Unemployed Ares I Mobile Launcher set for Crawler trip

[Chris Bergin]

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/07/unemployed-ares-i-mobile-launcher-crawler-trip-august/

[Downix]

There is one other option, build a milkstool on it and use it for a hsf-rated Atlas, Taurus or Delta.  Just me thinking out loud.

[Tim S]

Bolden will probably give it away to SeaWorld to "inspire children about becoming an astronaut".

[Jim]

Bolden will probably give it away to SeaWorld to "inspire children about becoming an astronaut".

Sour grapes.   

[zerm]

What makes everyone so sure that this will not be used for another Ares I-X style test launch?

[Downix]

What makes everyone so sure that this will not be used for another Ares I-X style test launch?

No Ares IX to test launch nor money to build one.

[Mark Max Q]

And the latest vision of Ares tests were with two SRBs.

[brettreds2k]

I understand this was already in the budget for this year, and they cant stop work due to the law in congress, But I cant see how it can be justified to continue work and spend the money on a platform that will once is completed, It will just end up being scrapped anyways.

Why continue the work on it?? We all know there is no shot at Ares anymore, and if this is only limited to working with the Ares design, quit spending the damn money on it.

[zerm]

What makes everyone so sure that this will not be used for another Ares I-X style test launch?

No Ares IX to test launch nor money to build one.

And where exactly is that written? Ditto for the two SRB tests. I've read over both the House and Senate bills and I don't seem to see any of that. Can someone please provide a link?

[rcoppola]

I like the fixed tower idea. Then we would just need a new platform.
Well it's something anyway..

A question though. Can a SD HLV inline with upper stage and capsule, be transported with only base hold down support?

[Jim]

A question though. Can a SD HLV inline with upper stage and capsule, be transported with only base hold down support?

How do you think the shuttle is transported?

[rcoppola]

A question though. Can a SD HLV inline with upper stage and capsule, be transported with only base hold down support?

How do you think the shuttle is transported?

Hi Jim,
Yes I am aware, but wouldn't this inline be much taller then the shuttle stack? Or is there significant weight where stability is assured.

[TrueBlueWitt]

A question though. Can a SD HLV inline with upper stage and capsule, be transported with only base hold down support?

How do you think the shuttle is transported?

Although I do wonder about the taller 2-stage Inline design with a large fairing.. Would their have to be stringent constraints on max wind speeds during the trip to the pad? 

The first bending mode would be much lower(and max deflection higher) than for the Shuttle stack. 

I thought the DIRECT team(at least at some point) had suggested something more like the Atlas V LUT mounted on the Platform.

[renclod]

...
We all know there is no shot at Ares anymore, 

No, we don't.

What we do know - from NASA's Bolden and garver, is that the shot at by-passing Ares I and go straight to heavy lifted CEV, keeping schedule  and cutting funds is, to quote a famous re-vision committee, "an unsustainable trajectory".

==================

Thanks for the article, good news !
The ML will move !

[mr. mark]

Ares 1 if built will be the Amtrak of human spaceflight. With Boeing, Spacex and possibly Orbital most likely getting into the game around the same time what is the point.   

[ChrisGebhardt]

A question though. Can a SD HLV inline with upper stage and capsule, be transported with only base hold down support?

How do you think the shuttle is transported?

Hi Jim,
Yes I am aware, but wouldn't this inline be much taller then the shuttle stack? Or is there significant weight where stability is assured.

Ares I-X was considerably taller than Shuttle and it was rolled out with only four hold down bolts securing the stick to the MLP.

[zerm]

...
We all know there is no shot at Ares anymore, 

No, we don't.

What we do know - from NASA's Bolden and garver, is that the shot at by-passing Ares I and go straight to heavy lifted CEV, keeping schedule  and cutting funds is, to quote a famous re-vision committee, "an unsustainable trajectory".

Actually what we "know" right now is only what has been released in document by the United States Congress- all of which remains in process at this time. I would suggest that we all (including me) go back an read that material and consider what it says and what it does NOT say. Things will become much more clear... or at least as clear as they can be at the moment.

[Ronsmytheiii]

What makes everyone so sure that this will not be used for another Ares I-X style test launch?

Another question is why keep it if it is only for another Ares I-X style launch, MLP-1 did fine for the original Ares I-X

Sad that is will not be used, but hopefully something can be salvaged.

[zerm]

What makes everyone so sure that this will not be used for another Ares I-X style test launch?

Another question is why keep it if it is only for another Ares I-X style launch, MLP-1 did fine for the original Ares I-X

Sad that is will not be used, but hopefully something can be salvaged.

The likely answer there would be "sunk costs" and politically covering them. One shot from that ML covers a world of political be-hind. Additionally, recall that back in May, Nelson asked Bolden about such another test I-X style flight. Bolden answered that from a budget standpoint it would be a good thing, because using the launch vehicle (and the ML/LUT) to test hardware for a different program (now SLS) allows the cost of everything involved to be spread across both programs and thus from a budget standpoint makes the Ares I appear less expensive.

Everyone- please keep in mind that we're not talking engineering value here, we're talking political and budget points of view. Whether or not you think the Ares I(X) is worthwhile from an operational or engineering viewpoint is not the point I'm making here as it applies to Bolden's remarks. I'm citing them strictly from a political and budget point of view. Let us please not begin flame throwing.

[zerm]

That Q&A between Nelson and Bolden is in the May 12 hearing and it comes at 117:17 into the hearing on the archived video. Bolden estimates the savings at being .6B