Damage to Ares 1-X booster and LC-39B - 09.11.10

[Zoomer30]

NASA is it's own worst enemy, people are on to them. If they say it's gonna cost $5 billion they really mean $10 billion so what the he'll let's spend $20 billion. I mean they spent (wasted) the same amount on the pos tower they won't even ever use that SpaceX used to fly Falcon 9. So SX is flying actual hardware and NASA just wastes money.

[Ninjaproness]

lol FFS that is For Fuck Sake

[ti994apc]

I think all the Apollo guys are working for SpaceX now. That is Falcon works and Ares is still playing around with Solid rocket boosters.

[MrHalosniper117]

its 9/11

[bishop51807]

That's what test are for, to find errors now and fix them before we use people and they end up like Challenger or Columbia.

[wavertree558]

Don't worry. It's all over. Thanks Obama.

[bishop51807]

@wavertree558 I blame Bush's $12 BILLION! dollar a month WAR! and causing the next president to scrap a 17billon dollar a year spacecraft(18billion of total development until cancellation for Ares 1 alone since 2008).

[divedevil985]

@bishop51807 Your numbers and conclusions are all wrong.

[bishop51807]

@divedevil985 Prove IT! the war rose to 5B to 7B than 12B a month but if you have more eveidence prove it I welcome to it. If all you have is just conspiracy and speculation get a life my numbers are from real sources including nasa!

[mohammeddavis]

Will you just bring the Apollo guys back. The Saturn V, best launch vehicle ever, hands down

[Nowhereman10]

Several mistakes here. Orion is 5 meters (16.5 ft.) in diameter, not 4.5 m. There was never a 7 person capability since the craft was designed for very long term missions in deep space. Only 6 person. As for the rest. I'm really astounded that the Ares bashers keep spouting the same technobabble crap and declare a failure when what they are really saying is that the engineers didn't know for sure what would happen so the used... gasp... CONSERVATIVE ENGINEERING ESTIMATES!! OMG! Can't have that!

[darkguardian1314]

Only viewable at 240p. 360p or higher shows only blocks and bars. :(

[legalista21]

watch?v=S9sZan94T9g

Tak to trzeba skombinować

[masterj345]

well we have nothing thanks to obama

[spacevidcast]

@masterj345 Actually, we do. Google directlauncher. click on the first link. Several of Spacevidcast's loyal viewers are big fans of this design. This animation from one of the viewers should clarify a few things too. watch?v=Z8tm4L5RTq0

[Tyrannobeast]

@spacevidcast To be fair, no actual work has been done developing Direct other than that on the Space Shuttle itself, which is not a particularly comparable vehicle in itself despite adapting some pre-existing technology.

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast Much of the preexisting technology for the Jupiter-style rocket is human-rated. Ares I is far from it, as was the Ares V design, particularly the 5-segment booster.

[Tyrannobeast]

@spacevidcast In what way was it not human-rated? Ares 1-X and both of the DM tests showed that on the Ares 1, vibration would be experienced at a similar level to the Space Shuttle, and let's leave the Ares V out of this because it wasn't intended to be anything more than a massive cargo launcher. Also, wouldn't it be safer to have a simple single SRM rather than risking a 2nd Challenger in the event of a burn-through?...

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast Ares I-X was a 4-segment rocket with a dummy 5th segment, and the test rocket was 200,000 lbs less than the planned design. The resonance of standard 4-seg is 7 Hz, but is dampened by the liquids. 5-seg SRBs experience 11Hz, and with Ares I, it's at +/-5 G's at the location Orion would be. The SRB joints have been redesigned with 150% more protection than Challenger had. Plus no cold-weather launches. 5-seg SRB isn't human rated. It's a new design with no knowledge base.

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast Also forgot to mention that the CG and CP of Ares I are within 3 feet of each other, at the weakest point; the expansion collar at midpoint. the Ares I-X test had extra support there to prevent excessive vibrations from causing failure. That support would have been removed on full up version because the mass would be replaced with vibe-damping system. Solids are bad about vibes, and the thrust oscillation without damping would have killed the crew, or turned brains to gray mush.

[Tyrannobeast]

@spacevidcast ...I mean of course Direct incorporates an LAS, which gets it a good mark in my books, but it seems like in the pursuit of safety (recall the biggest engineering concern for Constellation), one should forgo putting huge tanks of highly explosive fuel next to jointed SRMs, even with the array of safety systems created for them.

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast Many of us @ spacevidcast don't like solids, but after redesign, the performance of the O-rings has been commendable. Over 800 flights if you count each O-ring (4 segs=4 O-rings x 2 boosters x 100+ launches) with no issues. New design of the joints is great, and yeah, they are next to the cryos, but there'd be at least 10 meters separating the cryos from the crew. Adds considerable safety margin in case of an abort. If the SRBs have an issue we can see leaks before it's too late

[Tyrannobeast]

@spacevidcast You've put forward a very good series of arguments for Direct, which I will certainly think about. Thank you, but one thing I'm a bit unclear on is the collar support. If it was used to dampen vibrations, and it would be replaced with another dampening system, what's the problem? Wouldn't both systems be serving the same purpose, just with adjusted performance for the different motors?

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast The support bracing used on I-X was more structural than damping. The system to be put on Ares I would be mass damping, like shock absorbers. A 4-seg SRB doesn't behave like a 5-seg and NASA didn't think I-X would fail, but took steps to make sure. With Ares I, the mass damping would only allow 1200 lbs of payload, IIRC. Can't use I-X shocks on prod. version w/mass damping. It'd be too heavy to fly. The margins for the prod version Ares I are/were VERY tight. To be continued.

[spacevidcast]

@Tyrannobeast That was why Orion went from 5.5 meters to 4.5, and from 7 crew to 4. 3 for lunar missions. They had to delete a parachute in order to allow useful crew and still be "safe". Also no land landing and unmanned capability. Water landing only due to mass of air bag system, and someone has to mind the store. The avionics needed for remote guidance from ground were too heavy for Ares to lift. The I-X and I systems just couldn't carry all that weight unfortunately.

[lightingengineer1]

This first stage had four fuel segments instead of five planned for the actual Ares. The fifth (top segment) was loaded with instrumentation which added to the expended weight of the booster making it heavier than if the fifth segment had been a fuel segment. Consequently the parachute system was more heavily loaded during this test than if all five segments had expended fuel.

[spacevidcast]

@lightingengineer1 Actually, the entire rocket was 200,000 lbs lighter than the Ares I production version would have been, as per George Diller's commentary on another video about the Ares I-X flight.

[geomodelrailroader]

no wonder Obama had second thoughts who ordered the torn parachutes. back to Yuma to prove him wrong.

[tjohn6041]

They did not care about damage to the launch pad, it will be destroyed now that a new launch platform is built. The Ares I-X performed better than expected, with the roll, control system firing only 3 time.

[vcz11]

So it takes $7bn of our hard-earned taxes to burn one launch pad and bend one huge steel pipe?

[rocketshipstud1]

space-x falcon-9 rocket with dragon capsule (7 crew) will be launching for the space station in year 2011...(first test is 8 may 2010)

[pointmanzero]

MORE SPACEX COVERAGE!!!!

[Andrewmcmelonse]

does the SRB use o-rings or is it one piece?

[ideastoday]

It uses O-rings.

[spacevidcast]

@Andrewmcmelonse Each segment has three O-rings to prevent blow-by and burn-throughs Challenger had two O-rings between the segments, and they weren't designed for the cold temperatures experienced that day.

[Zoomer30]

You can see it bukle at impact. Ouch.

[youvebeenthunderstru]

"Damage to the pad" is a bit of an odd statement. Anytime anything launches there's damage to the pad.

[SSouthcombe]

This is undoubtedly a government program. Due to funding constraints we regret to inform you that we are unable to hire an attractive news reporter.

[spacevidcast]

@SSouthcombe Actually, no. Spacevidcast is in no way tied to a government program or any space agency.

[xrayeyesb4u]

@ssouthcombe.

aHahaha!!

[whiteguysamurai]

@SSouthcombe Hey, this is science here. If she is attractive to you or not has no bearings. Chances are, she is associated with JPL and has a high intelligence quotient. Smart is always sexy.

[spacevidcast]

@whiteguysamurai The woman in the above video is not associated with any space-related organizations, aside from spacevidcast. She is Cariann Higginbotham. See spacevidcast's Wiki entry for more info.

[furgee]

@SSouthcombe OUCH! lol

[wwefan774977]

how will they get in the ares if its 500 ft taller than the FSS

[spacevidcast]

@wwefan774977 The pad construction is not complete. Right now it is still in a shuttle config hacked together so they could get an Ares test flight. Before humans are launched they would finish construction.

[rss0246]

Damage to the 39B Rotating Service Structure (RSS) is a complete non-issue!! All the shuttle-era gantry structures at 39B -- including the RSS -- are scheduled to be demolished long before the next Ares flight, as they are unnecessary for the new rocket. Ares -- like Apollo before it -- uses a single skinny launch tower carried out to an empty pad aboard the same mobile launch platform (or MLP) that carries the rocket itself.

[1976Bukkits]

L2 if full of it.. why should have to pay to get access to something that has already been paid for by the tax payer????

[spacevidcast]

NSF and L2 are not run by NASA and as such they are free to charge for access to their content. I have found that the level of information they provide as well as the professionals on the site are near impossible to find elsewhere. Technically yes, a lot of that is open to the public, but good luck finding it! L2 makes it easy because it is all in one place with relevant real-world experience spattered in as well.

[spacevidcast]

@1976Bukkits L2 is privately owned. The money is to pay for the server space to provide the content. L2 is not funded by NASA or the government.

[duncanedwards036]

@1976Bukkits Because L2 finds it, collects it, puts it on a nice website for you to use, and archives it. That costs money and has value to the users. If you want to go to the trouble of doing all that for yourself then have at it.

[mianbentley]

@1976Bukkits, all that website does is give armchair spectators a forum to think they know more than College-Educated Aerospace Engineers.

A FOIA request and a phonecall can get you ANY info you want from NASA...

Why pay someone from England to profit off of our taxpayer dollars?

[danschaoticmind]

The final consensus is that there was no re contact but that a wire bundle (tensile of 10-25lb/ft) did not seperate.

The pad damage was something else.

Did you enjoy the atlantis launch?

I had to pull an all nighter here in Japan and update via 4chan what was going on.

(I do not twitter...) Though with all 4 major streams running (And later a VHF contact, however brief with the ISS) I enjoyed much the same as anyone else who watched it. I woulda loved to have been there like I was for 127...

[Thiren111]

2am is to early, that is 3am or 1am for me, not sure, but still to early..or late, however you look at it..

[Hannsfeld]

Did they acknowledge the recontact of the SRB with the upper stage during separation that caused all that tumbling?

[spacevidcast]

My understanding is that there was not recontact and the tumbling was by design to help dissipate some energy. There are more details on this very subject at NSF L2 forums with pictures and videos from other angles.