Ares I won't work, says John Young.

[rocketman5000]

Fairly easy is an over simplification. They must do analysis on all types of systems. Including the new natural frequency of the structure, and propulsion etc.

 

[rocketman5000]

Does this make the CG of a Solid booster more stable than a liquid?

 

[j05h]

shuttle_guy - you probably know as much as anyone about this. What are your thoughts on placing such a large payload on top of the SRB? Can the casing handle that much mass from that direction? Do you personally have any reservations about the ARES I? <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

On the shuttle, the SRB's currently carry about the same load. The ET load path to the SRB is through the forward attachments. The ET/Orbiter (also taking account for SSME offloading) put around 350klb on each SRB. The upperstage, interstage, CEV and fwd fustrum on Ares I is around 370-380 klbs

 

[j05h]

That is encouraging news to me. I had thought the SRB loads were along the side with attach points at top and bottom. What about bending of the stack? Do you see any issues from the "hotdog on a pencil" configuration, regardless of the similar mass? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

The aft SRB attach points are only for side loads. All the thrust goes thru the fwd attach points. The shuttle SRB's have to react to the SSME ignition "twang" which would be more than any flight induced bending.

 

[vulture2]

I gave Young and Crippen a briefing back before STS-1. It must have been one of thousands of briefings, on medical procedures, a subject he considered very unlikely to affect the success of the mission. Yet Young had read our entire manual well enough to pick out our mistakes. He knew there was a very real chance he would be killed on STS-1, but after doing everything he could to prepare, he forged ahead. He was, and is, an explorer. <br /><br />He is correct that Orion is overweight and the selection of the ATK booster for the Ares I is technically inexplicable, raising operational costs and introducing failure modes that cannot be mitigated.

 

[no_way]

Its may 23. Anyone called John Young yet ?

 

[tomnackid]

It looks like nasaspacewatch.com has taken down their thread about Young's "big Ares I announcement" for May 23. Seems a tad self serving. If I am mistaken and the thread is still there then I appologize.

 

[frodo1008]

I myself am ready to listen to the man (John Young) that has more and different varied experience in space than any other human being on this planet. By the way John Young does have a bachelor of science degree in aeronautical engineering with highest honors from Georgia Institute of Technology in 1952. <br /><br />While I do fully support NASA in its efforts to go back to the moon, even using the current design, I like John Young (and a lot of others) do have questions about the use of the single stick solids to do the job! <br /><br />At first, when I heard that NASA was going to use this method I thought that is was terrific as using existing space shuttle components seemed to be both the quickest and least expensive method for replacing not only the shuttle, but going on to he moon. However, that was before ATK had asked for NASA to come up with some $3 billion just to design, build and test a new 5 segment SRB!<br /><br />My question now becomes: Would it be less expensive to use the existing Delta IV Heavy by man-rating such a vehicle? At this time I don’t know what the status of the Atlas V Heavy is, as I would think it would depend on what the status of the possible merger of Boeing and LM’s launch business.<br /><br />Don’t get me wrong here, I still fully support NASA’s VSE program, I just have some questions of the methodology being used to achieve it. <br />

 

[vulture2]

>>possible merger of Boeing and LM’s launch business.<br /><br />They have merged; it is now called United Launch Alliance, or ULA ("yula"). At the moment they are continuing to operate both launch vehicles, but Atlas seems to have more launches.

 

[frodo1008]

I think that is good news as neither company could stand alone with the kind of international competition that differences in the exchange rates of currency have given the launch industry. <br /><br />I think there are more general launches for the Atlas than for the Delta IV, as Boeing seems to have realized that there is just too much competition in the total industry and has dropped out. Also, Boeing has put its commercial launch efforts into the Sea Launch program and evidently wants as little commercial competition with that effort (including its own Delta rockets) as is possible.<br /><br />However, I don't think this is the case with the Delta IV Heavy, which is being used only by the US government as a replacement for the Titan IV. And it would be this rocket that would then possibly be ULA's entry for manned launches by NASA. Another reason for this instead of the Atlas V is that the Atlas V Heavy, like the other Atlas rockets is powered by a Russian designed liquid engine, the very good (but to conservative American politicians in particular the Russian) RD180 system. Whereas the Delta IV Heavy is powered by the Rocketdyne designed and built RS68 as an American engine. The less political and more practical reason for the Delta IV being that it has already flown, and the Atlas V has not.<br /><br />My own personal feelings are that NASA should go as far as at least advanced paper studies of the EELV as a rocket to replace the SRB solid propelled single stick configuration. This would have two very good points. One is to spur ATK into keeping its costs and schedules in NASA’s favor. And the other is the more practical and less political one of having a backup in case the single stick should prove to be inadequate for NASA’s missions. I would like to think that the leadership of NASA is already intelligent enough to have also thought of this! <br />