Direct (Jupiter) v. Ares...the debate continues

[MajorTom]

Hi all,

Just ran across this article. I did not know this before, but apparently there are NASA guys are working on the Jupiter design in their spare time, and they are working "with the help of retirees and other space enthusiasts." Now who could THEY be? (*ahem* Simcosmos?)

Maybe it's the politically correct thing for him to do, but it's annoying that the Ares manager continues to dismiss project Jupiter as a "napkin" design.

Full article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25678645/

 

[pete.dakota]

Wasn't the ISS's orginal design drawn out by engineers on a napkin? I'm sure I've read this somewhere.

 

[Urwumpe]

Wasn't the ISS's orginal design drawn out by engineers on a napkin? I'm sure I've read this somewhere.

No, the original design was Space Station Freedom. It just got merged with Mir 2.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

Here's the part that most intrigues me:

But Cook said he is familiar with the Jupiter project, and he's not impressed. NASA informally reviewed plans for the rocket last fall and determined the idea to be a flawed scheme based on shaky numbers.
"It's not feasible. We said, 'It doesn't work' and moved on,'" Cook said.

If it doesn't work, then the Space Shuttle program since 1981 WAS a hoax! Direct copies the Shuttle SRBs, adds some engines to the tank and straps Orion up top. The technology is all proven except Orion, but its development would benefit from not having to try to fit an unproven rocket system.

 

[pete.dakota]

No, the original design was Space Station Freedom. It just got merged with Mir 2.

Well, yes, sure. I'm talking about the actual moment when this was realised. I'll try and find the article.

 

[Urwumpe]

The Jupiter is described here:

http://www.launchcomplexmodels.com/Direct/Docs/DIRECT_v2.02.pdf

There are some advantages in the design, but the performance values are looking too good to be true. of course NASA will not choose something NIH, but the commonality advantages are visible - the same ground interfaces in theory for the whole family.

Actually, the only difference between Ares and Jupiter is the performance - Jupiter requires a new mission profile. But the design premises are the same.

 

[GregBurch]

Here's a nice little summary of what's so screwed up about Ares/Orion and how it got that way:

http://www.newscientist.com/blog/space/2008/07/if-you-want-to-repeat-apollo-do-it.html

It really is mind-boggling how truly terrible the Ares/Orion project has been at every stage -- from original conception up through the nightmarish kludges being considered to "fix" the Ares I thrust oscillation problems.

I feel really sorry for the many talented people at NASA who have to drag themselves to work every day to chip away at this monstrosity. Anyone smart enough to do technical work on the project has to know they're being led down a path to humiliation. As much as I hate my tax dollars being wasted this way, it's just a small portion of my income that's being thrown down a rathole like this. For the people who have to actually work on the project, it's their life and their passion that's being wasted.

 

[Biscuit]

Wasn't the ISS's orginal design drawn out by engineers on a napkin? I'm sure I've read this somewhere.

I don't have any official figures, but from my own experience (and what I've heard and read from others) I would imagine a good percentage of designs start out as doodles on bar napkins and coasters.

I don't see why that should invalidate an idea.

What better way to work out an initial design than with a couple of workmates/friends over a few cold ones?

I know my best programming projects for work have started out on napkins at the bar.

 

[Urwumpe]

The famous W12/W18-engine of Volkswagen was designed by Ferdinand Piech on a napkin. I think the napkin is now in the Volkswagen museum, but they also used it for advertisements in local newspapers.

Which again shows: Not all drawn on a napkin is automatically good.

 

[Native Son]

I think Direct might be our only moon shot.....

The advantages of Direct far outweigh abandoning Ares at this point, from saving the STS infrastucture to the cheaper costs of not needing Ares 1 at all...........

I'm really hoping for the DIRECT guys to get the green light to submit a final report to all 535 members of the legislative branch.

 

[GregBurch]

I think Direct might be our only moon shot.....

The advantages of Direct far outweigh abandoning Ares at this point, from saving the STS infrastucture to the cheaper costs of not needing Ares 1 at all...........

I'm really hoping for the DIRECT guys to get the green light to submit a final report to all 535 members of the legislative branch.

I hate to say it, since I know we have DIRECT folks on the forum here, but I think the train has left the station. It WILL wreck, but the train is ARES, for better or worse.

No change could happen before November, because no one in Washington will pay enough attention to the issue before the election to make a decision. There might be a tiny window in which the political pain of the change could be inflicted and felt in 2-3Q09, but that would require someone in the new administration to REALLY, REALLY care about the issue.

How likely do you think that will be?

 

[Urwumpe]

How likely do you think that will be?

Almost Null. "Change" does not mean "Change the launch vehicle".

Also, I hope that NASA is not forced to implement DIRECT. The DIRECT people would become unbearable afterwards.

 

[Native Son]

I hate to say it, since I know we have DIRECT folks on the forum here, but I think the train has left the station. It WILL wreck, but the train is ARES, for better or worse.

No change could happen before November, because no one in Washington will pay enough attention to the issue before the election to make a decision. There might be a tiny window in which the political pain of the change could be inflicted and felt in 2-3Q09, but that would require someone in the new administration to REALLY, REALLY care about the issue.

How likely do you think that will be?

None.

The NASA administrator is as stubborn as our beloved president. And Congress....well, we know that story.

And you're correct about that train. It's left and we are just waiting for the wreck.

"Let us at least make a new mistake." Well, you got your wish Dr. Griffin.

 

[Linguofreak]

The government isn't the problem here. The problem is that the American people just don't care about it enough to put any pressure on the government to do anything else. Sure, all of us space geeks care, but not everybody is a space geek. There's alot of popular sentiment to the tune of "With all that's wrong with the world, why are we wasting money on space."

But I guarantee you that if you can get the American people to care, politicians will be falling over each other trying to make the idea of quadrupling the NASA budget look like their own.

 

[MajorTom]

Buzz Aldrin Speaks Up

Hi all,

Quoting from my morning AIAA newsletter:

"Buzz Aldrin is leading an effort to re-examine" the Constellation program -- "in particular, NASA's choice of rockets for the mission." Aldrin wants to create a panel to examine if Constellation is the "right way to go" because of reports of overruns and technical problems. The Center for Strategic and International Studies and internal NASA engineers that favor the Direct 2.0 proposal, as well as former Utah senator Jake Garn, favor Aldrin's plan. "Aldrin said he is not championing any one system but wants to make sure that all viable possibilities are studied." Yet, the Sentinel sees "Aldrin's push [as] a reflection of growing divisions inside the aerospace community over NASA's next generation of rockets." Internal NASA documents "suggest that it will be years before the agency will know whether its proposed fixes [for Ares] will work. In the meantime, the documents say, new problems have arisen involving the design of Ares launch pad, the astronaut emergency escape system on Orion and the capsule's heat protection system."
​

Full article: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/5906199.html

My respect for Buzz continues to grow.

MT

Edit: If Obama really wants to delay Orion for 5 yrs and redirect the funds to "education," then he needs to read Dr. Stuhlinger's famous letter (sorry, no time to provide a link...) Ciao

 

[Andy44]

The government isn't the problem here.

It's not? Do you really think a private company would be trying to make such an ugly baby? This has "government operation" written all over it.

And blaming the "American people" for not liking your hobby as much as you do is an old and tired excuse. I am very interested in spaceflight, but I have little interest in watching NASA waste money which was taken from me without my consent, and I don't begrudge anyone else who thinks the same way.

 

[GregBurch]

The government isn't the problem here. The problem is that the American people just don't care about it enough to put any pressure on the government to do anything else. Sure, all of us space geeks care, but not everybody is a space geek. There's alot of popular sentiment to the tune of "With all that's wrong with the world, why are we wasting money on space."

But I guarantee you that if you can get the American people to care, politicians will be falling over each other trying to make the idea of quadrupling the NASA budget look like their own.

... to add to Andy's comment: It's not that there's not enough money in NASA's budget. It's that Ares/Orion is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE design, driven entirely by the political pork requirement to keep as many current NASA and NASA contractor employees with jobs and contracts as possible.

NASA's had plenty enough money for a long time. They just waste huge amounts of it.

 

[Chupacabra]

I just want to mention, in reality echo the voices on NasaSpaceFlight, that too much blame is placed on NASA and not enough on the presentation of Direct.

Not to say that the Direct team hasn't done a good job. They've come pretty far to design a whole launch vehicle to an expandable mission criteria. But there needs to be less name-calling, It kills me that I can't find the post/er who came up with an effective critique of Direct. Essentially the post boiled down to:

1.Maybe Direct really is flawed
2.Maybe the numbers are too optimistic
3....(I forgot this one )
4.People at NASA are fools.

Obviously it is easier to point out flaws with 4 than to get the other issues worked out. And the official team is doing a great job of working the problem.

I hope for the best.:thumbup:

 

[joeybigO]

Small idea on the Direct.
Not sure what engine is on the bottom, but they should consider the N1 engine built by old Russia.
That bad boy can put out some force from hell. 1,720,000 lbf. If you strap a couple of those bad boys to the bottom of your direct, you can get some steam behind that mass. More or less what I really mean, is that you can get the lander and the CEV all in one shot.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

You mean the N1 rocket? The rocket had a combined thrust of only around 3 million pounds in the first stage, and that was spread over all 30 engines. They currently have RS-68's under Direct which each put out 663,000 lbf at sea level (2.9MN). Also RS-68 has a higher efficiency than everything but the SSME in its weight class at 365s at sea level.

Bottom line, NASA won't consider it because they didn't come up with the idea so whatever does work, they won't be able to claim complete credit for like they could if ares actually works.