Some before, and many after the accident criticized the use of old engines for the Antares. Many references were made to the long storage time with some mention of them as antiques. The refurbishment of these engines didn’t seem to slow down the slings, arrows and insults much.
My question is, at what point do the old Shuttle engines for the SLS reach the same category as the  failed ones on Antares? After all, at the probable flight rate, the used SLS engines will be in the same general age range at some point as the failed ones at Wallops.
Eventually there might be new engines, but how far down the road?
The following two tabs change content below.
johnhare
I do construction for a living and aerospace as an occasional hobby. I am an inventor and a bit of an entrepreneur. I've been self employed since the 1980s and working in concrete since the 1970s. When I grow up, I want to work with rockets and spacecraft. I did a stupid rocket trick a few decades back and decided not to try another hot fire without adult supervision. Haven't located much of that as we are all big kids when working with our passions.
Latest posts by johnhare (see all)
- Regenerative cooled turbopump - March 16, 2023
- Second Guessing Starship - September 19, 2022
- Projectile Fusion - May 19, 2022
Another interesting phenomenon is that when you have old used engines, you tend to cherry pick them starting with the ones you think are in the best condition. Which means that over time you start getting to the ones that have a little more rework and “personality”… But the “good news” is there’s only a few flights worth of old RS-25s so they’ll have to get an assembly line going sooner rather than later anyway…
~Jon
Furthermore, the use of the Shuttle’s SRBs and the planned usage of upgraded F1s in one of the three proposals for advanced boosters for SLS Block 2. Quite the amalgamation of relatively ancient technologies.
The bad news is they are only contracted to deliver 6 engines over the next decade. So not much of an assembly line.