Ares I (CLV) - status

Rxke · 2006-11-16 02:51:34

Nasawatch doesn't report it once again reported a sensationalistic piece of shite

Seriously, when I see the word 'Nasawatch', I become very wary, all he can do is naysaying to anything NASA does. It's just pathetic.

cIclops · 2006-11-16 04:01:50

Current ISS location status: Can the CLV get there and to higher orbits that will be in the offering once it is completted...

Ares I doesn't go to the ISS or any higher than 185 kms. Its job is to lift Orion into LEO. Orion reaches the ISS using its Service Module propulsion system to provide the extra delta.

Orion's primary purpose is to provide Earth return for the crew after Lunar and Mars missions, and this means docking with the EDS. Hanley's memo says clearly that Ares I is lifting 26.3 mT to LEO and the Orion is weighing 22 mT (both numbers have margins of about 20%)

GCNRevenger · 2006-11-16 06:58:52

Nasawatch doesn't report it once again reported a sensationalistic piece of shite
Seriously, when I see the word 'Nasawatch', I become very wary, all he can do is naysaying to anything NASA does. It's just pathetic.

Pretty much. Since so few people strongly care about space exploration, then he perhaps rightly believes that he can sway the only voting block that matters to space, either to "get back" at the agency which wronged him or just one of those Jeff Bell types who thinks he is a space god. Or, at the least, provide ammunition to anti-NASA persons of prominence as "secret leaked information" (which is, of course, always true and public NASA memos are lies) to accomplish this. Swathed in pretty quotes about it being "your" agency and to "take it back" even... of course! Take it back, and do what the NASAWatch guy says with it! Since he is so competent and knowledgeable.

There has to be a final authority about what NASA does with its money, if it were always design via committee, then the natural individuality of engineers and scientists would pull the thing is so many different directions that nothing would ever be done. This means that some peoples' opinions will simply have to be squashed and ignored... maybe NASAWatch guy can't stand that his were or something.

cIclops · 2006-11-16 13:56:30

ATK measure roll rate of SRB during ground test

The test will be monitored by 20 cameras, and it should assist Marshall and ATK engineers in determining the brightness of the rocket's flaming plume, said June Malone, Marshall spokeswoman. Also, engineers will collect information from the test to better help them understand how the solid rocket booster rolls, Malone said.
"There will be special instrumentation on the booster to help assess that roll rate of the rocket," Malone said. "That's information the Ares program is interested in."
The Ares I rocket that will take astronauts to the International Space Station and back to the moon will use a solid rocket booster as a first stage. Engineering studies show that the booster might roll in flight and Marshall engineers "want to better understand that launch control system," Malone said.

SpaceNut · 2006-11-17 07:33:16

This test of torque and vibration ect.. is not a test since the stand is a hard mounted brace afixed to the booster to hold it in place. Even if isolation cushions or attachment shock obsorbers were used it will still only record the changes in fuel burn to pressure.

New details on Ares 1 as posted Aug 3, 2006

The Ares 1’s Preliminary Design Review is scheduled for December 2007. The Critical Design Review is scheduled for July 2010.
Before the first operational flight, five static firings of the new five-segment first-stage boosters are planned in Utah by the manufacturer, ATK. The first static firing is scheduled for June 2009.
The Ares 1’s period of maximum aerodynamic pressure, or Max Q, will come about 58 seconds into flight when the rocket is traveling at 1.6 times the speed of sound some 40,000 feet above the ground.
Astronauts will experience an estimated maximum of 3.25-3.5 times the force of gravity during the Ares 1’s launch. That compares to about 3 Gs for the shuttle. An emergency firing of the escape tower could reach more than 10 Gs.

cIclops · 2006-11-17 07:41:35

This test of torque and vibration ect.. is not a test since the stand is a hard mounted brace afixed to the booster to hold it in place. Even if isolation cushions or attachment shock obsorbers were used it will still only record the changes in fuel burn to pressure.

Okay it's not a 5 segment SRB and it will be firing horizontally but why can't data about the roll torque be collected by using sensors on the mount attachment points?

SpaceNut · 2006-11-17 07:56:28

Only possible if the attachment points can move as in sort of a strain guage.

Pivot point is the center line of the booster all the up tho the top of the escape tower and with liquid thrusters to be used to make the booster role or vector in a straight line.

A possible solution would be to add little fins and evlons at the mid point and bottom of the booster to control spin. The booster is to have a nozzle that can move to help with vector IIRC.

cIclops · 2006-11-17 09:21:23

NASA Says Ares I Rocket Meeting Performance Targets

By Jefferson Morris/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
11/14/2006 09:29:16 AM
NASA's Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) is meeting its performance targets, contrary to rumors that its current design is overweight, according to Exploration Launch Manager Steve Cook.
Last week at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, NASA kicked off the integrated system requirements review (SRR) for the Ares I, the shuttle-derived rocket that will boost the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to orbit.
"In the end what we have to do is we have to deliver an Orion to an ejection orbit and let it loose," Cook told The DAILY Nov. 13. "What we saw out of SRR last week is that we're able to do that - to deliver the Orion at its mean design, to that injection orbit."
The weight ceiling for the Orion is 48,000 pounds. The Ares I is on track to meet that goal with an extra 15 percent performance margin on top of that, plus dry mass growth of up to 15 percent for certain components in the various stages of the rocket as their design firms up. The entire stacked rocket with the CEV atop it will weigh about 2 million pounds on the launch pad.
The Ares I will not require any additional strap-on solid boosters to get off the ground, according to Cook, who wouldn't speculate on where such rumors are originating. "It's not worth my time to go off and worry about that," he said. "What we focus on is what the data tells us, and the data tells us we can deliver with the performance margin we've been asked to deliver.
"That said, we're going to be tracking performance and mass as a risk all the way to flight and after, as is the case on any aerospace vehicle," he continued. "So we pay a lot of attention to it. We're going to be going through and looking at what the right performance splits and mass splits are between the stages, but [from] where we sit right now, we can meet our requirements with margin."
Slated to continue until Christmas, the Ares I integrated SRR is intended to validate the concept and requirements for the rocket and green-light it to proceed to its preliminary design review in early 2008.
Last week the team completed the SRR for the Ares I-1 test vehicle, which is scheduled for a suborbital test flight from launch pad 39-B at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in April 2009. That date could slip, however, due to NASA Administrator Michael Griffin's decision to use the pad for a potential "launch on need" shuttle rescue mission during the final Hubble servicing flight in spring 2008.
The shuttle team at KSC is working on various ideas that will preserve the launch-on-need option while allowing the Ares team to begin the modifications necessary for the pad to accommodate their hardware. The shuttle team has "come up with some pretty creative ideas to help us keep our schedule," Cook said. "I have not seen the final results of that ýý but I think we're going to be able to keep it to a manageable handoff between the two. Our goal is to have no change in the [test] flight date."
Last week also saw the official handoff of the A-1 test stand at Stennis Space Center in Mississippi to the exploration launch program. Testing of the turbomachinery and gas generator for the J-2X CLV upper stage engine is set to begin in the summer of 2007. Those tests initially will use components being refurbished from the canceled X-33 linear aerospike development, which used Apollo J-2S components for its testing.
The draft request for proposals (RFP) for the upper stage of the Ares I will be released in January 2007, followed by the final RFP in February and a contract award in August.
The final major acquisition for the Ares I will be for the instrument unit, which includes the vehicle's avionics and software. The tentative plan is to release an RFP in May 2007.

cIclops · 2006-11-18 15:38:02

Impact of funding restrictions (SAC=Senate Appropriations Committee)

Constellation Launch and Mission Systems (LMS)
NASA Request: $469.9M
SAC Mark: $373.1M (-$96.8M)
The LMS budget supports the ground and mission operations systems needed to inspect, assemble, test, simulate, plan missions, train astronauts, launch, operate and recover Constellation flight hardware. To support Ares I-1 (formerly Ascent Development Flight Test [ADFT-1]), scheduled for 2012, ground systems must be fabricated/modified/fully operational prior to shipment of flight articles for ground testing/flight preparation, including: Mobile Launch Platform/new construction; VAB/High Bay mods; Launch Complex 39/Pad B mods; Command and Control LMS; and, Exploration Training Facility (JSC).
Senate-proposed cut jeopardizes bringing the CLV on-line, including the planned early 2009 CLV demonstration (33 months from now) and 2014 First Human Launch.
Detailed LMS technical requirements will not be completed until Systems Requirements Review (SRR) next spring. Long-lead facilities architecture and engineering (A&E) design is underway. Multiple A&E contracts have been awarded, and construction contracts will be let in FY 2007. As noted in the FY 2007 IBPD, cost estimates elements within Constellation are "subject to change as the project matures." It is crucial to the success of the Vision that funds for individual projects not be seen as separate from the overall program. Based on latest planning estimates leading to the LMS SRR, NASA will submit a FY 2007 reprogramming request that changes the mix of Constellation projects. LMS funding is expected to be reduced by ~$200M, offset by increased funding primarily for the Ares I CLV. This reflects a reduction in the current single-string LMS launch infrastructure baseline (1 pad, 1 MLP, 1 LCC, etc) since the FY 2007 submit, and decisions early in FY 2006 to revise CLV architecture to include a 5-segment SRB with J-2X upper stage rocket (which increased up-front development funding requirements while reducing outyear operations costs, technical risk and life-cycle costs for the Ares I CLV).

SpaceNut · 2006-11-18 21:08:36

cIclops would you post the link for the SAC=Senate Appropriations Committee document in the appropriate year budget in Human.

This article contains alot of demensioning for the overall rocket and many of its components.

NASA May Alter Ares I Upper Stage Design a draft solicitation on Friday detailing the design requirements for the Ares I Upper Stage.

The excerpts are from here http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=22585
FYI: FY 2007 budget, 110th Congress

SpaceNut · 2006-11-20 07:52:54

More on the rumors that Ares I rocket would not be able to lift the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle.
Constellation Battles the Blogosphere

Cook said the Ares I upper stage is very similar to the Saturn-5’s third stage in size and performance. It held 240,000 pounds of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. We hold [280,000 pounds]. It had one J-2 engine. We have one J-2X engine. So we are a little bit bigger and a little bit higher thrust, but we are in that same thrust category, he said. That gives us confidence that what we are shooting for will work.

So that would mean that the booster is doing what a first and second stage did...

The preliminary design review for Ares I is in February 2008, about 14 months away. The critical design review, when NASA nails down the design and starts producing the vehicle, is slated for late 2009.
Orion’s preliminary and critical design reviews are slated for summer 2008 and summer 2009
A revised reference design for Orion, Hanley said, is not due until early December

The problem is the estimates are all based on paper and not on actual hardware. As to what hardware it has it is all modified and not true items. Alot is based on simular designs and materials.

GCNRevenger · 2006-11-20 10:38:54

The problem is the estimates are all based on paper and not on actual hardware. As to what hardware it has it is all modified and not true items. Alot is based on simular designs and materials.

And this is worse than pushing for hardware that is all paper instead of some paper? The EELVs just don't have the lift without radical upgrade, so that leaves a clean sheet rocket.

cIclops · 2006-11-21 03:02:23

Cook said the Ares I upper stage is very similar to the Saturn-5’s third stage in size and performance. It held 240,000 pounds of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. We hold [280,000 pounds]. It had one J-2 engine. We have one J-2X engine. So we are a little bit bigger and a little bit higher thrust, but we are in that same thrust category, he said. That gives us confidence that what we are shooting for will work.
So that would mean that the booster is doing what a first and second stage did...

All Cook was saying was that the Ares I US is about the same class as the third stage (S-IVB) of the Saturn V launcher, and will use a similar class engine.

Ares I is a two stage vehicle far smaller (25mT) than the massive three stage Saturn V (118mT), which in turn will be surpassed by the Ares V (130mT). So if you want to compare apples with oranges yes the Ares I booster first stage has the same basic function as the first two stages of the Saturn V, namely lifting the upper stack almost to LEO. Note that the S-IVB is the equivalent of the Ares V EDS and was fired briefly to reach LEO. Similarly the Orion SM will be used for the final insertion into LEO.

ftlwright · 2006-11-22 16:51:38

SpaceNut said:
So that would mean that the booster is doing what a first and second stage did...

Not quite. The Space Shuttle is considered a stage and a half configurations with the SRB supplimenting the SSMEs for the first 90sec of flight. The added thrust from the SRBs will perform the same roll as the Kerosene 1st stage did for Saturn 5. After 3 stages, the benefits of staging drop off considerable; it is arguable that the gains going from 2 to 3 aren't worth the complexity.

As GCNR has stated, the EELV aren't an attractive alternative for manned missions beyond LEO (it is HIGHLY doubtful that the Atlas V can be manrated with > 6g lateral kicks during staging and 3g vibrations during accent). Neither Boeing or LockMart will alter or divert funding for their EELVs at the risk of their military launch contracts.

I think the hope of many who are serious about space exploration is that ISS, Shuttle and Hubble will all be in the ground by '08. These three programs have put a massive finnancial drain on the agency while providing little mindshare of general public.

Good to be back, been busy of late. Glad to be back in the mix.

dicktice · 2006-11-22 21:21:33

I don't agree that the referenced now in-orbit hardware and space shuttle orbiters will be "in the ground" by '08, or even '11 or '12. Since these three projects are all we (and by that I mean the people of Earth) have to prove if we can even cope with space, weightless or accelerated, for generational stretches of time, and ultimately multiply and thrive off-Earth. Without the ISS, it is doubtful that other crewed platforms will be attempted for a generation, if ever. Without the Hubble, it is doubtful another space visible-light telescope will be launched, without the capability to service it manually for a generation, if ever. Without the space shuttle, neither of the foregoing will be supported with significantly numbers of human at one time to accomplish more than maintenance. In short: without something in space, capable of housing people, we will have nothing up there to strive to better, government- or privately-financed for a generation, if ever. Because, you know, there're not many on Earth right now who give a damn about anything but being saved and gaining a place in Heaven ... in fact just slavering at the prospect of "The Coming End of It All." We need something tangible up there to sink our teeth into while we pull up our spacesuit socks and start producing hardware that isn't just adapted from originally conceived projects intended for space war and/or defence. And--as to "massive financial drain on the agency"--the obscene debt budgeted for the war makes this laughable. Which is more worthwile? Will it mean a thing by comparison? Money should be the least of our worries, considering how out of control the defence budget is....

cIclops · 2006-11-23 13:41:43

Sad to say but Orbiter Atlantis will be retired in April 2008 and it's planned to retire the other orbiters before the end of 2010. To check this google found this Senate resolution - amazing to see that they actually had a vote about it!

HST will be serviced in 2008 by the Shuttle and it's planned to keep it working until 2013 when the JWST should be operational. ISS is not so clear, its assembly is planned to be complete by 2010, and it should stay operational until at least 2016 - if all goes to plan by then Ares V should be ready and the first lunar landing ought to have happened.

SpaceNut · 2006-11-23 21:31:07

I think dicktice was speaking in a sense based on mission of the shuttles which is to support ISS build and not of some edict or law.

cIclops the Senate resolution was a reaffirmation of what was said in the vision statement but even that can change based on ISS needs.

As for the iss and the travel to the moon hopefully in 2018 we will find out if we have the right stuff for as I fear it may mean that

Without the ISS, it is doubtful that other crewed platforms will be attempted for a generation, if ever.

The bigger problem will come when the US has decided to no fund the ISS and the partners continue to use it. Then the need for items only a shuttle can carry will be highlighted all over again.

Without the Hubble, it is doubtful another space visible-light telescope will be launched, without the capability to service it manually for a generation, if ever.

While a forced mission has been paid for it still would be beetter to fund HOP to give us back the visible light spetrum that Hubble has.

As for Atlantis in 2008 it is based on the need for a major overhaul of which Endeavor just is coming out of. Then there is always the question of what is a recertification for the fleet to be used beyound the 2010 date.

As for JWST it may be even further back than the 2013 date if budgets get quashed again.

dicktice · 2006-11-27 15:35:34

SpaceNut has it right. There is no other way open to us, given the hardware available in the near term. Keep on researching the facts, please, and present 'em here for brainstorming. No pessimism, only optimism, and bean-counters be damned. (Where were they, when the war budget was passed without a peep of dissenson?)

SpaceNut · 2006-12-04 11:36:57

Ares I boosts NASA Glenn; Rocket segments put Ohio in the thick of new space program

They're making tuna cans at Cleveland's NASA Glenn Research Center, but not anything like you'd find at the grocery store.
These monsters are 18 feet wide, stand taller than LeBron James in a top hat, and tip the scales at 5 tons, even empty. You could park a Ford F150 pickup inside one with room to spare.
Glenn technicians eventually will fabricate a dozen of the hollow segments. When stacked end to end, bolted together and stuffed with a quarter-million pounds of ballast, the cans will serve as the simulated upper stage for the first test flight of Ares I, planned for April 2009.
The bureaucratic red tape of bidding out the upper-stage job could have added as much as a year to the timetable. With Ares I components due at Florida's Kennedy Space Center in October 2008 in preparation for the first test flight, "that was going to blow the schedule," said Vince Bilardo, manager of the upper stage simulator at Glenn.
Glenn engineers will design the hardware that controls the direction of exhaust spewing from the upper stage's powerful J-2X engine. And in 2011 the J-2X will be test-fired in a giant vacuum chamber at Glenn's Plum Brook Station near Sandusky, which mimics the airless conditions of space.
The real Ares I's upper stage must lug 280,000 pounds of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen aloft to propel capsule and crew into space.

SpaceNut · 2006-12-05 07:29:12

The question of is it worth it to make rockets or there pieces reusuable is in the foray again but this time it is a question that even Nasa is asking its self.
NASA To Evaluate Non-recoverable First Stage for Ares I Launch Vehicle

The reason: the weight of hardware required to make recovery possible - and practical.
In making this recommendation, this requirements change request cites the fact that somewhere between 20,000 and 25,000 pounds of weight could be saved in the design of the first stage by removing the systems needed to allow it to be recovered after it has been used.
Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with an expendable launch system at all. Rather, the implications of this suggestion have to do with the economics and operations of a disposable first stage - implications that have not been factored into the Ares I program.
Instead of reusing segments, new ones would have to be purchased and shipped for every Ares I flight, driving up costs.

The Use ONLY expendable SRBs as Gaetano Marano blog site has some interesting numbers for this suggesting that the cost would fall per unit.

If this were the direction that Nasa is intending to go then maybe making the booster as a single segment would possibly lower the cost even further. This is being done for the VEGA solids that the ESA has just preformed a burn test on.

cIclops · 2006-12-05 08:39:07

In making this recommendation, this requirements change request cites the fact that somewhere between 20,000 and 25,000 pounds of weight could be saved in the design of the first stage by removing the systems needed to allow it to be recovered after it has been used.
....
If this were the direction that Nasa is intending to go then maybe making the booster as a single segment would possibly lower the cost even further. This is being done for the VEGA solids that the ESA has just preformed a burn test on.

A recoverable first stage is important for quality control. As the prime purpose of Ares I is safe crew launch, dropping this requirement would increase risk. Hanley and Cook said they had at least 10% margin in the design, 20klb represents about 1% of the vehicle takeoff mass.

If it were possible to change the first stage SRM to a single segment, it would entail an expensive massive redesign. Note that all of this is again based on rumor from the same forum that gave us the fake NASA powerpoint presentation and the baseless claims that Ares I was underpowered. Why are they so determined to find fault with the Ares I?

SpaceNut · 2006-12-06 22:19:26

First quality goes in to the product as you build it and not from review of why it does not work, that is how you fix the control of build from the recovery. Not recovering them causes no change in safety since the unit if it were unsafe has already been used. You can only fix why it is unsafe by identifing what failed in the process of build by inspection of what gets recovered.

Honeywell To Bid on Ares 1 Avionics Work

Honeywell Aerospace, the Glendale, Ariz. firm designing and building the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle’s avionics system, wants to do the same for the Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle.
NASA intends to release a request for proposals for the so-called Ares 1 Instrument Unit in spring 2007. A contract award is expected around November.

cIclops · 2006-12-07 01:51:02

First quality goes in to the product as you build it and not from review of why it does not work, that is how you fix the control of build from the recovery. Not recovering them causes no change in safety since the unit if it were unsafe has already been used. You can only fix why it is unsafe by identifing what failed in the process of build by inspection of what gets recovered.

It's both design and test. The big advantage of reusable components is that they can be examined after use to see how they performed. Measuring how much wear or damage has occurred is one of the best ways to detect problems before they happen. There is no real alternative to doing this other than ground testing and that is not the same as real flight. Examination of hardware after flight adds enormously to safety.

publiusr · 2006-12-08 15:48:59

Space News has some interviews at the end of their papers. One from Steve Cook. One from Doug Cook.

cIclops · 2006-12-11 08:02:15

Integrated Launcher Mobile Pad concept (ripped from Constellation Project, Ground Operations PDF)

Presentation charts from the 2nd Exploration conference are now online, in particular:

Ares project status
Ares I First Stage
J-2X (Pratt & Witney)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#226 2006-11-16 02:51:34

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#227 2006-11-16 04:01:50

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#228 2006-11-16 06:58:52

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#229 2006-11-16 13:56:30

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#230 2006-11-17 07:33:16

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#231 2006-11-17 07:41:35

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#232 2006-11-17 07:56:28

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#233 2006-11-17 09:21:23

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#234 2006-11-18 15:38:02

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#235 2006-11-18 21:08:36

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#236 2006-11-20 07:52:54

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#237 2006-11-20 10:38:54

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#238 2006-11-21 03:02:23

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#239 2006-11-22 16:51:38

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#240 2006-11-22 21:21:33

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#241 2006-11-23 13:41:43

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#242 2006-11-23 21:31:07

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#243 2006-11-27 15:35:34

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#244 2006-12-04 11:36:57

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#245 2006-12-05 07:29:12

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#246 2006-12-05 08:39:07

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#247 2006-12-06 22:19:26

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#248 2006-12-07 01:51:02

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#249 2006-12-08 15:48:59

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

#250 2006-12-11 08:02:15

Re: Ares I (CLV) - status

Board footer