it can be published.