Ares I-X test launch

andyd said:
This may be a little bit off topic. :D

How far are we away from using other forms of propulsion for example Ion drives / RAM Drives etc... ?
Click to expand...

ION drives are in use now. They're not the kind of thing thats going to take us into orbit though.

I think I remember reading that an ion drive exerts as much force as a sheet of a4 paper - however in zero mavity, it is far more fuel efficient than other means.
 
Just seems weird how technology moves on at such a rapid pace. However, 50 years later they are still using rockets to get us into orbit just seems ironic.
 
Bug One said:
ION drives are in use now. They're not the kind of thing thats going to take us into orbit though.

I think I remember reading that an ion drive exerts as much force as a sheet of a4 paper - however in zero mavity, it is far more fuel efficient than other means.
Click to expand...
And as I understand it, in vacuum of space - though they accelerate slowly - they are ultimately capable (because of fuel efficiency) of accelerating to much greater speeds than would be practical, economical or even possible with standard rocket engines.

For example solar sails have been another proposed means of accelerating to massive speeds (slow acceleration but obviously very efficient).
 
andyd said:
Just seems weird how technology moves on at such a rapid pace. However, 50 years later they are still using rockets to get us into orbit just seems ironic.
Click to expand...

They're still the best way of getting us in too space, and the money to develop a new one could be better speant on developing the infrastructure to build spacecraft in space. That would remove the need to have an engine just to take the craft out of Earth's atmosphere.
 
Bug One said:
"Testing concepts for the future of new rocket design."

Isn't this just one of the shuttles old boosters?
Click to expand...

Yup, It is an orbiter SRB that has been modified to simulate the real ares motor because the originally specified motor is not ready yet.
 
BloodyL said:
Yup, It is an orbiter SRB that has been modified to simulate the real ares motor because the originally specified motor is not ready yet.
Click to expand...
Really? The first stage was supposed to be a modified shuttle motor (modified design), because it's proven, ready tech and they are able to retain the same contractors with essentially same factory tooling and same supply chain. From what I've read this is the motor they will use, with exception of further mods they might make based on this test. And it further saves operational money by being reusable just like the shuttle SRB's. ed: one thing that was definately different from final Ares motor was that top element (or "ring") of the 1st stage was not fueled (packed with solid propellant).

But what I came here to post was that I was looking again at the video and it does look like the 1st stage actually knocked the 2nd stage into the pitching motion:
 
Last edited:
Both are true afaik, the real motor is a highly developed offshoot of the original orbiter SRB, whereby a single ares motor can provide more power than two of the original SRBs put together, thus it isn't too much of a stretch to use an existing orbiter SRB for the test flight.
 
BloodyL said:
Both are true afaik, the real motor is a highly developed offshoot of the original orbiter SRB, whereby a single ares motor can provide more power than two of the original SRBs put together, thus it isn't too much of a stretch to use an existing orbiter SRB for the test flight.
Click to expand...

Correct, this test was basically a Shuttle SRB which has 4 segments of solid rocket fuel and a newer nozzle, however the real Ares I-X will a 5 segment SRB, giving it a longer burn time (more range).


Separation did look "wrong" but that's because the upper stage was dead weight and had no controls. Plus they would have wanted it to tumble so it came down faster. The Real deal with have small thrusters to push it further away from the SRB before the SRB fires its tumble thrusters..
 
Overlag said:
Correct, this test was basically a Shuttle SRB which has 4 segments of solid rocket fuel and a newer nozzle, however the real Ares I-X will a 5 segment SRB, giving it a longer burn time (more range).
Click to expand...
Well this did actually have a 5th segment on it, but without fuel. I was assuming that the lack of fuel in that segment could have related to just wanting less thrust or shorter burn time for this test.

Overlag said:
Separation did look "wrong" but that's because the upper stage was dead weight and had no controls. Plus they would have wanted it to tumble so it came down faster. The Real deal with have small thrusters to push it further away from the SRB before the SRB fires its tumble thrusters..
Click to expand...
It just looks in the video as if it starts the tumble very suddenly right as the top of the srb appears to make contact with bottom of 2nd stage (right as 2nd stage starts to slow back on it and right as 1st stage starts it's induced tumble). From my amateur assessment it looks like the braking motors at the SRB nozzle didn't brake enough (thus allowing the 2nd stage to slow back on it).

ed: Was just looking at it again. Could be just the angle both making it look like contact and making it look like the tumble was more sudden than it was. But still looks a bit like that. I know that they weren't expecting a tumble that pronounced (they seemed to say to the press). The animations at least depicted a much slower tumble.


And yes, like can be seen in the famous footage from within Saturn V stages during separation, 2nd stage will have separation motors that both stabilize and push it away from the spent stage.
 
Last edited:
389937mainlaunch1lg.jpg


​
 
Launch with Atlantis sitting on pad 39A waiting for mission STS-129.


397880mainlaunch5m.jpg


Hot off the press, a new launch video in HD:


​


Space Shuttle Atlantis mission STS-129 is now set to launch on 16th of November.
 
Hot off the press an aerial film of the launch from a Cessna Skymaster aircraft positioned approx 10 nautical miles away from the vehicle at an altitude of 12,000 feet.

At 4:30 is the start of the parachute deployment on stage one:


​
 
Looks like one of the chutes failed which explains the dent they found in the side of the booster when inspecting it.
 
Gonzo0 said:
Looks like one of the chutes failed which explains the dent they found in the side of the booster when inspecting it.
Click to expand...
Yes it looked like a "balloon popping". I saw from the animation that the chutes are supposed to be fully unfurled just before splash. You can see that while one of them is fully unfurled the other seems to get significantly pinched (probably by the lines of the wrecked chute). So just before splash it had less than two thirds of the deceleration it should have (not to mention that it was already way faster because of only two chutes).

ed: I would guess though that the three chute configuration including the size of them has some redundancy in mind.

Excellent video.
 
Last edited:
Probably when President Obama decides if he wants to go the Ares route or go for another option. Bet NASA are on tender hooks waiting for the decision, hate to think how much they have spent developing the Ares project for it all to come crashing down.
 
sbi5ar said:
does any one know when the next test launch is due?? I missed this one :(
Click to expand...
They were talking 2014 in the press conf. video as a next test (apparently a full vehicle test) and seemed to be hinting that with more money (hint, hint), maybe they kinda sorta could do it soonisher :p The guy was really going around in circles whenever the money and speeding up the schedule questions came up. My guess is that they don't want to upset the government by looking like they are publicly appealing for more money instead of talking directly to congress and executive branch.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom