Nasa may drop Ares 1-Y flight

[agentgonzo]

Regardless of the decision of the presidency over the future of the Constellation Project, NASA may drop the 1-Y flight anyway due to the upper stage engine not being ready in time

http://spacefellowship.com/2009/11/05/nasa-may-drop-ares-i-y-test-flight/

 

[Urwumpe]

Oh, is it?

Do they now go the way of the N-1, testing is for cowards?

 

[agentgonzo]

Oh, is it?

Do they now go the way of the N-1, testing is for cowards?

IIRC the Saturn V was tested mostly in one go with a complete rocket. Though they had slightly tighter time constraints with that one. And a much better budget.

 

[Urwumpe]

IIRC the Saturn V was tested mostly in one go with a complete rocket. Though they had slightly tighter time constraints with that one. And a much better budget.

There are differences though.

The first stage was tested in complete configuration on a test stand. (Same for Ares I), same for the second stage, the second stage engines had already been tested on the S-IVB stage and the S-IVB stage had already been tested on the Saturn IB.

The Ares I is the equivalent for the Saturn I/Saturn IB in history, since the Ares I should test stuff for use in the Ares V, which means the testing should be compared. And the Saturn I had pretty many failures in it's early launch history, until the first stage worked and the Saturn IB had still problems until the S-IVB was considered "good enough". The Saturn I was joked to be "Clusters last stand" since it was made by clustering Redstone and Jupiter tank structures together (which is why the rocket had 8 engines on the first stage).

 

[Moonwalker]

NASA could even test Ares I manned (but of course, those todays sissies won't). The Space Shuttle had been tested manned as well. Riding on top of Ares I isn't more scary or risky than riding on the Shuttle stack.

 

[T.Neo]

Riding on top of Ares I isn't more scary or risky than riding on the Shuttle stack.

It is just as scary, only in different ways.

And it is probably a whole lot rougher...

 

[Arthur Dent]

...and more challenging (=more desirable) for test pilots

 

[Moonwalker]

And it is probably a whole lot rougher...

Which refers to the very last few seconds before staging, not to the whole first stage ascent. The dual-plane isolator probably is going to solve those vibration issues, which is not uncommon for solid rocket boosters anyway.

The first stage ascent probably won't be much different to the Shuttle first stage ascent, which is propelled by two SRBeasts in a more complex and scary stack config.

 

[garyw]

The first stage ascent probably won't be much different to the Shuttle first stage ascent, which is propelled by two SRBeasts in a more complex and scary stack config.

Shuttle might have two SRB's but it has a tank in the middle which absorbs a lot of the shock waves through it's structure. One of the big problems with Ares is vibration off the second stage during first stage powered flight.
It's such an important point it's still considered RED on the project plan and that means it's a major showstopper if it's not fixed.

 

[jinglesassy]

i would require a flight like the ares 1-x before i test the full thing becuse of it being so thin i want to know it wont snap in 2 right after takeoff

 

[Moonwalker]

Shuttle might have two SRB's but it has a tank in the middle which absorbs a lot of the shock waves through it's structure. One of the big problems with Ares is vibration off the second stage during first stage powered flight.
It's such an important point it's still considered RED on the project plan and that means it's a major showstopper if it's not fixed.

The vibration issues are not related to the complete first stage powered flight. It's related to the very last seconds shortly before separation. The first 115 seconds of the flight are expected to be smooth.

 

[T.Neo]

The first stage ascent probably won't be much different to the Shuttle first stage ascent, which is propelled by two SRBeasts in a more complex and scary stack config.

So, the Shuttle has a "more complex and scary stack config"?

The only issue with the Shuttle config is that it lacks an effective launch escape system.

But Ares (as with any launch system) could suffer other issues from which not even an escape system can protect you from.

which is not uncommon for solid rocket boosters anyway.

I never said it was uncommon. It happens. I could get into a rant about solid vs. liquid, but I digress.

 

[SiberianTiger]

They may drop Ares I-Y, but more real test flights can be performed sooner:
http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20091106/NEWS02/911060331&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL

Three test flights of the Ares I rocket would be staged at Kennedy Space Center in 2012, 2013 and 2014, providing major milestones that could bolster political and public support for the embattled program. No money is set aside for flights in 2012 and 2013, so NASA is re-evaluating its budget to see how it can come up with the necessary funds.

Successful tests would prove that Ares rocket systems work. They also would significantly improve confidence that Ares I rockets and Orion spacecraft will be ready for piloted flights on schedule in March 2015.

The new plan under consideration would include:


2012: the first Ares I test with a first-stage, five-segment solid rocket booster and a live launch abort system. The rocket would have aerodynamically exact mockups of the second stage and Orion capsule. The flight would involve a high-altitude abort test. NASA analyses show a second-stage engine failure is the top Ares I risk. The test would show whether the launch abort system would save astronauts in that scenario.


2013: a second test of the launch abort system, which employs small rockets that would pull the Orion spacecraft away from an Ares I rocket in an explosion or other serious failure. The escape system is key to NASA's goal of making its next crew transport system safer than the shuttle.


2014: the first full test of the Ares I-Orion system. It would be the first test flight of a second-stage J2X engine and the first unmanned test with a real Orion spacecraft.Both the five-segment booster and the J2X will be used on NASA's Ares V heavy-lift vehicle. So the tests would retire development risk early.

 

[Moonwalker]

So, the Shuttle has a "more complex and scary stack config"?

The only issue with the Shuttle config is that it lacks an effective launch escape system.

The lack of an effective launch escape system is a significant issue combined with the major design flaw, the fully unprotected thermal "protection" system of the Orbiter as a result of the stack. This makes the Shuttle the most scary todays manned launcher. STS-107 and the STS-107 investigation tells you that even more, which marked the beginning of the end of the Shuttle era.

 

[T.Neo]

The lack of an effective launch escape system is a significant issue combined with the major design flaw,

No, lack of an effective launch escape system is ONE OF the major design flaws. Of which several major ones exist on the Shuttle.

the fully unprotected thermal "protection" system of the Orbiter as a result of the stack.

If you do not think that the TPS of the Orbiter provides "protection", I'd like to see you do a reentry in a TPS-less shuttle.

This makes the Shuttle the most scary todays manned launcher.

Uh, yeah. It's also a radically different design to the other two that are operating.

The Foam Issue is not a launch problem. While it may occur during launch, it only affects the vehicle during reentry. If the shuttle orbiter were replaced by, say, a cargo pod, foam strikes would be much less of ( or potentially non-existant) an issue. It does not affect the delivery of the payload to orbit.

 

[garyw]

The vibration issues are not related to the complete first stage powered flight. It's related to the very last seconds shortly before separation. The first 115 seconds of the flight are expected to be smooth.

Not according to the information I've got. Can you cite a source for that please?

 

[RisingFury]

This makes the Shuttle the most scary todays manned launcher. STS-107 and the STS-107 investigation tells you that even more, which marked the beginning of the end of the Shuttle era.

Yes, and it also shows the power of the schedule and the stupidities people are willing to do to keep on schedule.

 

[Moonwalker]

If you do not think that the TPS of the Orbiter provides "protection", I'd like to see you do a reentry in a TPS-less shuttle.

The TPS of STS-107 was not protective.

It's also a radically different design to the other two that are operating.

As I said, it is a more complex design.

The Foam Issue is not a launch problem. While it may occur during launch, it only affects the vehicle during reentry. If the shuttle orbiter were replaced by, say, a cargo pod, foam strikes would be much less of ( or potentially non-existant) an issue. It does not affect the delivery of the payload to orbit.

The Shuttle system does not consist of a cargo pod or anything else. It remains scary until its retirement. That a damaged TPS has an effect during entry doesn't take away the fact that the entire crew vehicle is fully unprotected during early launch, which Ares I won't offer.

 

[T.Neo]

The TPS of STS-107 was not protective.

It was. It's just that it had a great big hole in it.

The Shuttle system does not consist of a cargo pod or anything else.

That isn't the point. I'm using it as an example.

It remains scary until its retirement.

As do all rockets. And I wouldn't call "scary" a technical spaceflight term.

That a damaged TPS has an effect during entry doesn't take away the fact that the entire crew vehicle is fully unprotected during early launch, which Ares I won't offer.

Although your wording is slightly...odd, I'm actually doing nothing other then agreeing with you on that point. STS lacks a launch escape system, but that does not make Ares-I some sort of safety holy grail, because (AFAIK) all rockets since Gemini have had a LAS of some sort.

 

[Moonwalker]

Not according to the information I've got. Can you cite a source for that please?

http://blogs.nasa.gov/cm/blog/Constellation/posts/post_1244149653134.html