Taking Flight: Ares I-X Test Flight

[KinaNafasi]

well, once Obuma is out of the white house, then we can get back to space exploration. Honestly, his ouster cant come quick enough for me.

[ti994apc]

Its amazing how massively big Ares1 actually is compared to the small size of its payload it actually puts into LEO. It needs to be a heavy lift rocket system (which adds major cost) because of its escape system must be gigantic to have a chance at survival.  That is because NASA insists on using a Shuttle SRB which is a design failure. Escaping from an SRB failure is exponentially more difficult to do than a liquid fueled rocket failure.

[usaeagle1776]

killed by that socialist radical in the white house. nicely done Obumbles.

[701shep]

THE U S WONT GO TO THE MOON THIS CENTRY CHINA AN RUSSIA WILL BEET U THIS TIME O AN ARES PROJECT CANCELED

[spacegeek5]

The upper stage is not recovered because of time and cost, the real ares 1 will have the upper stage burn and a 5 segment srb which means there would have to be deorbit engines and communications and this is a simulation with out the upper stage or fifth segement so that would be unnesasary

[tealmarlin]

upper stage is not recovered, why Not?

[Armigo91]

so with all the finance behind this, i must trust obama that he believes nasa can do this with the money they have.

Obama doesnt even understand the finance behind spaceflight. And look what the fool suggests.

Why does he demand the impossible things to happen. The president needs psychiatric healthcare, immediately. Whats wrong with the fool.

[Viz731]

@Armigo91 oh sorry about the Obama thing I said

[Armigo91]

on venus that supplies it with srbs and liquid fuel so it can takeoff from mars in the first place.

Then it coud orbit mars from takeoff, dock with the orion and get back to earth.

it would take 6-7months to get to mars with this aproach.

So its also a very dangerous mission.

[Viz731]

and....its sad that obama canceled it because he thinks we should go to mars not the moon...yet he missed one thing...the constellation program is going to the moon....AND MARS,,,THAT FREAK'N IDIOT!

[monimstarfox]

@Viz731

there is a proposal to bring it back

[BernieEOD]

@monimstarfox It just dies. this retro spam can should have never gotten this far

[BernieEOD]

@Viz731 You are not going to retro spam can to Mars

[Armigo91]

@Viz731

checmical aproach to mars will cost several hundred billion dollars.

You can use a similar sized capsule like the CEV with additional oxygen tanks.

You will need 2 additional launched (so the 2 usual cew launches and 2 others)

to supply the craft with more proppelant.

Then you need a automatic lander on venus with extra fuel tanks and boosters cause mars gravity is 3times stronger then that of the moon.

And the altair upper stage is ment for lunar takeoff. So you need a automatic

[Viz731]

@Armigo91 Actually, I know that :) I like your thoughts man, hows it going, God bless...oh and...what does that comment have to do with Obama?

[amourdutigre]

Not any more...

That stupid kenyan communo-islamic pretender (commie obammy) killed the whole thing, then claims that we will use 'commercial' heavy lift rockets. Sure. Sorry obammy, but after you communize everything, there will be no more private interprise to make any commercial anything.

[vava54own]

@amourdutigre

are you a wizard

[ti994apc]

As an American I am really embarrassed by Ares1. Werner Von Braun would be rolling in his grave if he saw this. Almost everything was done wrong with this rocket. In 1965 we had a reliable, safe, low cost rocket in Gemini / titan II with the LR87 engine. We had 10 launches in one year. Lets bring that back and upgrade the second stage like Russia did with Soyuz. Ares 1 is expected to be 1 billion a launch (thats even more than shuttle.) can only pray for Falcon9 success! Scrap Ares1.

[Armigo91]

@ti994apc

maybe because the gemini program only allowed astronauts in space for several days. On apollo, astronauts where gone for just over a week.

The orion is capable of staying on the moon for a month and probably even longer during its first mission.

Werner von braun would be partying big time if he knew 21st century coud allow such advanced life support systems to deal with.

As for propulsion, were all a bit dissapointed. But thats not a pre goal to reach the moon anyway.

[Ralroost]

they're pretty ugly. The Soyuz is even cooler looking.

[TheLostHibiki]

it's a challenging problem...... how to make manned spaceflight safe, cheap and sustainable? most of the physics involved was

established by the 1700's. but the other nagging details has taken another 90 years. pity the chinese couldn't have built that wall vertically back in the 1200s.... but that makes about as much senses as inventing the interstate system before the wheel?

[pplschmpion]

Will china lend the us enough money to goto mars? Will the Saudis buy enough of America to own the space program?

Only time will tell...

[ironman127b]

i can't believe that they are just going to let a piece of the rocket at the bottom of the ocean. soon they oceans will be filled with old rocket parts, that were never recovered.

[tuv45]

i don't think that will happen, you know, the ocean is pretty big and rockets are pretty small in comparison.

[EdouardDubois]

Oh.. I wish they had perfected fly-back boosters.

[andreasBeaverhausen]

It looks a bit cheap. I mean the only working component is a solid rocket booster, taken from the shuttle inventory -- the rest is a dummy load. I can imagine it's a tricky engineering job to modify an SRB to carry Ares, but given that the COG has moved much further away from the exhaust nozzle (compared to Shuttle SRBs) the gimble won't be working as fast or hard, will it. So they've done evrything on Ares except actually make any of it. Clever timing guys (Q3-2009).

[threadysparrow]

OH THANK GOD THEY TOLD ME THAT THE ROCKETS WERE GOING TO BE TESTED FIRST! 1:18

i assumed they were going to strap someone in and say "HERE GOES NOTHIN!" and then wing it from there

[skastroman]

Hello, US you never give up for Ares vehicle. You will acheive defenetely. All the best NASA.

[threadysparrow]

they wont achieve without the techno music. the techno rock is vital to their success. whenever they build a rocket this techno should be blaring in the background. and when it launches and crashes because the buildres were distracted by the music, then the techno music should be playing very loudly during the crash

[lepape2]

This and the voice makes it really, REALLY difficult to take this seriously. Looks like the test went successfully, but the separation animation does not reflect what really happened up there.

[fumfulapenguin]

@lepape2 this animation shows what really happened there

/watch?v=H0ZHzAvFuYc

watch, its exactly the same

[Sk8punk41]

anyone knows if the music can be found somewhere? its cool

[CamiloSanchez1979]

I hope they broadcast it..do they really need the roll control system? looks to me like added complications....not that i know about it though

[csj1969]

Wow not only going back in technology but now pollute the Atlantic !!!

[maryberry1222]

FAKE! looks like it was all done on the computer.

[kgs2264]

maryberry, you are one clever guy...

[mejw1]

well duh lol,, the first one launches at 8:am oct 20th

[relampago21]

no wayyyyy! Really???

[tehnoobtune]

have you just realised lol thats a SIMULATION of the flight.

[ZaneKaminski]

No shit, sherlock....

They are not talking in the past tense, because this launch hasn't happened yet...

[Helge129]

VERY clever boy you are. It is called an ANIMATION you retard.

[UglyKidMetallica81]

well it is, dumbass!!

[bronco2121]

sarcasm detector FAIL

[UglyKidMetallica81]

it doesn't work that on the web, smartass

[bronco2121]

only from your perspective.

[UglyKidMetallica81]

Yeah, sure

[NEEDCARS]

WOW REALLY !! IS IT DONE ON A PC?? WOW

[k32323]

WOW RELLY, THEY TESTED IT LAST WEEK!!!!!!! WOW

(get updated)

[NEEDCARS]

i was sarcastic

(get higher IQ level)

[k32323]

no u were not, the only reson u said the is cuz u didnt want to look like a asshole

(it made u look like a bigger one)

[NEEDCARS]

umm yeah i am going to text some1 whos less retarded.

[malenkylizards]

Is that so, sherlock? I'll bet you think the moon landings were all faked on a computer too. ;)

[BernzSed]

Yup. And Sir Isaac Newton did all his calculations on a TI-83.

In fact, he invented calculus by messing around with the CALC menu.

In his spare time he played ZTris.

[docmordrid]

Sorry to disappoint but Ares 1-X is just a PR firecracker for Congress that even NASA engineers laugh about.

Not even the real 1st stage. The real one has such severe vibration problems that uncorrected, a not easy task, they could turn the Orion crew into soup, and correcting them is costlier than just using an existing EELV rocket like Atlas V or Delta IV.

This turkey will cost $35 billion total when man-rating an EELV would have cost <$5 billion.

Your tax dollars wasted again.

[rossco1966]

Delta 4 or atlas 5 would have launched this for less. Better still, reduce the idiotic side of the capsule back to 10 tonnes and use a 4 stage srb and sensible upper stage....

couldnt agree more docmordrid.... Nasa is currently compounding the error of the shuttle with a completely screwed ares... Either just continue with the ares, give up and redesign ares as something proper of if you are hell bent on the moon dust off the Saturn V plans....

[KingDoy100]

cool! Isn't the ares 1-X already finished?

[FB0102]

Rolled out today, launches October 27

[breg77]

NASA says "The Ares I-X flight test is targeted for Oct. 31" (2009) - so they're behind the schedule named in this video, but only a little.

[shigshwa]

Gas? Since when was gasoline used on any rocket they launched? Gasoline doesn't work in space since there's no oxygen up there to keep it burning. The first stage runs on solid fuel.

[ZaneKaminski]

Not true...

Any rocket fuel won't work in space...

The rocket propellant (not fuel- they mean different things) consists of the fuel and the oxidizer to allow it to burn in space.

They could definitely use gasoline as a rocket fuel, provided an oxidizer such as liquid/gaseous hydrogen.

So don't speak when you don't know.

[shigshwa]

But you get the idea, right?

[jdecunha]

Well there's a reason they haven't used a Liquid fuel since WW2, and only on several occasions has Gasoline it self been used (Eg. 1926 Robert Goddard Flight). Yes they could use an Oxidizer but it's never been done in history. Nor would it make any sense to do so, you get far more propellant at less risk with solid fuel.

[ZaneKaminski]

That doesn't really make sense...

Liquid fuel is the obvious choice because liquid fueled rockets can shut down at a non-predesignated time.

Liquid fuel (LOX/LH2 in particular) can be almost twice as efficient as solid motors, too, although solid rockets generally produce more thrust.

[jdecunha]

You've got a very good point, I was only really refering to the initial Earth to Orbit stage of flight where that extra thrust from solid fuel is useful. Having a Liquid fuel main stage might not create the tangential velocity to reach orbit.

I agree that for obvious reasons you would want any additional stages to be liquid (eg. Liquid Hydrogen). Especially once you've left the thick part of the atmosphere, when you don't need to build momentum so much as maintain it.

[Starwing1272]

But remember.... A Solid Rocket is like a big firecracker (I know bad anology but best I could come up with) once you light it you cant turn it off. So once its lit your going somewhere

[sugoiking]

i would be more amazed if they use something else instead of gas... to launch the rocket lol

[Zoomer30]

I really think they should have waited to do Ares 1X until they had a real 5 seg SRB. Seems like the 5 seg would give different data than a 4 seg with a 5 seg sim.

[usfup328]

It's stupid to not recover the upper stage and no one is a narrow thinker just not as open minded people Ares I and Ares V will go to the ISS and to the moon and all that believe that don't think it can be done obviously thinks the Apollo missions were a hocks! And they aren't there is proof on the moon!

[Boy75402]

I'm not really sure they could recover the 2nd stage even if they wanted to. At the altitude it's released from, I think it'll burn up in the atmosphere much like the STS ET.

Though I'm not 100% sure about that.

[ZaneKaminski]

I don't think there'd be that much heating.

I mean they only accelerate the whole thing to ~1 km/s, nowhere near the orbital velocity the ET gets accelerated to of ~7.5 km/s.

The big thing is that the dummy upper stage probably won't float like the SRB, so it'd be kinda difficult to haul onboard a boat and recover.

[Boy75402]

Ah yeah.... that should have been obvious.

My bad.

[lolvks]

they are not recovering the upper stage

[dcb1138]

WOW...proof read much ?

[Boy75402]

"Agree with me or you're the enemy"?

Yeah, you're certainly an open-minded fellow. =\

[Boy75402]

Hmm. I'm in no way associated with NASA or any of its subcontractors. I just happen to believe that a capsule design for a spacecraft is the best way to go. I said nothing about the delivery rocket.

My opinion of Ares is neutral. I'd like to see it fly, but I also wouldn't mind seeing Direct go, if they can pull it off.

You claim I am narrow minded, the irony screams out so much about you.

[beatlefriend]

Ok a launch test flight by nature cannot be a failure because it's a system test. It's something to learn from whether it launches or not. The first 4 Spacex launches were tests with a curve that ending in a successful test flight 4. The first operational launch flight 5 (the last flight) was a complete success launching a satellite into orbit. Systems used from Falcon 1 will now be used in Falcon 1e and Falcon 9.

[Boy75402]

SteveNovak, I now challenge you to produce a spacecraft design that can

a) Go to the moon (and thus musn't be very massive)

b) Enter Earth's atmosphere.

c) Take payloads to the moon (like a lander).

d) Can handle lunar-return atmospheric entry (much faster and hotter than shuttle re-entries).

No way to get around it, a capsule is the most efficient, safest, and least expensive way to do it.

Sorry if it dissapoints you that modern spacecraft don't have lasers, cloaking devices, and warp drives.

[ti994apc]

I totally agree with Boy75402 ! In addition, most experts would say the 40 year old Soyuz is far more successful than the Shuttle because the soyuz has the following:

1) All weather launch capability.

2) No dangerous solid rocket components.

3) Ability to launch 20 times at the same price as 1 shuttle launch.

4) A way to eject.

[Boy75402]

Oh absolutely! Soyuz will piss on the shuttle's grave long after she's been retired.

Simple, inexpensive, reliable.

And a capsule design! Haha.

[ti994apc]

Why spend the money on Ares 1 when we have Falcon 9 ? Falcon 9 is far safer, cost a lot less, and almost ready to go. Keep Ares 5 but replace Ares 1 with Falcon 9.

[7uspatriot9]

NASA decided to go with the unknown folks at SpaceX to get US astronauts to the ISS and back wit their Dragon Capsule and Falcon 9 rocket. Unfortunantely the comapny onl has 1 successful Falcon 1 flight and no dragon launches...They need the Falcon 9 which is not yet proven. And we need t demo by 2010? Why did NASA decide to go with SpaceX is not sure yet but it was dirt cheaper compared to proven tech from ULA (Boeing/Lockheed). Worth the risk? NO!!!

[ti994apc]

The Soyuz failed 50% of the time when first developed and it turned out to be the most successful rocket in the world. Space X now has 2 in a row successful flights in a row and their only problems have been small issues with the second stage. Space X has never had a rocket blow up.

[Boy75402]

"Space X has never had a rocket blow up."

May I assume that you're completely discounting the first two (failed) launches?

[ti994apc]

They were NOT failed Lauches. They were fialed to reach orbit. There is a BIG difference. Both were minor (but corrected) issues to do with the 2nd stage. The question is what has SpaceX done for us lately? 2 perfect launches in a row!

[Boy75402]

Would you please explain to me the difference? First stage and second stage collided in mid air, destroyed the rocket. Sure, a minor issue with 2nd stage ignition, and I'm not disputing that, nor am I trying to bash SpaceX.

But since something failed, isn't it reasonable to call the mission a failure? The objective was not completed due to a Rapid Unscheduled Dissasembly of the rocket, and its cargo never made it to orbit.

Fail to launch, fail to reach orbit. Either way it's a failure.

[supertrinko]

hell no, the shuttle was the step backwards

[mrmaciejm]

well... nothing new, just improved a bit. Like bicycles.. still the same thing, but looks better.

[supertrinko]

no... it's just a similar design, but it's all completely new technology

[supertrinko]

like going from bike with trainer wheels, to motorbike, only thing the same is design

[supertrinko]

oh they have the passion, but with the time constraints and amount of money they're given, there's only so much they can deliver, i'm sure if they had more funding, they could pull off something amazing.

[mrmaciejm]

More funding? I thought Obama gave them money... more than they asked for. Anyway i know that they had many projects going nowhere... they spend money like hungry food lover in a organic food store. Now they will have to outsource from Russians... they still use Soyuz... and they will charge them for it good money... That`s why Obamas administration wants to review NASAs spending.

[rogelead]

To get to the moon you need to be going really fast a shuttle will break up during re-entry but a capsule is the perfect design. Because you cant slow down in space.

[mrmaciejm]

"rogelead" OK. Finally a reasonable explanation.

Thanks

[rogelead]

Yes for the longest time i thought that they were going in the wrong direction too. Then i found out that.

[Boy75402]

Rogelead, you actually can slow down in space, but it would require more fuel, which costs more fuel to lift into space and tug around.

[rogelead]

But there is another problem, if your not turned compleatly the diffrent direction. 100% you will be off.

But yes you do need alot of fuel, and at the moment in time, you cant slow down something thats moving that fast in space.

[farbot]

so.....basically they fly the standard 4 segment SRB with a weight simulated 5th segment,a wight simulate upper stage and cargo???i know that might be useful to point out that resonance is horrible and it does not work,but relay,is any part of the new vehicle in this test??(separation/electronics maybe).i heard the engine is a problem.just....build DIRECT

[Abanamat85]

Good job Americans!

[bb4aa]

Go go go baby .... go to the moon ... OK ... this time it is the first test with a lot of dummies, but soon Astronauts go with this vehicle to the ISS, later on to the Moon and much later on to Mars!

[dcb1138]

LETS GO NOW !!!

Enough cartoons....fly the thing

[joachim2464]

not long now, it is going to launch this year!

[MrBennetzen]

Very Impressive.