Her first scheduled test flight is set for Oct. 27

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/const ... index.html

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I'm gonna DVR that launch.

_________________
mechaphil

Yep, it's on the pad all right. And it's possibly (hopefully) the only Ares (at least under the current architecture) that ever is on a pad.

From an engineering standpoint, Ares I-X is almost useless. It's a four segment RSRM, the same as a shuttle SRB, with a dummy upper stage on top. I suppose they'll gather some data about how a shuttle SRB flies on its own...but that's about it. The actual Ares I will use a 5 segment RSRM, something that's never been created before (except for about a month ago when they fired the first 5 seg test into a mountainside). The TO (Thrust Oscillation) will be much different on a 5 seg RSRM than a 4 seg, and that's one of the biggest concerns about the Ares I launcher.

I really hope Ares I is dead in the water by the end of the year.

Do you work for a competing aerospace engineering company?

_________________

Nope. And NASA themselves is not an aerospace engineering company, they're contracting out the Ares/Orion architecture to other companies, notably ATK for the launcher and LockMart for the capsule.

The problem is that there are multiple issues with the Ares architecture that many people have pointed out. However, until this point, management has failed to address their significance. Former administrator Mike Griffin basically came up with and implemented the architecture himself, anyone that was vocal about problems with it could guarantee they'd be out of their job.

The president created the Augustine commission over the summer to assess the current Program of Record as well as alternatives, and present options, not recommendations, to the president. The committee did acknowledge that Ares is not feasible, and there are better alternatives, however Ares still has the stronghold in the political battle and has the chance of winning out. The committee's final report is to come out tomorrow.

There are a number of alternate architectures that would make much more sense. One is very simple - using EELV's (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) to launch the Orion capsule. It would use the Delta IV Heavy or Atlas V that are currently being used to launch unmanned satellites, with some modifications, to launch the Orion capsule. There would be a number of alternatives for launching cargo, including building the Ares V as planned.

My favorite would be the DIRECT architecture (directlauncher.com), which would take the current shuttle ET and SRB's, essentially attach SSME's (Space Shuttle Main Engines) to the bottom and the capsule to the top. It would require very little in terms of development costs compared to Ares, would retain most of the shuttle workforce (huge political plus), and would use components that have already been tested extensively.

The current favorite among NASA management and the Augustine commission seems to be SD-HLLV "Not-Shuttle-C" which would involve sidemounting the capsule and cargo to a current shuttle stack in place of the orbiter. This carries many of the same advantages as DIRECT, but is less efficient, would require 3 launches instead of 2 for lunar, although scenarios are being considered of using combination SD-HLLV and EELV to launch crew/cargo.

Another option worth mentioning that probably is not likely is Ares V Lite, basically a smaller version of Ares V that would be used to launch both crew and cargo (separate launches). Similar to DIRECT, but it would use the 5 seg RSRM's that aren't currently developed - thus more time and money. But an ET between the SRB's would probably serve as sufficient mitigation for TO.

In somewhat breaking news, NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden has just ordered MSFC to study alternate approaches. This is a very good sign. Hopefully the decision that will be made is the right one.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/10/ ... ernatives/

Bump for launch tomorrow.

After some delays, they're into the countdown .

T-3:00

Countdown stopped due to range weather officer.

Well, they would have been fine at one point had a ship not entered the restricted waters zone.

Yeah, that was somewhat amusing.

And because it was international waters, they could have kept on going if they wanted and not face any trouble.

Well, they finally got it off today. Just managed to have a break in the weather, finally!

It's going to be interesting to see what they say about the separation. After watching a few times from a few different angles, it appears that the booster and upper stage recontacted after separation. While the upper stage was just an unpowered dummy, it did not seem to separate very well from the first stage. Had there been a J-2X engine and a real second stage, it would have ignited while still too close to the first stage - that would have been at least loss of mission. Same kind of thing as on Falcon 1 Flight 3.

Now, the real Ares rockets will have ullage motors to assist in separation. That should help somewhat. However, the almost immediate tumbling of the booster isn't good - not only may there have been some contact, but the exhaust from the SRB seemed to be directed at one point toward the upper stage.

This may all be for naught though, as it may be the only Ares rocket we ever see.

Your insight into these things is quite impressive. This your chosen career field, or just a hobby?

_________________
Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way. I can't wait to look in the mirror, 'cause I get better looking each day. To know me is to love me, I must be a hell of a man. Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, but I'm doin' the best that I can.

i know they are scraping the shuttle program for more long distance rockets and exploration. are they going to return to fully reusable ships like the shuttle in the future? or is it rockets?

i heard russia was possibly going to go back to their shuttle program.

_________________

Both - I'm a student right now, it's been a hobby for the past 5-7 years. Eventually it's going to become my career.



Correct, the idea is to go to a program that can go beyond LEO, to the moon, eventually to mars, possibly to near earth objects, etc.

Who knows what the future will bring. The shuttle has been a marvelous vehicle but it's not the way forward if we want to go beyond low earth orbit. While reusability may seem like a good thing, there's not the flight rate to make it advantageous. Even though the main hardware is reusable, the shuttle's operating costs are still higher than an expendable system's would be.

No way at all Russia would be going to a shuttle system. Buran is dead and never really was alive. The orbiter was destroyed in a hangar collapse a few years back.

It would make absolutely no sense, especially with the international cooperation we have, for Russia to try and revive Buran. They'd essentially be starting fresh, and they sure don't have the money.

Besides, Russia has easily the most reliable spacecraft ever created in the Soyuz. While the shuttle has wonderful capabilities for what it does, nothing is as rock-solid as the Soyuz. They are cheap to produce, and are very reliable - they almost never are delayed. Those guys have it down to a science.

only one buran was destroyed, there are a few others in russia nearly finished, but have sat in isolation for years, correct?

i think this is where i got it from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_prog ... sibilities

_________________

Yeah, they started construction on a few more, only one is anywhere near completion.

It's been sitting unused for years though, there's no way it's practical to try and fly it again. There's no infrastructure for it either.

Plus it makes absolutely no sense for Buran to be restarted, as I mentioned earlier.