Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Spaceflight News Share news, stories, or discussions about government and private spaceflight programs; including ESA, ISS, NASA, Russian Space Program, Virgin Galactic, & more!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-15-2009, 11:25 AM   #106
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

I wonder what would happen if Ares I-X would explode...
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 11:50 AM   #107
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 Ares I-X has little in common with the real Ares I.
It's simply a 4-segment shuttle SRB with ballast and telemetry sensors mounted on top.
Airplanes within wind tunnels also have little in common with the real Airplanes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 I wonder what would happen if Ares I-X would explode...
What happened when the Shuttles main engines exploded during test firing or when NASA had to realize that the thermal protection system gets almost lost during testing? They looked for the cause and did it right.

What happened when even humans -> Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia got lost? They looked for the cause and did it right.

And what did not happen? Saying "that's it" and ending the program
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 12:01 PM   #108
T.Neo
SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Default

Quote:
Airplanes within wind tunnels also have little in common with the real Airplanes.
I fail to see your logic, I'm afraid.
T.Neo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 12:19 PM   #109
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 I fail to see your logic, I'm afraid.
That Ares1-X does have little in common with the Ares1 does not mean Ares1 won't work. Ares1-X is a one-to-one model if you will, that is capable to lift off and going to be tested within the real environment it is going to be used in. It already will tell a lot about thrust oscillation, no matter if it's a 4-segment shuttle booster with a mass simulator or the intended 5-segment Ares1 booster. The rest will tell and show us the Ares1-Y and following launches...
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 12:35 PM   #110
T.Neo
SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Default

Quote:
That Ares1-X does have little in common with the Ares1 does not mean Ares1 won't work. Ares1-X is a one-to-one model if you will, that is capable to lift off and going to be tested within the real environment it is going to be used in. It already will tell a lot about thrust oscillation, no matter if it's a 4-segment shuttle booster with a mass simulator or the intended 5-segment Ares1 booster. The rest will tell and show us the Ares1-Y and following launches...
Still, I fail to see your logic.

Ares I-X is nothing more then an expensive publicity stunt.

I honestly would not be surprised if sufficient thrust oscillation data could be developed from a computer simulation...
T.Neo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 12:40 PM   #111
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Neo View Post
 Ares I-X is nothing more then an expensive publicity stunt.
Maybe in terms of a subjective point of view.

You might want to look what Ares1-X is about. Otherwise nobody can help you and other pessimists to see the logic

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/249826main_aresIX_fs_61608.pdf1608.pdf
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 12:42 PM   #112
T.Neo
SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Default

Quote:
Otherwise nobody can help you and other pessimists to see the logic
I am not being pessimistic at all...
T.Neo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 01:26 PM   #113
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 It already will tell a lot about thrust oscillation, no matter if it's a 4-segment shuttle booster with a mass simulator or the intended 5-segment Ares1 booster.
It won't tell you anything useful, because the spectrum of the thrust oscillation vibrations will be completely different if you have just 5 segments.
Add a upper stage which is filled with superfluous hydrogen and oxygen propellants, and you again changed the vibrations.

Everything about the dynamic vibrations of the combination will not be useful and the static vibrations will be tested in an acoustic test stand.

It is just an expensive firework for making the progress appear faster.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 02:26 PM   #114
Insane
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 You can develope one midsize launcher, but you still have to build and assemble it two times and to launch it two times. To me it does not make sense to carry Orion on an overpowered stack with the reasoning that it's the same one as for Altair and the Earth departure stage.
Ever heard of mass producing? Having one production line where you reel off the same thing say 100 times, is a lot cheaper than having two production lines where you produce two different things about 50 times each. The benefit of having excess payload on one of launcher with Orion means a) you can send up extra useful payload with it and b) you don't have to continually cut down Orion so it's not too heavy for your underpowered rocket.

Quote:
NASA already is prepared building Ares. Machines and buildings already are prepared/converted. People at NASA all over the country already work on it. Plus Ares-1X is standing within the VAB soon ready for rollout.
This is just an awful, awful argument to continue with Ares I. It's too expensive, no exploration will be done with it, and the fact a rocket which bears superficial resemblance to it, and nothing more, is currently in the VAB should not be the reason you continue with it. It was designed so as not to be overpowered to send astronauts to the ISS. Since that isn't an issue any longer, there is no point for it to exist.

Quote:
It would be naive to scrap all that again, do something else and believe it would be cheap, would come with less efforts and no challenges during development, and last but not least would reduce the gap. Griffin and others prove right when they say the gap is not preventable under all circumstances. The only thing that can shrink the gap by a little is budget, a giant budget, which is unlikely to come. Anything esle is concepts, words and pipe dreams.
The naivity I'm afraid is thinking that NASA will do everything right because they're NASA, and that because a rocket is already being designed means it may as well be continued with, despite many, many reasons not to.

Quote:
We've been already told that the Shuttle will be an amazingly cheap and reliable vehicle that would launch hundreds of times within its life time. And now people again claim that using the stack would be a good idea.
You're twisting the argument. Who here is saying the Shuttle will be amazingly cheap and reliable? That was the hope when the conceptual Shuttle was began, 40 odd years back. No one here or anywhere is saying that Direct or whatever other alternative from Ares is going to be AMAZINGLY cheap and reliable. They're saying it'll be cheaper than Ares, and with proven components. The cheaper bit is validated by Aerospace, who independetly costed each plan for the commission. Shuttle currently costs $3bn a year, Ares I and V together would cost $7bn a year in running costs, and a sidemount would cost $5bn a year (Jupiter hasn't been published yet). Even the sidemounted option is more expensive that Shuttle, but still a whole $2bn cheaper than Ares. Over 5 years thats more than NASA gets in a year.

Quote:
Cheap and reliable works in commercial aviation, but not in manned space flight. Not on paper and graphics, but in reality space flight will always be expensive and risky.
$3bn a year is expensive. Losing two Orbiters and their crews in a little over 100 flights is risky. What you seemingly fail to grasp is that just because all spaceflight is, as you say, expensive and risky, it doesn't mean you pay no heed to expense and risk at all when choosing a system. You minimize the risks and keep the costs down as much as possible.

This argument is pointless anyway, the commission aren't even going to be presenting a real option that involves Ares I to the president, it'll be there just for reference. Unless he wishes to go against the expertise of the panel he asked for, the panel that would be according to you pro Ares, then the "perfect" rocket is gone already. The only question is it's replacement.

Crew launch is more than likely going to be commercial now. Whether that's a good thing will have to be seen.
Insane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 02:59 PM   #115
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane View Post
 The naivity I'm afraid is thinking that NASA will do everything right because they're NASA, and that because a rocket is already being designed means it may as well be continued with, despite many, many reasons not to.
The naivity actually is that in this topic even just mannd space flight fans instantly become experts and arrogate to know everything better than NASA and those who work on that stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane View Post
 Crew launch is more than likely going to be commercial now. Whether that's a good thing will have to be seen.
That's still dreams of the future. SpaceX is anything but close to launch crews into orbit.

I have not enough time yet to respond to everything. But specualtions actually do not make sense anyway, less than ever on this place here, because I'm not more or less expert than anybody else here, or those who think to be. We'll see what happens. But I risk to prophesy that most likely a budget increase will take place. And in case Ares will be scraped, nothing is going to lift off from the KSC anytime soon...
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 03:24 PM   #116
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 The naivity actually is that in this topic even just mannd space flight fans instantly become experts and arrogate to know everything better than NASA and those who work on that stuff.
of course, there could also be the naivety of thinking, that here are absolutely no spaceflight engineers taking part in the discussion and all criticism on Ares I-X is just foul talking...

You can't take a Fiat 500 and then claim you can make any reasonable predictions about the next seasons Ferrari Formula One racer.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 03:41 PM   #117
reject
Orbinaut
Default

I don't know if many of you lurk on nasawatch, but there are three very interesting contributions to a comment thread by a user called "CornDog Rocket" (who claims to be a NASA employee) on Ares I. Since they are rather long and detailed I will just post the link:

http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/20...ional_p_1.html

Now of course on the Internet anyone can claim to be anyone, but if he is bluffing then he's doing a pretty convincing job of it.
reject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 03:44 PM   #118
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 of course, there could also be the naivety of thinking, that here are absolutely no spaceflight engineers taking part in the discussion and all criticism on Ares I-X is just foul talking...
Rocket modeling, Orbiter addon development, reading a few books or visiting a few semesters of space / aerospace technology does ot make experts. I would be rather surprised if an experienced NASA engineer, who seriously works on Ares or the Shuttle for many years for example, would find the time for a little chit-chat in the Orbiter forums about Ares and the future of NASA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 You can't take a Fiat 500 and then claim you can make any reasonable predictions about the next seasons Ferrari Formula One racer.
You can use a Fiat 500 test vehicle to make reasonable predictions of the Fiat 500, just like Ares1X is used to predict Ares1.
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 03:53 PM   #119
Andy44
owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
 
Andy44's Avatar
Default

Always the same argument.

"Nobody here is a real engineer, so none of you are qualified to voice an opinion."

That is false. Many of us here are engineers or scientists, and many of us work in the space field (I can name at least 3 guys on this board). That doesn't make us experts on Ares (unless one of us works on the program, you ever know, do you?) but it does make us qualified to speak with some authority when we see flaws in the program managment and systems engineering. You may be no automotive engineer, but if you are any kind of mechanic or engineer it gives you an advantage when deciding whether to buy a new car.

And besides, I'm paying for it, so I will speak out if I don't like it, period.
Andy44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 04:12 PM   #120
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reject View Post
 Now of course on the Internet anyone can claim to be anyone, but if he is bluffing then he's doing a pretty convincing job of it.
Yes. Even the guy cleaning the floor inside the VAB can claim and post anything across the web.

In case a real NASA person expresses concerns, which by far is not unusual, does not mean anything. Apollo had its opponents as well, at a time without the internet (luckily). Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14) even talks about aliens and that NASA is hiding important informations and discoveries. Others who worked on Apollo even contribute to the Moon landing conspiracy theorie. Others who worked on STS in the past also said not too good things about NASA and the program in interviews.

I don't actually care. We'll see what the voices inside the White House will say not too long from now I think...
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:04 PM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.