Ares I-X Launch on 10/28/2009

[Torro624]

when it breaks off at 7:35, the top one looks like a joint.....

[nerdystarwarsman1994]

They already spent so much to build this...why cancel it now? Epic waste of money.

[spacevidcast]

@nerdystarwarsman1994 Well, they spent a lot of money, yes. But an Ares I-X is not an Ares rocket. The rocket above is a 4 stage SRB whereas a real Ares is a 5 stage SRB. The above rocket had no upper stage whereas a real Ares would have a full upper stage. Heck, even the guidance computers were taken from another rocket as they were not ready. Most of the rocket is not Ares, only a small handful of components were, such as the parachutes.

[vava54own]

Not long before burnout, they said it was going at mach 4. So it only reach mach 6-7 or so? That's like 20% of the speed required to get in orbit.

[sedgie09]

Is this the for the man on mars mission? I heard rumors that this for the mars mission where the first United Kingdom astronaut is gona be in place. correct me if im wrong.

[ti994apc]

Solid rocket fueled rockets like Shuttle and Ares 1-X remind me an old car running with bad gas in the projects. Liquid fueled rockets like Soyuz and Falcon 9 are clean burning and look more like a real rocket (almost like jet fighter running full after burners). Shuttle and Ares look more like there is fire on the bottom of the vehicle and burning every direction making lots of smoke.

[Sherwin930]

the ares system better be amazing if it plans on replacing one of the most iconic man made machine ever the space shuttle. I'm already impressed by the cool name and he speed at which it gained altitude. I'm also assuming that this is alot lighter than the space shuttle?

[MasterRegal]

In some ways its bittersweet. Ares I has been plagued with technical and budget issues since its conception. Frankly, Obama's budget request was a bit of a surprise. I expected the cancellation of Ares I, but not the entire Constellation Program. I'm all for commercial to LEO, Ares V, and returning to the Moon. If Ares I survives congress, I'll have no qualms.

[dave46563]

I love that view @ 2:10 showing the old and the new. Old being orbiter Atlantis waiting to launch for STS-129 on 39-A. New being the Ares I-X on 39-B. Just awesome.

[megispris1984]

cuando se solto la parte de atras casi colicionan eso es muy peligrozo!!

[xabat77]

what's the timeframe on the first Ares V test launch, middle of this decade at latest hopefully?

While I can't blame the US for scuttling its deep space program after Apollo 17 given how much money it was costing, I can't help but wonder how far along we'd be now (Moon Base, Mars Landing, etc) if we had kept investing in the program.

[heound]

2014

[FlightDirDan]

If Obamas Budget for NASA gets approved by congress.... Never.

Saddest day ever.

[folion37130]

i know it will be the saddest day for nasa

[guitarnashelter]

very fast take off,wonder how fast with a heavy payload

[crewportal1]

When I watch a Titan II first stage launch (from the early 60's), or a Soyuz launch, and compare it to this Rocket. I just cannot figure out where the US went wrong? Why technologically are we taking a MAJOR STEP BACKWARDS. Why are computers and cars so much more advanced today but our rockets are so backwards inefficient? The shuttle and Ares smoke plume by itself look like a crappy 74 Chevy Nova running with no muffler, burning oil and bad gas.

[redlegsfan21]

Because Titan II and Soyuz are liquid rockets and STS and Ares I are solid rockets. Just different types of propellant.

[Tyrannobeast]

@crewportal1: I just has to do with the fact that the Titan and Soyuz use fuels that create little visible smoke. The Ammonium Perchlorate in the SRBs just create more visible smoke. It's not less efficient, it's just different fuels that have overall different burn characteristics.

[Timsalt3100]

this test nearly never happened even on the day it launched it was like a fluke the weather was only 10 mintutes from wrecking the attempt

[TheCarolStreamKid]

that ares 1-x is FAST. Was there anyone in the rocket wehn it was launched?

[rss0246]

No. This was the first TEST flight to check out the concept of using a big, dumb, relatively simple, relatively safe and relatively cheap solid rocket booster (SRB) as the first stage of a new rocket. The upper stage was a dummy without any control or power at all. No folks aboard this time and for several more years...

[MrSensai1]

dam look at this NASA good job nasa

i can't believe it's already starting on project constellation

[SnottyAust]

I thought the tail section got a bit close to the launch pad. 5.23

[spacevidcast]

It did. Burned the heck out of pad 39/B too. There was a good amount of damage to the pad as well as to the SRB itself. See this video: watch?v=Rdui3vLhP-U

[rss0246]

After the first shuttle flight (STS-1 Columbia) in 1981, a NASA engineer described the condition of the launch pad (39A) to a NY Times reporter as "Hiroshima." Modifications were made and new refurbishment techniques were developed. The same thing will happen this time. Also, the pad is going to be modified so that the Ares sits in the middle of the exhaust openings which will soften the impact of ignition of the pad. This time it had to be placed off to one side...

[mrcheeseface2]

@SnottyAust it did there was amage to the launch pad but their fixing it

[SC1337]

fuck you china!!!

[spacevidcast]

I wouldn't go touting the success of Ares just yet.

The SRB was borrowed from the STS program and was not the 5 stage unit. The upper stage wasn't done so they used a dummy. The LAS wasn't done nor was Orion so they were both dummies. The guidance software wasn't done so it was borrowed from Atlas instead. The parachutes were real. Of the three one failed fully and one half failed.

So basically almost none of this rocket was real, none of it was complete, and what was complete failed.

[SC1337]

@spacevidcast thanks for taking me down man

[spacevidcast]

HA! I do what I can.

[russssellcrow]

Looks like the SRB fired and pressurized perfectly, the guidance system gimbaled for maximum deflection test while maintaining structural integrity, stage separation worked, the airframe proved functional at Mach IV @ 150,000 feet, and the parachutes deployed. The launch vehicle was recovered, so the crew got that right.

The only thing that really failed here was your analysis. Just for the record, do you have any clue what the cost and time and logistics requirements were for the Saturn V?

[spacevidcast]

Well, and the parachutes. They didn't deploy right and they were the only final part of the Ares. This wasn't a full 5 segment SRB it was a 4 segment from the STS program (the Ares SRB wasn't done yet). There was no Orion module. There was no upper stage. One of the only real parts of the system that will be from the final Ares design was the parachute. 1/2 of the stopping power failed and we bent the SRB on impact.

It *is* a test so failure is expected. Borrowing from other programs is not.

[danschaoticmind]

@russssellcrow The moon program, by the way, adjusted for inflation, was 254 billion dollars.

[1111111rawr]

you mean russia

[SC1337]

china is more of a threat

[EndeavourLaunch]

Walter Cronkite would be proud!

Go Ares I!

[Tulostenaloor]

hard to believe that this is only the "small" brother of the Ares V, bigger than Saturn V. cant wait to see that launch, only 9 years till its first try :(

[Hazmat0987]

well its not rocket science... I'm sorry i had to say that. It just fit with the moment, barely.

[sbmrunning]

lol ! cutting his tie! lol.......hahahahaaaa....... some traditions ? how does it get started? lol

[sbmrunning]

sound suppression system? lol......... my speakers picked up that rubble! awesome shot!..........that son of a "B" was movin fast too! did you see how fast it was breaking the sound barrier? ! awesome video! thanks! well done nasa !

[darkcorsair247]

amazing love how they cut his tie at the end hahaha sweet

[tanga41591]

what a beauty!

[PivotStorm]

kickass video!

[ecodna2000]

The test is the test.

I think that this test is very important.

Very Very Good launch test.

Good Job,USA'peaple.

[apopheniacMCMLXXXIX]

At 2:19, you can see the space shuttle and the Ares I-X in the same view. Kinda neat. That's the only time we'll get to see the two programs overlapping.

[mrmaciejm]

Good Launch

[TimeLapseSteve]

Hahahaha Mach 1 at 50 seconds after liftoff, with a single SRB candle lifting 2 million pounds of dead weight. Completely badass. What a great launch to watch. Great job to everyone at NASA.

[Minuteman351]

Not great.

Didn't you see the 1st stage sep jacknifiing at the end? That was not planned!

[TimeLapseSteve]

The first stage's ullage motors are designed to decelerate it so it does not impact the second stage. Tumbling after separation is quite normal.

[Minuteman351]

Dude, I work wth mostly ex-shuttle people, who know the SRBs and launch systems. Did you see the tipoff it gave to the 2nd stsage?  Not good!

[TimeLapseSteve]

Yeah the more I watch it the more I see what you are saying. Looks like the booster still had a bit too much 'oomph' when it separated.

[MusicalFan1701]

There is no reason for an unpowered unguided upper or lower stage to do anything but tumble after burnout and separation. Watch the long press conference.

[zephyrus001]

@Minuteman351

There was no recontact.

[hellomate639]

Luckily it's a developing concept...

But I don't plan on riding an Ares even if given the opportunity... Hehe...

I'll take a space elevator any day.

Honestly, I think the best concept within our current technological reach is a low earth orbit launch with something like a shuttle or large capactiy low earth launch rocket coupled with an ion or plasma thruster to get large loads to the moon.

[URProductions]

Dude, there's never gonna be a space elevator. By the time we have the resources to build one, we'll have single stage to space spacecraft efficient enough that building something as enourmous (and slow mind you) as the elevator will be pointless.

In short, the space elevator will be obsolete before we even build it.

[hellomate639]

Well, sorry to burst your persona of the realistic skeptic, but the equation E=Fd, Energy equals force times distance, completely disassembles your argument. A space elevator will always and forever require far less energy than a rocket to the point at which rockets are a joke in comparison.

Furthermore, a space elevator does not take nearly as much resources as the name would imply and the only major obstacle is achieving the tensile strenght of carbon nanotubes.

[URProductions]

Yeah, and scientifically it would take less energy to walk my 180 lb. ass to New York than to drive my half tonne truck, but I'm still gonna drive. For similar reasons people in the future will rather drive down to the local spaceport and take the next ship into space rather than drive down to their local airport, fly to the bloody equator wait in line for a spot on an elevator half the world's using and then wait 5 days until you're finally at the top. No thanks, spaceships for me.

[hellomate639]

The local spaceport won't have anything a common person would be able to afford for at least 50 years, 50 years if we're lucky.

With a space elevator, you can build more space elevators cheaply. I've researched this and gave it thought. The ride up on the space elevator won't be bad either. By the time you can afford it, it will either be a nice hotel on the way up, or better, it will be a fast ride up.

It's not going to be one elevator at the equator. It's going to be thousands.

[URProductions]

Ok fine. You take the elevator, I'll take the rocket.

[hellomate639]

Deal. Just see how long it takes to lower 500 million a launch to something affordable.

[pete5668]

It's a big Hoover. Oversized vacuum. It'll be the Aardvark eating the ant.

[MasterRegal]

@hellomate639 A space elevator is attractive, but that too is a huge multi-billion dollar project 20-40 years down the road. There is so many problems with such technology that getting past conception is going to be difficult. Cost is one issue. Safety is another.

[hellomate639]

@MasterRegal

Let me get one thing clear: cost is not an issue at all, unless we're not planning to go to space. It won't cost even close to enough to make up for what it will save.

Safety is a bigger issue, but not so big that someone would avoid making a space elevator as opposed to rockets.

[MasterRegal]

@hellomate639 I agree, the biggest selling point for a space elevator is cheap frequent "launches", which will open up space for private companies. There are safety concerns, however and until those concerns are satisfied an elevator will not be constructed. It will likely be the most significant structure ever built in the history of man. Imagine a 30,000-mile elevator. The US can't even get a 500-mile border built. Such a project will be multi-national no doubt.

[hellomate639]

@MasterRegal

It's not certain whether or not it will be multinational: Bill Gates could single handedly pay for it.

[hellomate639]

Just try taking a further look at things that sound crazy but aren't quack science.

Anyhow, the thing I expect to work the best in a time period that we're more likely to see is a system where we use large powerful rockets up to a station that acts more like a spaceport to the moon where you send craft powered with ion or plasma thrusters, which are far more efficient than using traditional chemical rockets when you can use a gentle push in space to go far.

[FuZuSa]

Yeah the first stage was still finishing burning off its remaining fuel when it separated and nudged the 2nd stage they got lucky it didn't hit it hard enough to make it spin into the first stage..

[A86]

NASA has already talked about it. The spin direction of the second stage was one of the predicted scenarios evaluated by the simulator. The upper stage was unpowered in this mission so it was pretty much just dead weight. In a real mission it would push away from the first stage with vernier engines.

[artsmith1972]

couple things.... i saw and concur, but the speaker says "seperation and tumble motor ignition".... is there any conceivable reason they would want the the upper portion to tumble as it did? Also i was wondering if the fact that there was no 2nd stage ignition, which would have propelled the craft straighter.... i dont know but i did notice what you mention and was wondering myself....

[spacevidcast]

The tumble was to dissipate excess energy from the launch and was planned. No 2nd stage as it was not complete yet.

[simav8r]

Is it me, or does the PAO seem thrown off by not saying " seven, six, main engine start, five"

[Dominikanlyricist]

The Power of mankind...Always leaves me speechless.

[sabretoothed69]

Is this Carbon Neutral?

[spacevidcast]

Basically, yes.

[thugsterz]

hydrogen base so perfectly green

[xaethyx]

@snoopyloopy - Its not a mission, its simply a test flight

[Ovumee]

Diller has the greatest voice at NASA TV.

[spacevidcast]

And some of the bestest lines... "Hoisting Harmony to the Heavens..."

[ytbfinney]

@Ovumee Don't forget Brandi Dean! Love to hear her voice!

[RJY4356]

Amazing sound at the moment of ignition though...wish they didn't turn it down after that and let us hear the real sound unmuffled

[deathafterlive]

great flight nasa much better than the shuttle the shuttle did a great job and is one of the safe rocket's made at all time but with a design 30 years old nasa was in need of a new more advanced i cant wait wen ares v Ares IV tak off

but this is the most ass kicking launch i ever seen !!!!!!!!!

[RJY4356]

George Diller is the most worthless commentator. Hardly says anything and when he does sounds like he's whispering. Do the job, come on.

[shimmers00]

nah

[Patriol666]

it's so impressing! i hope, they will go on with the ares series. that would be a great step to new worlds...

[lestube001]

i don't wish be a party pooper but is this not a backward step from the shuttle.old tech ?

[A86]

Not really. This is more advanced than the shuttle. Just because the shuttle looks like a plane doesn't mean it's more advanced.

[myudelson]

Ares is a rocket booster system, Shuttle is an orbital plane. The advance is in the time of the design and assembly. Ares and Shuttle are different in their purpose and design.

[age234]

How else would you land on the moon? You can't take a shuttle, and it would be overkill.

A rocket stack is perfect for the job of going to the moon and Mars, and any other world with negligible atmosphere and no landing strips to be found.

There is tons of new technology in the Ares rocket. Don't let the basic concept of a rocket fool you.

[GIANNHSPEIRAIAS]

it still a rocket with liquid fuel and that isnt good enough one small mistake and boom the technoogy is a particle boost not fuelniggahwiggahrocketahlaunch­ah

[saggenbendavis]

The first stage is a solid booster.

[Brian5475E]

solid fuel, not liquid.

[GIANNHSPEIRAIAS]

the problem was the fuel or that it doesnt have new technology on it this rocket is just evolution not a revolution

[ClancD]

The idea of a reusable launch vehicle has come and gone. Yes, the Shuttle was neat, but it was far more expensive to operate than was planned. It had it's uses, but for the simple mission of launching people into orbit, you can't beat a plain ol' rocket. Ares is also far, far more advanced in it's systems and avionics. The Shuttle is still running on 1980's computer technology...

[lestube001]

fair point cheers

[crazybastard82]

clancd:

um, i was under the impression that the ares is still a reusable vehicle considering they recover the booster stage like they did with the srbs for the shuttle?

[ClancD]

That's true, thee first stage will be reusable, but the second stage and the Orion spacecraft itself will not be, compared to the Shuttle where both the SRBs and Orbiter are reused, with only the External Fuel Tank being expended.

[snoopyloopy]

looks so small compared to an sts mission...

[ClancD]

And yet it's 2.5 times taller... It is wierd to not see the huge ET-SRB-Orbiter stack that we're used to..

[elocoetam]

We dont actually want the tumble sep do we?

[BurfTheMagicDragon]

With the dummy upper stage there's no way to prevent it. For the first stage you want the tumble to reduce the speed (energy) of the reentry. If it's coming down too fast the chutes wouldn't hold up when deployed.

[remyworldpeace]

I saw this live on your website too!

AWESOME LAUNCH, AWESOME COVERAGE!!

[spacevidcast]

Thank you. We had a lot of fun covering it live!

[NuwKiru]

This is the first test flight by NASA in years. Great job, way to go! I saw this live online and it was pretty amazing!

[aarongregpon]

me to :D

[aarongregpon]

i watched this and was waiting for someone to upload it so i could show them