Author Topic: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?  (Read 112048 times)

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #20 on: 08/13/2011 08:08 PM »
I think in the end it would have been cheaper and quicker to develop "Stumpy" than Ares I. The two side-by-side SRB would have evened out the thrust oscillation problem, and the upper stage could have been lit on the ground, thus allowing use of SSME.

Stumpy was not "real" design.  It was "developed" by ground ops people.

It has no redeeming value.  EELVs could do the job, since there is no re.ation to Ares V
That depended on the particulars of the Ares V.  The stumpy design, upon studying it, would have mirrored one of the EDS configurations which were developed for Ares V.  Switch out the EDS interstage with the original shuttle interstage, and you now have relation, in fact you'd have a lot more relation than you did with Ares I and Ares V.

Still think this is the short term answer.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2006/07/nasa-has-5-seg-clv-alternatives/

The J2-X engine would have to go however.

Use a single SSME, problem solved.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7952
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2157
  • Likes Given: 5101
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #21 on: 08/13/2011 08:16 PM »
Like this... for Ed :)
Jarvis
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline luke strawwalker

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1032
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #22 on: 08/17/2011 01:38 AM »
The problem with Ares I/V was the airlit SSME.  Originally the plan was to develop and use the SSME for both the upper stage of Ares I AND the EDS.  While the airlit SSME WAS possible, RELIGHTING one for a TLI burn on an EDS stage was totally non-viable.  Ergo, J-2S, which COULD be relit, HAD to be on the critical path for the EDS (at least with Ares V as it stood then-- it MIGHT have been possible to replace the pair of J-2S with a cluster of RL-10's on the EDS and forego the development of the J-2S/X completely).  SO, the decision was taken to replace the SSME on the second stage of Ares I with the J-2S, which almost instantly was recognized as being too low a thrust for the massive second stage weight it had to push, leading to the upgrade in thrust, making it J-2X.  The beancounters justified this as paying down the development of Ares V since it would share the same J-2X on the EDS stage. The lower efficiency of J-2X versus SSME (and lower thrust) meant more propellants and thus a larger second stage on Ares I, thus forcing the move to the five segment booster, and the thing just snowballed from there. 

NOW, HAD Ares I kept the airstart single-burn version of SSME on its second stage, and therefore been able to retain the four segment booster revamped as a first stage, Ares I wouldn't have become as convoluted a mess as it was.  I STILL don't think it was the best solution by a LONGSHOT, but it could have worked.  Had the decision to switch Ares V back to SSME for the main core propulsion come about the same time (certainly the thermal environment wouldn't be THAT difficult to work out and put RS-68 out of the running, would it?) then the airlit SSME program could have been justified as an adjunct to a 'disposable SSME' program "sharing costs", which would have made the beancounters happy.  Ares V could then have stayed with four segment boosters with the possibility of an UPGRADE to five segment boosters down the road. 

Personally, I think that Ares I was a road to nowhere, and had the 1.5 launch solution been tossed out early on and development of the four segment SRB/4-5 SSME Ares V been pursued as a "2 launches, 1 rocket" solution (instead of the so called 1.5 launch solution which was really 2 launches of TWO different rockets, and actually FAR less desirable from a commonality/flight rate point of view) for exploration missions, I think we could have had an "affordable" HLV along those lines with Ares I 'along for the ride' for LEO/ISS backup.  Once exploration began, though, obviously Ares I would be pretty much useless and would be phased out. 

That's just my thoughts on "what might have been"... When the whole thing devolved into keeping Ares I no matter HOW stupid, expensive, and behind schedule it got, and forcing Ares V into becoming the "super-duper uber booster that ate NASA's budget", it could only lead to where we are now...

Later!  OL JR :)
NO plan IS the plan...

"His plan had no goals, no timeline, and no budgetary guidelines. Just maybe's, pretty speeches, and smokescreens."


Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8173
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 106
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #24 on: 08/17/2011 02:29 AM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12782
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 610
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #25 on: 08/17/2011 02:42 AM »
Ed.... Say something....
Robert :)

O.K.  Consider this alternative.  We have to go back in time for this.  Back to 2005.  Have NASA develop the ESAS Crew Launch Vehicle with the RS-25 upper stage engine and the four segment booster.  Then use it.  Don't spend billions more for Ares V.  Fly lots of Ares I rockets, using the unparalleled scoot and shoot capability of LC 39 - the purpose for which it was originally designed, and go to the Moon using LEO rendezvous as Von Braun intended.  Use the Ares I upper stage as the basis for propellant depot and TLI stage. 

After the program is underway, if deemed helpful, NASA could go ahead and develop five-segment booster or liquid RP booster.  Either would push payload up to 35 or more tonnes to LEO. 

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #26 on: 08/17/2011 04:15 AM »

Still think this is the short term answer.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2006/07/nasa-has-5-seg-clv-alternatives/

The J2-X engine would have to go however.


Stumpy!! ;D
I still love Stumpy, in all of it's... stumpyness.  8)

chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 664
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #27 on: 08/17/2011 05:44 AM »
IMO the biggest problem with Ares I/V were that there was two launch vehicles to begin with. NASA cannot afford to own and operate two different launch vehicles. The only time they could was during the Apollo era budgets.

They should have settled on a compromise... Like the Jupiter 130. They had all the pieces practically in place! Oh well.

Now SLS seems to be slowly heading for an early cancellation. Imagine what could have been done if Griffin & company had not decided to build "the largest rocket EVAH!"  ;D

Perhaps it was an inevitable result of the institutional rot of NASA over the last decades. Hopefully something leaner and greater will rise in its place. NASA will remain, the only question is how it will be changed.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2011 05:45 AM by Lars_J »

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7952
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2157
  • Likes Given: 5101
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #28 on: 08/17/2011 12:44 PM »
Ed.... Say something....
Robert :)

O.K.  Consider this alternative.  We have to go back in time for this.  Back to 2005.  Have NASA develop the ESAS Crew Launch Vehicle with the RS-25 upper stage engine and the four segment booster.  Then use it.  Don't spend billions more for Ares V.  Fly lots of Ares I rockets, using the unparalleled scoot and shoot capability of LC 39 - the purpose for which it was originally designed, and go to the Moon using LEO rendezvous as Von Braun intended.  Use the Ares I upper stage as the basis for propellant depot and TLI stage. 

After the program is underway, if deemed helpful, NASA could go ahead and develop five-segment booster or liquid RP booster.  Either would push payload up to 35 or more tonnes to LEO. 

 - Ed Kyle
Thank you for your thoughts Ed :)
BTW, I'm enjoying the Jupiter history page.
Regards
Robert
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #29 on: 08/17/2011 03:17 PM »
Ed.... Say something....
Robert :)

O.K.  Consider this alternative.  We have to go back in time for this.  Back to 2005.  Have NASA develop the ESAS Crew Launch Vehicle with the RS-25 upper stage engine and the four segment booster.  Then use it.  Don't spend billions more for Ares V.  Fly lots of Ares I rockets, using the unparalleled scoot and shoot capability of LC 39 - the purpose for which it was originally designed, and go to the Moon using LEO rendezvous as Von Braun intended.  Use the Ares I upper stage as the basis for propellant depot and TLI stage. 

After the program is underway, if deemed helpful, NASA could go ahead and develop five-segment booster or liquid RP booster.  Either would push payload up to 35 or more tonnes to LEO. 

 - Ed Kyle
I can raise you one, and save a ton of money in the process. Don't develop Ares I at all and launch those payloads on EELV. When the need for more lift is there, peruse one of the evolution options.

Without Ares V, Ares I had no purpose for existing.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline strangequark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Co-Founder, Tesseract Space
  • Mojave, CA
  • Liked: 212
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #30 on: 08/17/2011 04:03 PM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

Definitely. But why?
Don't flippantly discount the old rules of this industry. Behind each one lies a painful lesson learned from broken, twisted hardware. Learn those lessons, and respect the knowledge gained from them. Only then, see if you can write new rules that will meet those challenges.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7952
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2157
  • Likes Given: 5101
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #31 on: 08/17/2011 04:05 PM »
"Big Bunker Buster Bomb"? :D
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #32 on: 08/17/2011 04:22 PM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

Definitely. But why?
I think SRB-X used an air-lit SRB as it's main stage.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 700
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #33 on: 08/17/2011 05:25 PM »

Still think this is the short term answer.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2006/07/nasa-has-5-seg-clv-alternatives/

The J2-X engine would have to go however.


Stumpy!! ;D

shame on you had to look it up!

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=3537.0

edit: next time i should click the link on the page.hehhe
« Last Edit: 08/18/2011 12:12 AM by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1663
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #34 on: 08/17/2011 05:42 PM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

A solid rocket motor with class 1.3 propellant was "successfully ignited, terminated the burn, and then re-ignited " in 2003 - though not in flight but in static firing test.
Start - Stop - Start.


Offline racshot65

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2580
  • Aaron Kalair
  • Coventry, England
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #35 on: 08/17/2011 07:20 PM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

A solid rocket motor with class 1.3 propellant was "successfully ignited, terminated the burn, and then re-ignited " in 2003 - though not in flight but in static firing test.
Start - Stop - Start.



I always thought SRB's couldn't be stopped without destroying them once they were lit ?

How did they do it ?

Offline Alpha Control

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #36 on: 08/17/2011 07:50 PM »
Can a SRB be airlit?

A solid rocket motor with class 1.3 propellant was "successfully ignited, terminated the burn, and then re-ignited " in 2003 - though not in flight but in static firing test.
Start - Stop - Start.



I always thought SRB's couldn't be stopped without destroying them once they were lit ?

How did they do it ?

That's what I thought, too. The solid fuel mixture has both fuel and oxidizer in it, so how do you shut that down once it has started burning?
Space launches attended:
Antares/Cygnus ORB-D1 Wallops Island, VA Sept 2013 | STS-123 KSC, FL March 2008 | SpaceShipOne Mojave, CA June 2004


Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #38 on: 08/17/2011 08:28 PM »
How did they do it ?
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ATK+Successfully+Conducts+Its+First-Ever+Start-Stop-Start+Solid...-a0131555528


Ok, so it's a pre-designed shutoff, not whereby you can shut off something already underway in case of emergency.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1663
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Could Ares 1 have Worked if things had been different?
« Reply #39 on: 08/17/2011 08:33 PM »
How did they do it ?
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ATK+Successfully+Conducts+Its+First-Ever+Start-Stop-Start+Solid...-a0131555528


Ok, so it's a pre-designed shutoff, not whereby you can shut off something already underway in case of emergency.

 It has a variable area nozzle (pintle nozzle) which they can control to reduce the internal pressure at any time in flight, and so terminate burn.

It is "pre-designed", of course !

« Last Edit: 08/17/2011 08:35 PM by renclod »

Tags: