ares Archives - Rainer Gerhards

2008-10-222019-07-15

India is going to the moon…

Everybody seems to want to go the moon these days. Russia does, China does, Europe, as usual, “says” it does (if someone else provides the ferry ship ;)) and the US, of course, will, too.

Today, India has launched a moon mission, just to tell us they, too, are serious about this topic. A rocket carrying the Chandrayaan-1 probe rocketed into the skies at India’s spaceport Sriharikota. Chandrayaan-1’s mission will last two years. It is tasked to create a detailed map of minerals and chemical properties of the moon surfaces, as well as general surface structures.

The moon seems to promise big business. It is also politically quite important. With the US right in front of a very important election, it will be very interesting to see which direction the new administration will take. NASA’s constellation program is underfunded and has unrealistic goals if being worked on at the current (finance-dictated) pace.

Will the US be among the last folks to go back to the moon? The Russians are on a good path already and seem to have funding and a commercial vision. Or will a new moon race start, where the US demonstrates technical leadership? Interesting question, time will tell. At least we have a new player who seems to be serious inside this game…

2008-10-172019-07-15

NASA’s Ares I Rocket Passes Review To Reach Critical Milestone

NASA has taken a major step toward building the nation’s next generation launch vehicle with Wednesday’s successful completion of the Ares I rocket preliminary design review.

Starting in 2015, the Ares I rocket will launch the Orion crew exploration vehicle, its crew of four to six astronauts, and small cargo payloads to the International Space Station. The rocket also will be used for missions to explore the moon and beyond in the coming decades.

The preliminary design review is the first such milestone in more than 35 years for a U.S. rocket that will carry astronauts into space. The review was conducted at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. It examined the current design for the Ares I launch vehicle to assess that the planned technical approach will meet NASA’s requirements for the fully integrated vehicle. That ensures all components of the vehicle and supporting systems are designed to work together.

“This is a critical step for development of the Ares I rocket,” said Rick Gilbrech, associate administrator of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate in Washington. “Completing the preliminary design review of the integrated vehicle demonstrates our engineering design and development are on sound footing, and the Ares I design work is taking us another step closer to building America’s next mode of space transportation.”

The preliminary design review included more than 1,100 reviewers from seven NASA field centers and multiple industry partners. The review is the final step of this design process. Teams representing each major part of the Ares I rocket — the upper stage engine, first stage and upper stage — all have conducted similar reviews during the past year.

The preliminary design review is one of a series of reviews that occurs before actual flight hardware can be built. As the review process progresses, more detailed parts of the vehicle design are assessed to ensure the overall system can meet all NASA requirements for safe and reliable flight. This process also identifies technical and management challenges and addresses ways to reduce potential risks as the project goes forward.

“Risk assessment is a very important part of the process,” said Steve Cook, manager of the Ares I rocket at Marshall. “It allows us to identify issues that might impact the Ares I rocket. For example, we identified thrust oscillation – vibration in the first stage – as a risk. In response to this issue, we formed an engineering team. The team conducted detailed analyses and reviewed previous test data, and then recommended options to correct the problem.”

“We intend to hold a limited follow-up review next summer to fully incorporate the thrust oscillation recommendations into the stacked vehicle design,” Cook added. “Identifying risks that can impact the project and resolving them is a necessary and vital part of the development process.”

With the completion of this review, each element of the Ares I rocket will move to the detailed design phase. A critical design review will mark the completion of the detailed design phase and allows for a more thorough review of each system element to ensure the vehicle design can achieve requirements of the Ares program.

This week, the J-2X engine will be the first Ares I element to kick off the critical design review process. The engine will power the Ares I upper stage to orbit after separation from the first stage.

“We’re excited about getting into full system engine tests with the new J-2X engine,” Cook said. “This will be one of the safest, most affordable and highest performing rocket engines ever built, and testing is critical as we begin preparation for future flights.”

Marshall manages the Ares projects and is responsible for design and development of the Ares I rocket and Ares V heavy cargo launch vehicle. NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston manages the Constellation Program, which includes the Ares I rocket, the Ares V vehicle, the Orion crew capsule and the Altair lunar lander. NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida is responsible for ground and launch operations. The program also includes multiple project element teams at NASA centers and contract organizations around the U.S.

For more information about the Ares rockets, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/ares

For more information about NASA’s Constellation Program, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/constellation

2007-12-04

Ares, Constellation, Orion, …

Sounds like pretty new terms? They are all about NASA’s next space program. The Constellation program is simply what is also called the “Vision for Space Exploration“.

In short, it means that new launchers and crew vehicles will be developed to ferry people to the international space station ISS, later on to the moon and even later to Mars. Ares is what the launchers are being called. Ares I will be the rocket that launches humans into space while Ares V is a heavy-lift rocket used to launch the heavy equipment. Finally, Orion is the name of the new crew capsules, also known as “Crew Exploration Vehicle”.

It looks quite doable to return to the moon, but sending humans to Mars is much more challenging. A lot of work needs to be done to solve the issues. I am sure they can be solved if we try hard enough, but the question is if there will be budget allocated to do so.

The Constellation program borrows heavily both from the Apollo as well as the Space Shuttle programs. For example, the overall launcher and capsule design is based on Apollo. The shuttle program contributes its boosters. Some folks tend to say that Constellation becomes more and more an Apollo V2, especially as the budget is quite constrained. It is not yet clear how far resuable the Orion capsules will be.

In my blog, I write about Constellation, Ares and Orion. While it is quite early to know any specifics, it is an interesting time to watch development. If you are interested in a specific topic, just follow the relevant labels.

2007-11-30

John Glenn on the NASA Budget

I had the pleasure to be able to listen to great American hero and former Senator John Glenn at World Space Expo 2007. The event was held in November this year in Kennedy Space Center, Florida.

Both John Glenn and Scott Carpenter were honored guest on the evening event. Apollo 15 astronaut Al Worden discussed with them over their experiences as well as their visions for the future. I take some videos of that event. Thankfully, I also captures John Glenn’s speech on the future NASA budget. He very rightfully stressed that fact that Constellation, NASA’s new moon program, has taken a lot of money from science missions. He explains that there is no special funding for the whole constellation program. But listen yourself:

This speech couldn’t be more on-time: Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is thinking about taking that Constellation money from NASA to fund education. So I think it is good to know the fact that NASA has not received any special funding and is already starving in its science activities.

If you listen closely, however, you will notice that John Glenn assigns science priority over the moon program. But that doesn’t mean that money taken away from science should now be removed from the budget at all…

2007-11-25

Space Shuttle

I thought its time to write a bit about the space shuttle itself. As many say, it is the world’s most complex machine ever built.

The space shuttle made its maiden flight on April, 12th 1981 and will, based on current plans, be retired in 2010 after completing the construction of the international space station, its current primary target.

The space shuttle was developed as a replacement for the Apollo spacecrafts. Contrary to Apollo, it can reach low earth orbit, only. It is not capable to go to the moon.

The space shuttle’s major components are the boosters, external tank and the orbiter. The orbiter is the airplane-shaped white “ship” that is commonly called “the shuttle”, though it is only part of it. The reddish external tank contains ascent fuel. And the white booster rockets on the sides of the external tank provide the main propulsion for the initial flight phase after launch.

Its main feature was reusability of most parts. Only the external tank is lost on launch, the boosters glide back to earth on parachutes after separation from the craft. The initial design called for huge savings from that fact – something the space shuttle could not life up to. Some sources quote that NASA expected to have as much as one flight per week and the shuttle to replace all other launch vehicles. In practice, only a few launches per year were achievable and each of them being much more expensive than initially thought.

The space shuttle program was compromised by budget cuts in its early design phase. Initially, it was planned to have the actual orbiter sitting on top of the external tank and boosters. There would obviously be a different design for the main engines in this concept, too. The then-chosen configuration with the orbiter being mounted to the side of these components is a trouble source until today. It exposes the shuttle to launch debris, for example parts of the external tanks foam isolation that fall off during launch.

Launch debris is very hard to avoid. On launch, each spacecraft is shaken quite well. So chances are great something will go off. With all designs but the space shuttle, this poses no problem, because no vital system can be hit by such debris. If you look at Apollo-days Saturn V launches, you will see lots of ice falling off, but the crew capsule and their support system sat well protected above the debris source. Consequently, NASA’s new constellation moon program designs an Apollo-like craft with the vital systems again sitting on top of the launch propulsion system.

In my personal opinion, the space shuttle is a good example why budget constrains should not overrule engineering decisions. NASA paid badly for the initial savings…

Besides that problem, the space shuttle is an incredible and fascinating machine. Among its many great achievements is the delivery and continued servicing of the Hubble Space Telescope. Also, construction of the international space station ISS depends on space shuttles doing the heavy hauling. The space shuttle is also the only spacecraft ever capable to capture massive satellites in orbit and deliver them back to earth.

The space shuttle is also very inspiring. Viewing a space shuttle launch is a special experience.

Astronauts also praise the space shuttle for its roominess and the smooth ascent and descent, which puts very low G-forces on the crew.

NASA’s future constellation space program borrows heavily both at the space shuttle and Apollo programs. It is expected to get the best of two worlds. For example, Ares rockets will fly modified space shuttle boosters.

So while the space shuttle has some weaknesses, it is a very successful craft that not only contributed significantly to science, but will also help pave the way to the Moon, Mars and beyond. In my personal opinion, even the weaknesses were kind of success: they proved which things needed to be done differently. And, of course, a lot of issues were already fixed during the lifetime of the space shuttle program.

Currently, the shuttle fleet is set to retire in 2010. This is a political decision not backed by hard technical fact. In my personal opinion, I would like to see the space shuttle flying at least once a year until the Ares I and Orion vehicles are ready to launch. Of course, I do not know exactly what this requires, but I am a bit hesitant to leave access to the international space station just to the Russians. I also doubt that there will really be a “just” six-year inability of carrying humans into space – the Constellation program already has some of its schedule’s slipping. And with an endeavor as complex Constellation, it would be wise to count on some more schedule slips. I wouldn’t be surprised if the first Ares manned flight will not happen before 2018…

The space shuttle has received numerous fixes both in procedures and technology. It is more capable than ever before. It is safer than ever before. Wouldn’t it be wise to count on it as long as its successor is not ready?

2007-11-07

Ares Launch Viewing …

While I was at Kennedy Space Center last week, some folks mentioned that the first Ares test flights are planned for 2009. That surprised me and, to be honest, I did not yet verify the information. On the other hand, Constellation (and thus Ares) has a very challenging schedule, so I would not wonder if it is try. After all, tests take time and so it makes only sense to start as early as possible.

I wonder if the public will be able to witness the first Ares flight. I guess the situation is quite different from a shuttle launch. Ares will be totally new, never before launched and as such there inherently is a much greater risk of a mishap during the first launch attempt. That risk may be too high to allow general attendance. On the other hand, NASA Causeway is over eleven miles away from launch pad 39B, where Ares will launch.

So it comes down to keep a keen eye on the potential Ares launch date. Of course, it would be very cool to view the first launch ever of a totally new vehicle. Keep reading my blog, I’ll keep you informed on any news updates. And if you happen to know something, please drop me a line ;)

2007-10-04

Astronauts ride rollercoasters – really…

OK, I have to admit this is totally off-topic for the time being. But as I said: this blog is probably not only about the space shuttle, but space launches (and me viewing them ;)) in general. As such, I’d like to stuff in some notes on the Ares rockets right now (after 2012 it’s probably more interesting, but anyhow…).

When I visited the NASA home page to pick up news about Discovery, I was dragged in by a page about the ares rockets and, more precisely, the escape system that astronauts use when things go wrong. Of course, all of this is just a model, not real hardware. That escape system is based on a roller coaster. Just read what NASA says:

As NASA revamps Launch Complex 39B to host the new Orion spacecraft and Ares I rocket of the Constellation Program, engineers are preparing to install a new kind of departure system to evacuate astronauts.

The agency calls it the Orion Emergency Egress System, but it is fundamentally a group of multi-passenger cars on a set of rails reminiscent of a roller coaster. Its purpose is to move astronauts and ground crew quickly from the vehicle entry on the launch pad to a protective concrete bunker in case of an emergency.

The emergency egress system for Ares will carry astronauts and ground crew.

Similar systems have been built into launch pads since the Saturn rockets and for the space shuttle. Both earlier systems were cables running from the spacecraft’s crew ingress level to an area near a bunker. There has never been an emergency on the pad that required the crew use these systems.

For Orion, the rail car would stand some 380 feet above the ground. It will be at the same height as the hatch on the Orion capsule, which is where the astronaut crews enter the spacecraft before launch.

Kelli Maloney, the lead designer for the launch pad escape system, said a trade study showed the railcar best met NASA’s requirements. Those requirements call for astronauts to be able to get out of the spacecraft and into the bunker within 4 minutes.

One of the benefits of the rail system, Maloney said, is that the track can take the astronauts directly to the bunker door. That would be a big help if one of the crew members or a ground crew member was incapacitated.

Scott Colloredo, NASA’s senior project integrator for Constellation ground systems, said the group called on the world’s roller coaster designers for help with the concept.

“It’s obviously not a thrill ride, but we’re taking advantage of technology that’s there,” he said.

I just hope that rollercoaster is never to be used in practice…

Source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/main/railcarevac.html