Gerst: expect this study to fit into broader budget discussions. Should have preliminary findings in the next month or so.
Gerst: one astronaut with flight experience is part of the study. Won’t speculate on what astronauts think about flying people on EM-1.
Gerst: administration team, in concern with acting administrator Lightfoot, asked us to do feasibility study.
Hill also says he doesn’t have a position one way or another on crew on EM-1, but does note it needs a “significant” amount of money to do.
Gerst: don’t have a preconceived position whether or not put crew on EM-1. Even if we don’t, study may offer changes worth doing for EM-1.
Gerst: minimum 33 month gap between EM-1 and EM-2 because of need to modify launch platforms to support upgraded SLS.
Hill: believe we can do the AA-2 altitude abort test prior to EM-1 (currently planned for after, I believe.)
Gerst: in study, look at what do we gain by putting crew on this flight to balance the risk of the mission.
Gerst: ICPS upper stage for SLS EM-1 would be used here; capable of flying proposed mission but needs to be human rated.
Hill: crewed EM-1 mission would be like plans for EM-2: 8-9 day mission for lunar flyby.
Bill Hill: ruled out accelerating EM-2. Had discussions in last month to see if in “realm of possibilities” of putting crew on EM-1.
Gerst: constrained the crewed EM-1 flight to take place in 2019; if it goes much later not much advantage over flying EM-2 as planned.
Gerst: know tornado damage at Michoud will affect SLS core stage work by a couple months; looking at effects on overall schedule.
Bill Gerstenmaier: this is a feasibility study; won’t recommend whether or not to put crew on EM-1.
That would explain a certain sticker spotted on the CST-100 mockup last week…
"Были когда-то и мы рысаками!!!"