Ares I-X Launch Video

Looks like its going slow but I think that is a sonic boom you see forming at the nose. Cool stuff.
 
Hybridchild said:
I'm glad I don't pay tax in the US :eek:
Click to expand...

I would rather my tax dollars give a boost to NASA's budget and not companies like AIG, GM and such.

I had the stream up since 8 AM waiting for that damn thing to lift off lol.

as a side note, if you have never seen any launches in person, go do it!
 
k1pp3r said:
I would rather my tax dollars give a boost to NASA's budget and not companies like AIG, GM and such.
Click to expand...

Amen brother...

The pursuit of sciences and knowledge will be our country's salvation.
 
Only thing that bugs me is that this will almost certainly be a waste. Not one single scientific body in all of NASA or the world at large see's the Ares program ever being completed. This demonstration was just a glorious display of wishful thinking, but the budgetary money is simply not there to recreate the apollo program all over again. The only way we're getting back to the moon, or more importantly mars, is another super-charged infusion of cash a'la space race. While there may not be anybody interested in racing us anywhere, we need that kind of drive to get our space program back into high gear. The only way we're ever getting to Mars is on a nuclear rocket, and that would require a completely new propulsion design, which means lots of money funding totally new technology. The Iraq war could have paid for this, along with the bailouts... Thats two missed opportunities, how sad :( ..
 
I view this more as a move by NASA to say "YES WE CAN" to the boys in DC, sadly, Obama is reviewing our manned spaceflight plans and will probably axe the program, which will be stupid and childish. NASA has created some great technologies in their time and has been a part of the US for a long time.

I hope that Obama doesn't axe the Ares rocket, doing so would make me loose what little faith i have in him as a leader, and i already don't approve of him running the country.

China has already announced it wants to send a man to the moon, and will do it , question is, will the US care?
 
uviuar2 said:
Only thing that bugs me is that this will almost certainly be a waste. Not one single scientific body in all of NASA or the world at large see's the Ares program ever being completed. This demonstration was just a glorious display of wishful thinking, but the budgetary money is simply not there to recreate the apollo program all over again. The only way we're getting back to the moon, or more importantly mars, is another super-charged infusion of cash a'la space race. While there may not be anybody interested in racing us anywhere, we need that kind of drive to get our space program back into high gear. The only way we're ever getting to Mars is on a nuclear rocket, and that would require a completely new propulsion design, which means lots of money funding totally new technology. The Iraq war could have paid for this, along with the bailouts... Thats two missed opportunities, how sad :( ..
Click to expand...

Actually there is a non Nuclear rocket that will get to Mars in 39 days, So a Nuclear Rocket is not needed(I'm not against nuclear power or unproven nuclear rockets, It's an expense that's not needed for Mars, So why waste money on It?), A nuclear powerplant for the landing stage and maybe a smaller one for the orbiting unmanned command ship, sure. But a Rocket? Why?

Plasma Rocket Could Travel to Mars in 39 Days

Google Search - rocket that will get to Mars in 39 days
 
Lame, posting about the Ares rocket instead of dancing MIT students.

:D
 
uviuar2 said:
Only thing that bugs me is that this will almost certainly be a waste. Not one single scientific body in all of NASA or the world at large see's the Ares program ever being completed. This demonstration was just a glorious display of wishful thinking, but the budgetary money is simply not there to recreate the apollo program all over again. The only way we're getting back to the moon, or more importantly mars, is another super-charged infusion of cash a'la space race. While there may not be anybody interested in racing us anywhere, we need that kind of drive to get our space program back into high gear. The only way we're ever getting to Mars is on a nuclear rocket, and that would require a completely new propulsion design, which means lots of money funding totally new technology. The Iraq war could have paid for this, along with the bailouts... Thats two missed opportunities, how sad :( ..
Click to expand...


The biggested difference between now and then was the acceptability of the loss of life. Now if we blow up a rocket and loose 10 people it's an epic disaster, then it was accepted that it would happen and was part of the cost. If we would return to that mentality, the cost could come waaay down. Now before anyone yells about how human life is priceless, there are lots of peope who would be more than willing to take the risk because they view the reward as worth it. If you have an issue with those people's view on the value of their own lives, take it up with them. I'm just stating the differences between now and then.
 
Almost $450M for a two minute flight

The cost for the space shuttle launch is the same. Even if they didn't get there wish to do everything they want like going to Mars. They need to replace the space shuttle with something. I would have thought that a one time launch of a non reusable rocket would have been cheaper though?
 
jkerr2 said:
Almost $450M for a two minute flight

The cost for the space shuttle launch is the same. Even if they didn't get there wish to do everything they want like going to Mars. They need to replace the space shuttle with something. I would have thought that a one time launch of a non reusable rocket would have been cheaper though?
Click to expand...

Not really, while the design of the first stage was based on the shuttles solid rocket booster, that stuck over 700 sensors in it, and built the motor to handle a fifth segment (5th segment was a fake in this test). Not to mention they built a dummy upper stage of the rocket.

$450 million honestly is pretty cheap to develop a rocket motor and launch it.
 
jkerr2 said:
Almost $450M for a two minute flight

The cost for the space shuttle launch is the same. Even if they didn't get there wish to do everything they want like going to Mars. They need to replace the space shuttle with something. I would have thought that a one time launch of a non reusable rocket would have been cheaper though?
Click to expand...

Depends on how you calculate cost. Are you just calculating the cost of the vehicle that was used or is it the total sum of all expenses paid so far towards the project.

You can go out and get a plastic part made for 5 cents a piece, but you'll spend 50,000$ on the tool. Does the first one then cost you 5 cents or 50,000.05$? It's all in how you do your accounting.
 
i agree that 450mil to get a good test bed lauch of the next platform is relatively cheap...only the upper sections of the rocket will be trashed, the rest can/will be recovered and used again, much like the SRBs on the shuttle. as with most things political(NASA not withstanding) there are many different facets as to why things are done and the behind closed doors aspects, for the geeks in white coats though, they'll be pouring over data til mid 2010 at least from this one test. manned flight on the Ares platform may be a ways off, but the US needs a heavy lifting platform and the bigger models of Ares is designed to do just that, do you REALLY trust the russians and their old as hell Soyuz to do all the heavy lifting? i mean...REALLY? ;)
 
B1zz said:
do you REALLY trust the russians and their old as hell Soyuz to do all the heavy lifting? i mean...REALLY? ;)
Click to expand...

The Soyuz is a good rocket, but lacks the lifting strenght to even build the ISS, that heavy lifting was done by the shuttle, which was decent at low earth orbit.

Has the Soyuz been used to deliver anything more than people or supplies?
 
k1pp3r said:
I view this more as a move by NASA to say "YES WE CAN" to the boys in DC, sadly, Obama is reviewing our manned spaceflight plans and will probably axe the program, which will be stupid and childish. NASA has created some great technologies in their time and has been a part of the US for a long time.

I hope that Obama doesn't axe the Ares rocket, doing so would make me loose what little faith i have in him as a leader, and i already don't approve of him running the country.

China has already announced it wants to send a man to the moon, and will do it , question is, will the US care?
Click to expand...

Why would we care. we've already done that.
Now when China announces it wants to go to Mars, hold your hats boys, because that will light a fire under the American Space program. Just not sure if the fire will destroy the program or propell it to Mars to beat the Chinese.
 
Jakalwarrior said:
Looks like its going slow but I think that is a sonic boom you see forming at the nose. Cool stuff.
Click to expand...

I live about 20 miles south of the cape I didn't hear a boom. We were expecting at least a little rumble (we can feel the shuttle some time after it goes up).
 
k1pp3r said:
China has already announced it wants to send a man to the moon, and will do it , question is, will the US care?
Click to expand...

We've been there and done that. We'll probably start giving a shit when they say they're going to colonize Mars.
 
I am perfectly happy having my tax money go to NASA, even if some consider it a waste. It kills me because we can give billions to stupid companies that should go under for their bad business practices, money which we'll never see returns on, and yet, our retarded gov continues to take money from nasa and then they wonder why we cant go back to the moon. The gov panel concluded if all stays the same, no way there will be a human trip in 2020.
really, they only give nasa a 18 bill budget. WTF!!! not even 1% of the federal budget. Actually, its only 0.6% of our 2.9 trillian budget (2008). Take medicaid out of my check and give it to nasa.
 
It is being worked on. NASA is funding research for focused fusion in the hope that even if it doesn't work economically as a power source it will make long range relatively high power fusion engines. Granted they'd be useless for lifting off; because they work under vacuum conditions, but once you're in orbit you could fire the thing up and get an enormous amount of thrust for a long period of time (relative to say ion engines) with a very little fuel. I was reading about their efforts on this front a couple weeks ago and the concept is very cool.
 
k1pp3r said:
The Soyuz is a good rocket, but lacks the lifting strenght to even build the ISS, that heavy lifting was done by the shuttle, which was decent at low earth orbit.

Has the Soyuz been used to deliver anything more than people or supplies?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station#Pressurised_modules

The Soyuz brought up a docking port (for the Soyuz no less) but the first ISS module was sent up on a Russian Proton rocket, as well as the crews main living quarters.

I want to see footage of the separation. Do they show that?
 
We can argue about numbers and money appropriations all day, but watching a new rocket on its maiden flight makes me proud of this country and what we can do.
 
I suppose not being a rocket expert makes me not qualified to pass an opinion, but I will anyway or else what the fuck is a forum for ;).

Why ARES when DIRECT (wikipedia is your friend if you don't know what this is) makes more sense ?? Maybe I'm just uninformed, but comparing the two it seems readily apparent and obvious except one gives NASA a TON of money and obviously a lot of others jobs on the tax payer dime. Seems like incentive to me to down play a cheaper better way to go. I'm usually pretty independent, usually lean more left, but shit this type of apparent blatant waste makes me bat-shit crazy. I guess if you know enough about NASA there just appears to be a ton of pet projects and other bullshit in the way of real progress. We need TWO separate rockets? ARES V looks like a huge expense compared to finding ways to expand on currently existing, shown "safe", and proven otherwise technology.

Call me crazy I guess.
 
launchx.jpg


Congrats to the Ares I-X team. Lets get this thing flying ASAP.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
what can I say, the space program is one of my greatest inspirations, and the lack of coverage/care from most of the population, let alone a tech site, disgusts me...
Click to expand...

what i mean to say in short: few things get me more worked up than the American space program....
 
defuseme2k said:
I suppose not being a rocket expert makes me not qualified to pass an opinion, but I will anyway or else what the fuck is a forum for ;).

Why ARES when DIRECT (wikipedia is your friend if you don't know what this is) makes more sense ?? Maybe I'm just uninformed, but comparing the two it seems readily apparent and obvious except one gives NASA a TON of money and obviously a lot of others jobs on the tax payer dime. Seems like incentive to me to down play a cheaper better way to go. I'm usually pretty independent, usually lean more left, but shit this type of apparent blatant waste makes me bat-shit crazy. I guess if you know enough about NASA there just appears to be a ton of pet projects and other bullshit in the way of real progress. We need TWO separate rockets? ARES V looks like a huge expense compared to finding ways to expand on currently existing, shown "safe", and proven otherwise technology.

Call me crazy I guess.
Click to expand...

I wish i could find the space.com article that cited a bunch of studies but i can't

In short the Orion spacecraft was designed to launch on the Ares 1-X and V rocket motors, to use commercial scale rockets (which a few have blown up recently after liftoff) would cost around $25 billion dollars to retro fit the orion capsule to the commercial rockets. However changin to the commercial rocket would say like $30 billion - the retrofit.

So to save $5 - 10 billion at this point simply isn't worth scrapping the ares project, at least not in my opinion.
 
defuseme2k said:
Why ARES when DIRECT (wikipedia is your friend if you don't know what this is) makes more sense
Click to expand...

DIRECT might have led to cheaper and faster development of a Shuttle replacement, but a lot of engineers disagree with those assertions and say the DIRECT proposal underestimates its cost. Also, the proposed heavy lift variants of the DIRECT Jupiter class rockets would be significantly less capable than the Ares V and would have required 2 heavy launch vehicles and more complicated orbital construction/docking for lunar missions.

The R&D costs for the full Ares program might be more than the Shuttle-derived or commercial options, but the work on Ares I will be very beneficial later on. All of the proposed options are cheaper than the Space Shuttle program, so we really can't go wrong.
 
k1pp3r said:
I wish i could find the space.com article that cited a bunch of studies but i can't

In short the Orion spacecraft was designed to launch on the Ares 1-X and V rocket motors, to use commercial scale rockets (which a few have blown up recently after liftoff) would cost around $25 billion dollars to retro fit the orion capsule to the commercial rockets. However changin to the commercial rocket would say like $30 billion - the retrofit.

So to save $5 - 10 billion at this point simply isn't worth scrapping the ares project, at least not in my opinion.
Click to expand...

DIRECT isn't a commercial rocket system. Its a way of reusing existing shuttle based systems and could lift orion without this retrofit as I understand it.
 
So when the shuttle is gone we have no way of getting heavy objects into orbit like pieces of the ISS? We have relegated ourselves to simple manned missions just for the sake of going up there and launching satellites?
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
what can I say, the space program is one of my greatest inspirations, and the lack of coverage/care from most of the population, let alone a tech site, disgusts me...
Click to expand...

I like how Dailytech does their International Space Updates every once in a while.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top