Author Topic: Remembering Ares I-X 10 years on (multiple views) (Read 98285 times)

Chris Bergin · « **on:** 10/28/2019 05:04 pm »

The one and only launch of the Ares rocket program, Ares I-X was a single four seg booster with a dummy upper stage simulator.

To mark its 10th anniversary (October 28, 2009 launch), here's a bunch of clips and photos, a lot from L2 to make it more interesting.

1) Push test in the VAB. They did this with Saturn V to check the pad GSE could handle the vehicle being rocked by windy conditions.

2) NASA TV launch for the opening part of first stage.

3) L2 photo (NASA NSF Member) of MaxQ.

4) L2 Chase Plane footage of first stage and staging. Note, a cable didn't disconnect, causing additional rotation on the dummy upper stage.

5) Two L2 clips of additional staging footage.

6) Back to L2 Chase Plane footage of the booster returning, with one of the three chutes failing.

7) L2 photos of the booster at Port Canaveral with the dent from the hard landing.

joseph.a.navin · « **Reply #1 on:** 12/02/2019 06:22 pm »

Great video of the Ares-1X launch! I know it had it's problems but in my opinion Ares-1 looked really cool

Sadly, this now marks 10 years from the last launch from LC-39B

Rocket Science · « **Reply #2 on:** 12/02/2019 08:38 pm »

What a "blast from the past"... Looking forward to that next NA$A rocket show...

mike robel · « **Reply #3 on:** 12/07/2019 05:46 am »

Hmph. 10 years. How depressing I find this.

JIS · « **Reply #4 on:** 01/30/2020 11:47 am »

It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

Jim · « **Reply #5 on:** 03/16/2021 01:09 am »

Quote from: JIS on 01/30/2020 11:47 am

It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

It was POS back then and still one now. Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

sdsds · « **Reply #6 on:** 03/16/2021 01:16 am »

Here's what Popular Mechanics said:

Quote

But some within the space agency complain that the Ares I is a pet project of NASA boss Michael Griffin and former exploration chief Scott Horowitz. Before coming to NASA, Griffin, an aerospace engineer, co-authored a technical paper for the Planetary Society that proposed a rocket strikingly similar to the Ares I. Horowitz had previously promoted an Ares-like concept while a senior executive at ATK Thiokol, the manufacturer of the solid rocket booster that subsequently became the first stage of the Ares I. "The fix was in from the beginning," says a NASA contract engineer involved in the process. "Other configurations never had a chance."

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a3845/4295233/

Proponent · « **Reply #7 on:** 03/16/2021 02:50 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am

Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

What made SRB-X worse?

Jim · « **Reply #8 on:** 03/16/2021 03:58 pm »

Quote from: Proponent on 03/16/2021 02:50 pm

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am
Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

What made SRB-X worse?

truss, third SRB, Titan second stage

edkyle99 · « **Reply #9 on:** 03/16/2021 08:49 pm »

Worse than what? Titan IV, which failed more than 10% of the time and ended up costing 1/2 billion dollars per launch?

- Ed Kyle

clongton · « **Reply #10 on:** 03/16/2021 08:57 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am

Quote from: JIS on 01/30/2020 11:47 am
It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

It was POS back then and still one now. Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

Biggest bottle rocket in history. Bent like one too.

Jim · « **Reply #11 on:** 03/16/2021 10:08 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 03/16/2021 08:49 pm

Worse than what?

Worse Idea or configuration.

Titan IV had an implementation problem.

eric z · « **Reply #12 on:** 03/31/2021 08:26 pm »

I'm curious if Jim or someone could comment on how much NASA might have learned by firing off an SRB or two pre-STS full-stack flights? Would there have been some technical, safety or operational and maintenance issues that could have been learned by such tests? I know budget was tight...Thanks.

Jim · « **Reply #13 on:** 04/01/2021 01:36 am »

Quote from: eric z on 03/31/2021 08:26 pm

I'm curious if Jim or someone could comment on how much NASA might have learned by firing off an SRB or two pre-STS full-stack flights? Would there have been some technical, safety or operational and maintenance issues that could have been learned by such tests? I know budget was tight...Thanks.

Not much. It would have been negative work. Would have needed a guidance system and roll control system like I-X. They did plenty of static firings

Comga · « **Reply #14 on:** 04/01/2021 02:29 am »

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am

Quote from: JIS on 01/30/2020 11:47 am
It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

It was POS back then and still one now.
Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

Full sentences from Jim!

Sentiments I wholeheartedly agree with.
Except that I almost forgot about SRB-X
The worlds largest (class EE!) worst model rocket ever. And I love big model rockets.
Sorry to any Ares-1X fans

FinalFrontier · « **Reply #15 on:** 04/01/2021 02:37 am »

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am

Quote from: JIS on 01/30/2020 11:47 am
It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

It was POS back then and still one now. Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.

Agree. Was rather funny to watch however or at least it would have been if not for realizing the massive amount of $ and wasted time it constituted.

woods170 · « **Reply #16 on:** 04/01/2021 08:07 am »

Quote from: FinalFrontier on 04/01/2021 02:37 am

Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2021 01:09 am
Quote from: JIS on 01/30/2020 11:47 am
It is still beautiful rocket. It's been over 10 years. BTW, this is my first comment at NSF also after over 10 years.

It was POS back then and still one now. Second worse rocket design after SRB-X.
Agree. Was rather funny to watch however or at least it would have been if not for realizing the massive amount of $ and wasted time it constituted.

~$400 million was wasted on the glorified model rocket known as Ares I-X.

yg1968 · « **Reply #17 on:** 04/04/2021 08:26 pm »

https://twitter.com/DavidWillisSLS/status/1378555403756134401

Hog · « **Reply #18 on:** 04/05/2021 03:20 pm »

Quote from: Rocket Science on 12/02/2019 08:38 pm

What a "blast from the past"... Looking forward to that next NA$A rocket show...

This time we'll get to see what an actual fully fueled 5 segment SRM looks like when fired in launch position. We humans haven't experienced such an event, as of yet. Let alone having 2 of them firing at once. No "mass simulator" on top of a 4 segment SRM like for Ares 1-X.

8 megapounds of solid propellant glory off the ML is going to be awesome!

Was there even a grain change for ARES 1-X? or was it straight up RSRM technology?
A true 5 segment SRM required grain changes to certain positions of the SRM stack and the larger nozzle hole such as with RSRM-V that are stacked for flight in the VAB as I type.

New boosters, new tank, and running 4 RS-25s at 109%RPL for 8'ish minutes. Heck I'd LOVE to see the CT/ML(Crawler Transporter/Mobile Launcher data for the VAB to LC-39B Artemis-1 move. At least another 8 megapounds more load as compared to STS. 12 vs. 20 at least when comparing the ratings of the CT's for STS and SLS usage.
Artemis-1 is going to be a very interesting test shot for sure.

jackvancouver · « **Reply #19 on:** 04/23/2023 10:15 pm »

Do I dare reboot this thread because of Ryan?

https://twitter.com/ThePrimalDino/status/1649789023638921218

It's RYAN'S fault if this thread revives, not mine!

(mods delete if inappropriate)