Ares V (CaLV) - status

GCNRevenger · 2006-07-18 10:44:34

Note the magic words...: "Word has it"

Say this little birdie chirping in NASAWatch's ear is a liar trying to stoke the few people who care about space - us - into a furor.

RedStreak · 2006-07-19 15:57:52

Note the magic words...: "Word has it"
Say this little birdie chirping in NASAWatch's ear is a liar trying to stoke the few people who care about space - us - into a furor.

Beyond NASA its always political, save perhaps private spaceflight but that is barely out of its shell as is...

Its good we're all debating about the technicalities of the Ares but try to remember to be thankful NASA is giving this serious thought instead of the years and years of mothballed Mars-quack plans since the 80s. I'd rather not delve back into that era...

I'm not going to debate anything until we see the results of the prototype testing; engineering prints and working vehicles often prove to be two different creatures.

cIclops · 2006-07-24 05:19:39

Michael J. Sander Manager, JPL Exploration Systems and Technology Office said during his recent webcast JPL lecture that Ares V will cost between $300m and $400m per launch.

GCNRevenger · 2006-07-24 07:23:35

If by "cost per launch" includes everything like integration, launch pad work, and launch crews then thats really good!

Rxke · 2006-07-27 01:25:28

Yeah, eat that, STS!

publiusr · 2006-08-11 14:59:33

Note the magic words...: "Word has it"
Say this little birdie chirping in NASAWatch's ear is a liar trying to stoke the few people who care about space - us - into a furor.

Probably so. Some ATK basher that couldn't foist the EELV albatross on Griffins neck.

SpaceNut · 2006-10-02 21:03:08

Doing away with the ECO sensors is a must when we consider how often they are bad from shuttle experience with the ET.
NASA aims to measure fuel levels using radio

Radio waves can be used to determine fuel quantities because, says NASA, “the resonant electromagnetic frequencies [in the RF spectrum range] of a tank…are modified by the presence of [the fuel].” A resonant electromagnetic frequency (EMF) is the response of the tank structure’s EMF to an external RF signal.
NASA has begun a programme to mature RF gauging to a technological readiness level of six, which means it must be tested in a relevant environment. That could require a sounding rocket flight that would expose the gauge and fuel to microgravity or experiments with test vehicles in orbit.

publiusr · 2006-10-27 12:16:43

Over at NASAspaceflight, someone mentioned something along the lines that--with more LH2 mass, sensors might be less likely to give false readings like what caused the Delta IV to fail. Better propellat seating or something to that effect, IIRC.

cIclops · 2006-11-08 14:09:41

Sumrall Leading Development of NASA's Future Heavy-Lift Launch Vehicle

[Phil] Sumrall, manager of Advanced Planning in the Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Center, is responsible for development planning for NASA's Ares V launch vehicle and Earth Departure Stage,

cIclops · 2006-11-15 07:34:07

Jeff Hanley, Constellation Program Manager reports in a memo dated November 13, 2006 some good news about the project

Architecturally speaking, we have improved our performance projections over the past year for the amount of mass we can launch to TLI on a Lunar mission by more than 2 mT. We have a highly synergistic launch vehicle approach for Ares I and Ares V that gains high leverage off of our early investments in the 5-segment motor and J2X engine. Our selection of the RS68 engine for the Ares V core stage reduced our outyear costs by billions.

GCNRevenger · 2006-11-15 08:38:30

Thats Billions with a "B" for ditching the SSME in favor of RS-68. Way to go Griffin!

cIclops · 2006-11-28 17:05:42

At the Astrophysics enabled by return to the moon workshop today, Scott Horowitz said the main engine will be the RS-68B and is being developed jointly with the USAF. Astronautix says:

Upgrade (details not specificed) to basic RS-68 for Delta IV Heavy growth versions.

More details would be interesting, anyone?

cIclops · 2006-12-02 07:05:36

While waiting for NASA to decide which numbers to make public, here are some to play with:

Launcher.......Atlas 541......Ares V low......Ares V high
$ millons ......... 195 (1) ......... 600 (3) ........ 1,000 (4)
kg ............ 522,330 ..... 3,350,000 .......3,350,000

kg to LEO ... 18,750 ....... 130,000 .......... 130,000
$ per kg ..... 10,384 ........... 4,615 .............. 7,692

kg to moon .. 2,885 ......... 20,000 (2) ........ 20,000 (Atlas V prorated on Ares V)
$ per kg ..... 67,591 ......... 30,000 ............. 50,000

kg to Mars ....... 775 (1) ..... 5,373 ...............5,373 (Ares V prorated on Atlas V)
$ per kg ... 251,613 ....... 111,669 .......... 186,116

(1) 775 kg MSL using Atlas 541 @ $194.7 million (fixed LM contract price)
(2) CaLV 20 mT cargo to moon surface (ESAS)
(3) vehicle $400m (Saunder JPL) + estimated launch services $200m
(4) vehicle $700m + launch services $300m (CBO study)

publiusr · 2006-12-08 15:39:40

So much for the lie of EELVs being cheaper.

cIclops · 2006-12-11 11:11:20

Current concept (ripped from Ares Project Status, Steve Cook, December 4, 2006 PDF)

Note: payload to LEO is now 131.5 mT

GCNRevenger · 2006-12-11 16:51:45

More payload than Saturn-V

cIclops · 2006-12-12 04:31:45

Steve Cook's chart shows the Saturn V lifting 262k lbm to LEO and 99k lbm to TLI.

Ares V lifts 11% more to LEO and 45% more to TLI (with the docked Orion from an Ares I launch) ...

ftlwright · 2006-12-18 18:13:56

Hey all,

I'm hearing more info from LockMart and the Beltway that there is more dicussion with regard to an existing hydrocarbon engine being used. Despite the higher thrust of the RS-68 it still remains a concern; including some issue with the fuel tank. I'll see if I can learn anythings else over the holidays; though any discussion will be of benefit to the design.

My guess is that we won't have a final decision until after the Ares I design is closer to completion. It will set the pace for future vehicle designs.

GCNRevenger · 2006-12-18 20:07:19

Bah, just LockMart trying to sell cheap Russian engines at American prices. Shuttle works, why won't Ares-V?

Dayton Kitchens · 2006-12-18 21:45:16

Weren't there some designs on line somewhere for Ares type boosters that included up to four five segment SRBs that could deliver up to 158 metric tons to LEO?

348,000 lbs to LEO!

Now that could definitely lift Zubrins Mars Direct hardware!!!

GCNRevenger · 2006-12-18 22:19:24

No there is no such design. It was with 4X four-segment boosters if memory serves, and isn't much better than the present Ares-V. The dead weight of an additional pair of thrust vectoring sets and heavy steel endcaps really detracts from the payload. 4X five-segment boosters, the thrust would start getting out of hand quick.

And even if MD could fly, it still couldn't DO much. MarsDirect is broken, and needs to be abandoned. Even ~150MT would probably just make up for the mass margin corner-cutting from his crazy low figures, and not add a single square centimeter of cabin space or gram of surface equipment.

Dayton Kitchens · 2006-12-18 22:31:43

You seem to be trying to build a career out of dissing Mars Direct and insulting Dr. Robert Zubrin.

Without Zubrin, NASA wouldn't be bothering even considering a manned Mars program.

Incidentally, see http://images.spaceref.com/news/2005/ilc-3cargo.med.jpg

GCNRevenger · 2006-12-18 22:57:51

Somebody needs to do it, people are being hoodwinked by Bob's crazy plan, born of his insatiable "lust for red dust" as soon as possible at any price or risk, even the future of Mars. Oh, that and the sick messianic complex he has.

Thats an awfully bold claim to say that without Zubrin, NASA wouldn't be considering Mars. Did you get that from him? He thinks entirely too highly of himself and his... "destiny."

Your link is broken too.

Dayton Kitchens · 2006-12-18 23:05:26

Somebody needs to do it, people are being hoodwinked by Bob's crazy plan, born of his insatiable "lust for red dust" as soon as possible at any price or risk, even the future of Mars. Oh, that and the sick messianic complex he has.
Thats an awfully bold claim to say that without Zubrin, NASA wouldn't be considering Mars. Did you get that from him? He thinks entirely too highly of himself and his... "destiny."
Your link is broken too.

Sorry about the link. It was at Spaceref.com last year.

It is a drawing of the SDV (Shuttle Derived Vehicle) ILC-3 In-Line Cargo Vehicle Option.

This rocket design doesn indeed have four FIVE SEGMENT SRBs with 4 SSMEs in the core.

Its LEO capability is estimated at 350,000 lbs. plus.

How much larger Hab could that send to Mars than the 288,000 lbs. capability Ares-V?

I would bet it would be somewhat larger.

ftlwright · 2006-12-18 23:47:17

Bah, just LockMart trying to sell cheap Russian engines at American prices. Shuttle works, why won't Ares-V?

Not my source . I'll wait until the next report to come out to before I put my hat on one side or the other. Must admit that the "10 seconds to clear the pad" of the Delta IV scared me almost as much as SS1. Most of the issue I'm hearing have to do with the fuel tank; either integration or aerodynamics losses.

I guess I was most surprised by the award of a contract with so little actually analysis done. "Hard" CAE methods haven't even been used, much less fabrication. Griffin is keeping thing under as much control, but there is only so much athority he can exert under today's aerospace establishment.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2006-07-18 10:44:34

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#52 2006-07-19 15:57:52

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#53 2006-07-24 05:19:39

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#54 2006-07-24 07:23:35

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#55 2006-07-27 01:25:28

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#56 2006-08-11 14:59:33

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#57 2006-10-02 21:03:08

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#58 2006-10-27 12:16:43

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#59 2006-11-08 14:09:41

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#60 2006-11-15 07:34:07

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#61 2006-11-15 08:38:30

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#62 2006-11-28 17:05:42

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#63 2006-12-02 07:05:36

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#64 2006-12-08 15:39:40

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#65 2006-12-11 11:11:20

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#66 2006-12-11 16:51:45

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#67 2006-12-12 04:31:45

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#68 2006-12-18 18:13:56

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#69 2006-12-18 20:07:19

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#70 2006-12-18 21:45:16

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#71 2006-12-18 22:19:24

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#72 2006-12-18 22:31:43

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#73 2006-12-18 22:57:51

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#74 2006-12-18 23:05:26

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

#75 2006-12-18 23:47:17

Re: Ares V (CaLV) - status

Board footer