NASA Watch has a poll up on what kind of heavy lifter NASA should build. I’ve decided to do my own, proper poll:
[Mid-afternoon update]
Wow, not much love for either flavor of Ares, at least from my readers. So far, the vast majority goes for “none of the above.”
Is there any amount of money that this thing could cost that would cause you to say, “OK, it’s not worth it”? Because to listen to them defend it, you’d sure think that the answer is “no.” That the only important thing is that it’s “safe,” and to hell with the cost.
It looks like they just won almost a million dollars in the power beaming contest.
I sure hope that the administration will request a lot more money for Centennial Challenges, and Congress grant it. Tomorrow’s award of the NGLLC prizes at the Rayburn Building would be a good opportunity to make the point that, dollar for dollar, they put to shame anything else that NASA is doing, Constellation most of all.
A fight over radioactive space monkeys.
I want one.
Pat Flannery probably does, too, but only if it’s cute and personality filled.
Check out this editorial at The Crimson on Ares I-X:
Such an achievement augurs well: The new moon program is a shining rebuttal to detractors of America’s math and science programs as well as a promise for progress in American space exploration in the future.
To begin with, the rocket’s technical specifications are astounding. Thirty-two stories high, the Ares 1-X towers as the tallest rocket in the world. And the sight of the launch was no less spectacular than the rocket itself. The first stage of the engine brought the rocket 25 miles into the air until its fuel ran out and parachuted it into the ocean.
When Clark wrote the other day that the Ares was really tall, it was completely tongue-in-cheek, but this editorial writer seems to seriously believe that rocket height is a useful technical metric. And 25 whole miles in the air? What a spectacular achievement, fifty-plus years after the first orbital launch. But wait, it gets better:
But the true triumph of the Ares rocket doesn’t lie in its physical properties alone. It’s the less tangible inspiration the rocket will provide to future generations of American mathematicians, scientists, and engineers that makes it so important. Education reformers working with students from kindergarten through 12th grade will now be able to look to the rocket as a symbol of hope and inspiration. The Ares will encourage them to imagine even more fantastic goals and products that will be achieved after America repairs its education problem.
Yes, only the Corndog, flying a few times a year at billions per flight, will inspire the Young Pioneers, and fill them with hope. Hundreds or thousands of people going to and from orbit with their own money, reusable tugs fueled in LEO, or at the Lagrange points, on the moon, with orbital and lunar hotels? Boooorrring.
Sigh.
Dennis Wingo says that NASA doesn’t need more money, it just needswhat NASA needs is a better architectural approach. I agree. But that’s doesn’t keep the jobs in the right places.
Despite my initial misreading of it, though, I even think that it’s possible to do it without the extra three billion. And it had better be, because I doubt if they’re going to get it.
Sentencing occurs on Friday morning. Jim Muncy writes:
I plan to be there, and hope to see some of you as well.
It’s scheduled to start sometime between 930am and 945am. There are no limitations on friends showing up in the public gallery.
The details are:
Friday, Nov. 6, 9:30 am.
333 Constitution Ave, NW, Prettyman Federal Court Bldg,
Courtroom II, Judge Rosemary Collyer.
If you’re in DC that day and want to show your support, I hope you can make it.
Fox News’ Harris Faulkner a few minutes ago, in response to the video of the winning Masten flight.
The editorial board at the Orlando Sentinel (Florida’s largest paper) weighs in:
If U.S. space-policy decisions were dictated based solely on spectacle, the Ares I would be a shoo-in as NASA’s next manned vehicle. Unfortunately for fans of the rocket, cost, design and timing also matter.
Problems with all three argue for scrapping Ares I and assigning commercial rockets the task of flying to the international space station in low-Earth orbit. That would allow the agency to concentrate on its pre-shuttle mission of cutting-edge exploration.
I think we’re reaching the point at which its supporters are trying to swim up Niagara Falls.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Mark Matthews over at the Sentinel has a story on the hearings discussing the future of the program.
This should shock no one:
“There are a few people in the administration who want to kill Ares I and put all the money in commercial and the [Augustine] report tends to endorse that type of scenario. I think that is absolutely wrong,” said Doc Horowitz, former astronaut and Constellation architect.
If I were him, I’d just shut up, and hope that the IG doesn’t decide to open a belated investigation into his revolving door between NASA and ATK.
And then there’s this little tidbit at the end:
…there are whispers that the administration is exploring plans outside options presented by the Augustine committee, although it is unclear as to what they could include.
I suppose they could include (e.g.) bringing in the Chinese. We could just put it on the tab with all the other things we borrow money from them to buy from them.
…this time from Henry Spencer:
Such separation problems – even including collisions – have happened before. Large rocket motors often produce noticeable thrust for a surprisingly long time after they officially shut down, as remaining gases and fluids leak out, and this thrust can overwhelm the effect of small separation motors trying to separate the stages. (Just such a problem caused the failure of a Falcon I launch last year.) Or perhaps not all the Ares I-X separation motors actually fired.
Two such problems in one launch would be an odd coincidence, but there’s at least one way that both could have the same cause: suppose a wiring error sent the ignition signal for some of the separation motors to the tumble motors instead?
This may sound far-fetched, but there have been a number of cases of cross-wiring of multiple similar devices, especially in early tests of new systems. For example, on the second unmanned test of the Saturn V in 1968, a shutdown command directed at one second-stage engine shut down its neighbour as well, because they were partly cross-wired.
Well, even if true, it’s not reasonable to expect them to get the wiring perfect. They had to launch this thing on a pinch-penny budget of only half a billion dollars.
And the controversy of “did it or didn’t it recontact” continues in comments at NASA Watch.