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 12-14-2008, 05:15 PM   #106
Andy44
owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
 
Andy44's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe
 And if the advices would come from Paris Hilton... who says the truth, is not important. And the cold hard facts speak against Ares I-X.
Exactly. Facts are facts, regardless of the messenger.

I didn't know these things about Ares I-X until now. A fake segment? What a complete lack of faith this gives me. Like the PDR dog and pony show, they keep faking it. Sooner or later they're not going to be able to get away with just getting by anymore, and then the true progress will be revealed.
Andy44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 08:28 PM   #107
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

The "true progress" already is revealed constantly and available on nasaspaceflight.com. It's first-hand informations, but not for free.
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 08:37 PM   #108
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 The "true progress" already is revealed constantly and available on nasaspaceflight.com. It's first-hand informations, but not for free.
You mean the forum, where about half of the veteran Orbiter community is already Level 2 member and where most critics of the Ares program get their ammunition from.

Maybe you can understand NASAs behavior better, if I introduce a German verb to you, "schrödern". Which is coined by the political behavior of our former chancellor and is best explained by the statement:

We are going to paint this wall blue, but it is possible that we need to use yellow paint.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 09:10 PM   #109
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 You mean the forum, where about half of the veteran Orbiter community is already Level 2 member
I'm not quite sure about this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 and where most critics of the Ares program get their ammunition from.
Which does not mean something special.

And yes, facts are facts, regardless of the messenger. But opinion venting is regardless too, espcially if it's related to outdated criticism (that's why I'm not quite sure about the number of Level 2 members in this partly strange community).


-----Post Added-----


Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 Maybe you can understand NASAs behavior better, if I introduce a German verb to you, "schrödern". Which is coined by the political behavior of our former chancellor and is best explained by the statement:

We are going to paint this wall blue, but it is possible that we need to use yellow paint.
Well, there are always proponents and opponents. And I'm not on the left anyway
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 09:22 PM   #110
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 And yes, facts are facts, regardless of the messenger. But opinion venting is regardless too, espcially if it's related to old and outdated criticism (that's why I'm not quite sure about the number of Level 2 members in this partly strange community).
You can still just attempt to kill the messenger of the bad news, but it will not change the facts... Your discussion style does not get better and is really only opinion venting.

And I doubt you have any information which is newer than December 9 and completely contrary to the knowledge posted in this thread.

Thats the difference between trolling and a honest discussion... backing the opinion up with reason.

http://search.nasa.gov/mission_pages...ftv_label.html

Funny fact: They claim to use the flight to test the separation system (Which, as SpaceX showed us, is always a good thing to test first, instead of assuming this is simple and works automatically), but use a completely different separation plane between simulator and first stage (so they can reuse the Shuttle recovery system)... The only thing about the separation system, they can test during this flight is if installing the aft BSMs upside down has any negative side effects. The rest is again completely different to the final flight article.

The Ares I-Y flight is more interesting, as it at least launches a complete upper stage with only a J-2 dummy. Which fulfills the separation test objective at least to about 85%.

And:
http://search.nasa.gov/pdf/271630mai...yer_090408.pdf

Notice how they again play the Apollo card, though this flight has nothing in common with the Apollo testing strategy (Which used comparable hardware in all flights and never lost the focus of the test objectives).

It would be better, they have at least the humor to do the Ares I-X launch on July 4.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 10:38 PM   #111
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

I know the plans and facts about Ares I-X and Y, and I'm aware of the current progress. I don't see any showstopper yet, and I won't jump on the bandwagon of bashing NASA's new program for no serious reason.

I'm glad that the Shuttle retirement is an almost done deal finally, and I'm convinced that Constellation is the right path for future manned space exploration out of LEO, which STS was not from its beginning. That's the back up of my (but by far not only mine) opinion, if you will.
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 11:01 PM   #112
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 I know the plans and facts about Ares I-X and Y, and I'm aware of the current progress. I don't see any showstopper yet, and I won't jump on the bandwagon of bashing NASA's new program for no serious reason.
Need an example for a show stopper? 2000 kg of extra mass is a good one, if you are already running out of mass budget. The Ares I has still no payload reserves and the Orion Mass will not get reduced - it will grow in the next year again.

Also, with each month of delay, NASA looses one month of being the only way to the stars for the USA. How many political favors can NASA expect? The day will come, when the question will not be "Have manned spaceflight on our own or not?", but "Invented inside NASA or bought from commercial providers?"

NASA will become a god of the gaps. That is an inevitable trend. Unless NASA does really excel, it will become just one alternative among many.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 11:49 PM   #113
C3PO
Donator
 
C3PO's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 It would be better, they have at least the humor to do the Ares I-X launch on July 4.


@Moonwalker:
I am convinced that Ares-I will fly eventually. (If it doesn't, NASA will lose it's "S")
My 1'st problem with the Constellation program is that it's main goal is to re-use bits from the STS program. IMHO NASA should focus more on the exploration/space travel.
Personally I like solid rockets. They are very reliable, but the way NASA is using the STS SRB's is just plain wrong IMHO. When you're talking about adding a 2000 kg mass damper to a launcher, there should be alarm bells going off L/R&C. How much weight did they save by not painting the ET's?

My 2'nd problem is that NASA is once again trying to build a space craft for very different missions. This time however, they did leave the heavy stuff out of the manned launcher.
I hope that SpaceX's Dragon can be the "American Soyuz" because I think that's what NASA has been missing since Gemini.
C3PO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 12:08 AM   #114
Andy44
owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
 
Andy44's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO
 I am convinced that Ares-I will fly eventually. (If it doesn't, NASA will lose it's "S")
LOL!

"Are you going to the Moon?"
"NAA"
Andy44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 12:10 AM   #115
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy44 View Post
 LOL!

"Are you going to the Moon?"
"NAA"

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 01:35 AM   #116
Moonwalker
Orbinaut
Default

Well, it's not only an inevitable trend. NASA already is "the god of the gaps", and it was a god without a vision for a long time, as I often tend to mention.

The gap between STS and Ares is not NASA's first one as we know. The gap between ASTP and STS already was a huge one, while STS-1 still was anything but certain in 1979 because of problems with the SSME's and the TPS (which already caused a delay of more than one year).

Related to the sense or nonsense of Ares I-X in this context, the "cold" Enterprise test in 1979 also did not proof anything for example. It did not even leave the launch pad. I can only imagine what certain people today would think in case NASA would carry Ares I-X to the launch pad only, just to look if the white room and different connections do fit. Without any doubt, would the STS development take place right now, we would see the same amount of criticism we see on Ares right now. Steve Cook is rather right when he mentions that everything is within what you typically associate with a launch vehicle development program. The difference just is that we have the internet today and a lot more information along the media and people all over the world. I actually doubt that the STS had less criticism back in the late 1970's. It was just silent criticism without blogs, forums and tons of news resources. But the STS was a "relatively" successful program at the end. So Ares will be for sure, or lets say it has to be. There is no real alternative anymore, just like after ASTP in 1975.

Anyway, the Space Shuttle needs to be retired, which was not only recommended by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Further operation beyond 2010 possibly would increase the risk of losing a crew from 1 in 12 to 1 in 8 (yes, it is againg, which is even visible). The mistake of NASA was a delay of decisions and a loss of visions (which in my humble point of view already took place in the 1990's). But by Constellation, NASA got a pretty good new vision finally at the very last seconds I think. And if we keep the promised extra budget in mind again, Ares I might even lift off manned in 2014 already. But that's still not certain for now.

I don't see a serious reason for bashing the Ares I development (2 tons of extra weight also is no insuperable obstacle). But I do agree to the nonsense of the second huge gap within NASA's history, which could have been prevented. But NASA still is on the forefront of manned space flight, and is going to remain so. I don't see what ESA or Roscosmos seriously have to offer once Ares runs its show, including manned lunar missions later on. And not to mention private companies, which did not even enter LEO manned yet.


-----Post Added-----


Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO View Post
 @Moonwalker:
I am convinced that Ares-I will fly eventually. (If it doesn't, NASA will lose it's "S").
It would not only lose its "S", it would probably lose its whole name and would become split into different small departments I think. But this was a serious risk in the early 1990's alerady, caused by the problems with the HST.

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO View Post
 IMHO NASA should focus more on the exploration/space travel.
Well, IMHO they do so very well by Constellation The Space Shuttle was bounded to LEO. Orion is going to be bounded to nothing between Earth, Moon and Mars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO View Post
 Personally I like solid rockets. They are very reliable, but the way NASA is using the STS SRB's is just plain wrong IMHO. When you're talking about adding a 2000 kg mass damper to a launcher, there should be alarm bells going off L/R&C. How much weight did they save by not painting the ET's?
The STS actually has a pretty big mass damper: the ET. Of course the ET is not just useless weight, while a mass damper is not useless too. But it's the only reason why the two SRB's do not need mass damper. But for single use as a first stage, mass damper have to be installed obviously. This is the compromise if you want to use a reusable solid rocket first stage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO View Post
 My 2'nd problem is that NASA is once again trying to build a space craft for very different missions.
What's the exact problem of trying to build a space craft for very different missions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO View Post
 I hope that SpaceX's Dragon can be the "American Soyuz" because I think that's what NASA has been missing since Gemini.
I don't think that SpaceX will manage to enter LEO manned anytime soon. They have to do a lot of work still.

By the way, Gemini actually has nothing to do with Soyuz. The Gemini capsule was just a small manned rendezvous and EVA test vehicle. NASA did not miss an "American Soyuz" at all by developing and operating the Apollo spacecraft just right after Gemini, which even flew to the Moon

Last edited by Moonwalker; 12-15-2008 at 02:10 AM.
Moonwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 02:14 AM   #117
Zatnikitelman
Addon Developer
 
Zatnikitelman's Avatar
Default

You're absolutely right, there was not less criticism of STS, just less that was heard, but there's a big difference. STS wasn't trying to fit unreal expectations into a limited system quite as much.
2 tons of weight, no insurmountable obstacle? Strictly speaking, no, but with what we've got yes. 2,000Kg is 19,613.3 newtons. That's 19kN of lost thrust that could be better suited to shoving up a payload rack, or enough fuel in Orion for it to do a solo LOI. Someone should run the Dv numbers on AresI, I don't have the time. Figure out how much extra Dv this thing's got BEFORE the 2,000 extra kilograms then how much it's got after.

Quote:
But for single use as a first stage, mass damper have to be installed obviously. This is the compromise if you want to use a reusable solid rocket first stage.
Solid rocket yes, liquid fuel no. Same performance out of a safer, MORE reliable (overall) system WITHOUT a 2 metric ton mass dampener.

Quote:
What's the exact problem of trying to build a space craft for very different missions?
Too much development, too much money lost etc. The Russians have used Soyuz for solo LEO experiments, docking experiments, manning 9 Space stations (!!) and a slightly altered Soyuz (Progress) as a cargo truck. Think about this, do you buy a new car for hauling lumber for your new patio, then buy a new car to haul the kids around, then buy yet another one to cruise on 40mpg past the gas pumps? NO, you buy one car and make it work.

Quote:
I don't think that SpaceX will manage to enter LEO manned anytime soon. They have to do a lot of work still.
They're launching their Falcon 9 demonstrator early next year, then will likely launch their Dragon demonstrator my guess is Q3 of next year. With any luck, they'll put a crew on the ISS by late 2010, around the time the shuttle is formally retired last I heard.
Zatnikitelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 02:34 AM   #118
C3PO
Donator
 
C3PO's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 I don't see what ESA or Roscosmos seriously have to offer once Ares runs its show, including manned lunar missions later on. And not to mention private companies, which did not even enter LEO manned yet.
They are all currently flying Soyuz. And so will NASA in a few years!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 The STS actually has a pretty big mass damper: the ET. Of course the ET is not just useless weight. But it's the only reason why the two SRB's do not need mass damper. But for use as a first stage, mass damper have to be installed obviously. This is the compromise if you want to use a reusable solid rocket first stage.
..... and that's why STS SRB's aren't very good as a 1'st stage for manned launch vehicle. If it wasn't for STS, NASA wouldn't use a solid fuel 1'st stage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 What's the exact problem of trying to build a space craft for very different missions?
It's expensive. You end up with a craft that doesn't use it's capability. Ares-I is (or should be) capable of a direct re-entry from Mars, but will probably end up in LEO operations. Maybe a few lunar missions, but I'm not even too sure about that.
Remember the impressive list of capabilities of the Shuttles? Spy sats in polar orbit, satellite repair missions, returning large payloads, cheap and frequent flights?
And it ended up barely able to finish ISS assembly. It needs a stand-by rescue shuttle if it's going anywhere but ISS. Very few of those capabilities were used more then once, before NASA realized that it wasn't safe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 I don't think that SpaceX will manage to enter LEO anytime soon. They have to do a lot of work still.
I think NASA is going to use more man hours on Ares-I before it flies, then SpaceX is going use on Falcon 9. But the resources aren't really comparable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalker View Post
 By the way, Gemini actually has nothing to do with Soyuz. The Gemini capsule was just a small manned rendezvous and EVA test vehicle.
NASA doesn't have a LEO work horse. They thought that STS would be one, but got smarter after a couple of decades.
C3PO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 02:44 AM   #119
Andy44
owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
 
Andy44's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C3PO
 If it wasn't for STS, NASA wouldn't use a solid fuel 1'st stage.
Ain't that the truth. The worst part of it is that there were plans to replace the SRBs with LRBs that would've increased the payload of STS. They never got the chance to do it, but Constellation was the golden opportunity to finally build a good reusable liquid rocket booster. Fail.
Andy44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2008, 03:24 AM   #120
Zatnikitelman
Addon Developer
 
Zatnikitelman's Avatar
Default

Pic says it all!
Attached Thumbnails
aresfail.jpg  
Zatnikitelman 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 06:02 AM.

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 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.