“If you’re launching to Mars the window optimum opens every two years.”

It’s a money issue, not timing for Mars missions, that will limit the use of the SLS (if it survives to fly). At $1.5B per launch, there is not much budget left to build the expensive payloads that must be SLS-sized in order to justify it’s continued use.

It takes NASA 10 years to build a telescope, so you can already see the challenges NASA will have in building complex payloads for the SLS. And then you have to operate them for some period of time, which means that since NASA can’t have multiple missions going at the same time, all their missions will have to be short duration disposable ones.

It will encourage NASA to do the complete opposite of what we really want to do in space, which is to reuse space hardware and stay in space as long as we can.

If you’re launching to Mars the window optimum opens every two years.

How many times are you going to post that nonsense?

The core is not going to be designed that way.

This is called a “false choice,” not that we really care what you believe, of course.

Small correction here. I believe that Mr. Bolden stated “the SLS will fly once a year, or once every two years.”

I’m surprised that more wasn’t made of that statement.

“SLS is the worst of big government which Reagan abhored (sic)…

Hmmm… Yes he did, didn’t he? Just like all those “nuts on the right wing…”

“The SLS will prove to our fellow countrymen and the world that “America is [still] too great for small dreams” Ronald Reagan.”

One to two flights a year? A big rocket for small dreams.

“…and she calls SLS a “heavy-loss” vehicle (!) before she corrects herself ans says it’s a “heavy-launch” vehicle.”

She was right the first time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGeOHu9NbBc

This was after the press conference. She says that SLS is a ferry to the ISS (!) and she calls SLS a “heavy-loss” vehicle (!) before she corrects herself ans says it’s a “heavy-launch” vehicle.