Author Topic: MLAS - the alternative Orion Launch Abort System gains momentum  (Read 82449 times)

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • Liked: 0
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
I'm glad to see a successful anything in relation to Constellation, Mike's Launch Abort System or not.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7239
  • Liked: 403
Here is the video of the launch on YouTube:

« Last Edit: 07/08/2009 03:48 PM by yg1968 »

Offline SpaceWarper

  • Member
  • Posts: 57
  • Liked: 0
What purposes could MLAS support/handle after launch?
- deorbit
- landing
- something you don't think about?
« Last Edit: 07/08/2009 05:30 PM by SpaceWarper »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9702
  • Liked: 708
    • Space Launch Report
the rockets are under it,and not on the sides?

This test had very little to do with an actual MLAS design.  Motors were different and stabilization system was different. 

Danny Deger

This was a test of the system that will be used to actually test the system.  This test isn't a waste unless one thinks that MLAS itself is a waste. 

In the past, running parallel competitive design efforts like this for high-value programs has proven to be a good idea (Atlas-Titan, Thor-Jupiter, Corona-Samos, Atlas V-Delta IV, Cygnus-Dragon, etc.).  Why not "kick the tires"?

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 07/08/2009 04:28 PM by edkyle99 »

Online Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1525
  • Liked: 55
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
What purposes could MLAS support/handle after launch?
- deorbit
- landing
- something you don't think about?

Wouldn't work:
- deorbit - too much thrust, too high acceleration, too heavy to take it to orbit
- landing - not controlable



Online Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2769
  • Liked: 1
  • Houston, Texas
the rockets are under it,and not on the sides?

This test had very little to do with an actual MLAS design.  Motors were different and stabilization system was different. 

Danny Deger

This was a test of the system that will be used to actually test the system.  This test isn't a waste unless one thinks that MLAS itself is a waste. 

In the past, running parallel competitive design efforts like this for high-value programs has proven to be a good idea (Atlas-Titan, Thor-Jupiter, Corona-Samos, Atlas V-Delta IV, Cygnus-Dragon, etc.).  Why not "kick the tires"?

 - Ed Kyle

I have no problem with a parallel effort, but this test didn't retire any of the risks of the MLAS motors or the MLAS stabilization system -- both of which are very high risk.  At least they could have tested the grid fins during coast.  It did show we can flip, jettison the cover, and land with chutes.  None of these have any risk to them. 

I am not a big fan of the MLAS concept because I don't think it can be kept stable, especially at the very, very high dynamic pressures of Ares.  Griffin may have a PHD in aero and I only a Masters, but he needs to go back to school on control problems in his conceptual designs.  This test did zero in my mind to advance MLAS forward.

Danny Deger
« Last Edit: 07/08/2009 06:14 PM by Danny Dot »
Danny Deger

Offline SpaceWarper

  • Member
  • Posts: 57
  • Liked: 0
What purposes could MLAS support/handle after launch?
- deorbit
- landing
- something you don't think about?

Wouldn't work:
- deorbit - too much thrust, too high acceleration, too heavy to take it to orbit
- landing - not controlable

If you fire just 2 of 4 of the rockets you would get half (symmetric) thrust.
If you can half the size and double these rockets you could have a 1/4 of thrust 4x the time.   I think it's worth about thinking how to combine task of jettison, deorbit and landing.   Does "not controlable" mean you can't shut them off?  How about droping them or drop nozzles for less thrust?  May be there is a reasonable way to improve it!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23641
  • Liked: 1916
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport

If you fire just 2 of 4 of the rockets you would get half (symmetric) thrust.
If you can half the size and double these rockets you could have a 1/4 of thrust 4x the time.   I think it's worth about thinking how to combine task of jettison, deorbit and landing.   Does "not controlable" mean you can't shut them off?  How about droping them or drop nozzles for less thrust?  May be there is a reasonable way to improve it!

No and no again and again.  This has be stated on many threads.
 All those are unreasonable and not worth it. 

A.  It overcomplicates a safety system, which is to be simple for reliability
B.  It will increase the weight of the system
C.  It will reduce payload to orbit.
d.  The booster cover needs to be jettisoned before on orbit

Online Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1525
  • Liked: 55
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
If you fire just 2 of 4 of the rockets you would get half (symmetric) thrust.
You can't. The MLAS would have the motors connected by an manifold, so that they fire all together as one motor to level out thrust differences.

If you can half the size and double these rockets you could have a 1/4 of thrust 4x the time.
See above.

I think it's worth about thinking how to combine task of jettison, deorbit and landing.
   
En contraire. The tasks are too different. Launch abort needs high thrust during a short time. Deorbit should be much gentler. And you have too large mass penalties, if you take the LA system to orbit.

Does "not controlable" mean you can't shut them off? 
Exactly! These are solid fuel motors.

How about droping them or drop nozzles for less thrust?  May be there is a reasonable way to improve it!
No! Launch escape systems have to be as simple as possible to keep them at the highes possible reliability level. It has to work at onece, there would be no second chance.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17075
  • Liked: 209
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
Nice video. Nice launch & recovery.

If nothing else, maybe this will be the only test launch we see of something connected to the current CxP architecture??? Never know.
Congrats to Lewis Hamilton, 2014 F1 Champion!

Offline madscientist197

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1015
  • Liked: 1
If nothing else, maybe this will be the only test launch we see of something connected to the current CxP architecture??? Never know.

Now that's an interesting thought.
John

Offline spfrss

  • Member
  • Posts: 22
  • Liked: 0
If nothing else, maybe this will be the only test launch we see of something connected to the current CxP architecture??? Never know.

Now that's an interesting thought.

Or ANY US manned spaceflight architecture, taking into account the state of the economy and, most important, the person you elected as president.

Mauro

Offline butters

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1529
  • Liked: 175
If nothing else, maybe this will be the only test launch we see of something connected to the current CxP architecture??? Never know.

Now that's an interesting thought.

Or ANY US manned spaceflight architecture, taking into account the state of the economy and, most important, the person you elected as president.

Mauro

Riiight, I'm sure that McCain would have made NASA a top priority...

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1654
  • Liked: 3
  • EU.Ro
Nice video. Nice launch & recovery.

Yes it was. It was worth the long wait.

Quote
If nothing else, maybe this will be the only test launch we see of something connected to the current CxP architecture??? Never know.

Pad Abort - One in New Mexico,
Ares I-X in Florida
and (not launch, but ground test) Development Motor - One in Utah

You have a lot to endure just this year alone ... emoticon below :


Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4834
  • Liked: 598
  • Louisville, CO
Question guys,  I just heard that this test wasn't even of the actual abort motors, but just of the "boost vehicle and parachutes".  Anyone have any information on that?  Does the $30M for MLAS include another launch that actually tests MLAS itself?  Or did we just blow half a DC-X program on the world's biggest model rocket (before Ares-1X)?

~Jon

Tags: