- \n
- Ares I Foum Section<\/li>\n
- L2 Ares I-X Section<\/li>\n
- L2 Ares\/HLV\/Orion Sections<\/li>\n
- Click here to Join L2<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Three post-flight reviews are taking place to evaluate the data that has been gained from the launch, with the first review now complete.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe will have 30, 60, and 90-day reports to show what we\u2019ve learned thus far. There should be a press conference in December to talk about what we\u2019ve seen in first 30 days,\u201d noted Ares I-X Deputy Manager Steve Davis on an extensive mission review memo acquired by L2.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are working to retrieve the flight data. We are expecting to retrieve most (if not all) of it. We have two ways to get data: (1) telemetry where data is sent to the ground and (2) data that was recorded on board.<\/p>\n
\u201cEven though we came down hard (first stage hitting the water hard), no water damage got to the data recorder. We are going through it now stripping off the data.\u201d<\/p>\n
Space tourism guides
<\/path>Aerospace & Defense <\/path>Company News <\/path>\n (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});<\/p>\n
![\"A5\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A510.jpg\" "\\"A5\\"")
The parachute failure \u2013 resulting in one parachute fully deflating during deployment, along with interference with a second parachute \u2013 resulted in the first stage impacting the water at an angle, and at high speed. This dented the side of the booster.<\/p>\n\u201cThe parachute failed, and we think it was because of a parachute cutter failure. When the Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) lands, there is a cutter to cut away the chutes so there is not a danger to the divers who are part of the recovery team that bring the SRB back,\u201d added Mr Davis. \u201cIt looks like one of the cutters broke, and when the loads distributed on the remaining lines, they failed.\u201d<\/p>\n
Despite the hard landing, most of the DFI (Developmental Flight Instrumentation) sensors gained the required data from the ascent, which will be priceless for the continued development of the vehicle.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn one area, we saw belching; smoke coming out of nozzle on first stage. Some may have gotten down to sensors. Nothing other than that indicates a problem, but we really don\u2019t know yet. (However, we collected) probably terabytes of data. We had 711 sensors. A few didn\u2019t make it. Most did.\u201d<\/p>\n
Data was also collected on the Ares I issue of Thrust Oscillation, though further work is required until the full data overview is forthcoming \u2013 likely to be within days.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt looks like the thrust oscillation is in the range of the lower Shuttle levels measured on the SRBs,\u201d added the memo. \u201cWithout any data, very preliminary, it looks like it is at the lower, much more reasonable levels, but we won\u2019t know until we analyze the data. We put in special sensitive sensors to measure it.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe had high sampling rate pressure sensors in the upper part of first stage to measure thrust oscillation. These should have captured some really good data. The Systems Engineering and Integration function is at Langley Research Center. For two days a week, we look at data.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"A2\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A230.jpg\" "\\"A2\\"")
Ares I-X managers also confirmed that the separation between the First and Upper Stages was nominal, after the stages \u201cappeared\u201d to recontact and send the Upper Stage spinning sideways. The question on if the event was nominal was actually posed by engineers in the Q&A section of the mission overview memo.<\/p>\n\u201cYes (it was nominal). We ballasted the upper stage. We predicted this. Our 2nd stage was a dummy. Our dynamic pressure was 10 times what you\u2019ll see (on Ares I), and we had a different separation point,\u201d Mr Davis answered.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe separation we saw was in the realm of possibilities. It wasn\u2019t unexpected to us. The engineers put animation together that showed this before the launch.<\/p>\n
Other parts of the ascent produced good results, such as the RoCS (Roll Control System) \u2013 which was required to pulse less times to control the vehicle than expected.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe roll control system fired only minimally as the vehicle rolled very little. We got that data early. It shows the thrust firings over time. We had firings in the 15 to 20 second time up front to orient in the astronauts head-down condition that we expect to see in flight. After that, a couple of minor pulses,\u201d added the memo.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe rolled 90 degrees to get the vehicle in a position where if there were a crew on board, the astronaut\u2019s heads would be in a downward position. We didn\u2019t have to do it, but it was requested that we do. We wanted the aerodynamics of the vehicle to be in the right orientation, the closest orientation to what the Ares I will fly with crew on board.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"A3\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A322.jpg\" "\\"A3\\"")
Pad 39B was also damaged by Ares I-X\u2019s launch profile, which saw it \u2013 as designed \u2013 kick out its first stage towards the Fixed Service Structure (FSS) during the first few seconds of ascent.<\/p>\nWith the plume impacting on the pad\u2019s structure, a large amount of damage was found once engineers returned to the pad.<\/p>\n
A separate 51 page presentation, also acquired by L2, outlined both the status of the pad, and modifications that will be made to the Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) Sound Suppression System (SSS) to help reduce the amount of damage on the next test flight.<\/p>\n
\u201cMore damage observed than Shuttle at 95\u2032 Level. No major damage observed at 115\u2032 Level. No damage observed at and above 135\u2032 Level,\u201d the presentation noted, whilst adding \u201cAres I-X caused more damage than Shuttle; acoustic level seemly louder than Shuttle.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"A4\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A414.jpg\" "\\"A4\\"")
However, this is not a major problem \u2013 given the pad won\u2019t be used for another flight for several years. Plus, Ares I-Y (or Ares I-X Prime as is now likely to be the case) will utilize a beefed up SSS.<\/p>\n\u201cI-X SSS: Not effective. 3-sides of deck surface uncovered. Vulnerable to plume damage. Piping exterior to MLP deck,\u201d the presentation added. \u201cI-Y (I-X Prime) SSS: 60ft diameter coverage in all directions. Piping interior to LM. No Structure Damage Expected!\u201d<\/p>\n
Overall, the Ares I-X test flight was a success, although Time magazine appeared to get a little carried away, pointing to Ares I as the best invention of the year (despite the low-end commonality between I-X and Ares I). Regardless, this provided a nice morale boost to the Constellation Program management, and welcomed praise for NASA.<\/p>\n
\u201cI was so excited about Ares coming out as Time magazine\u2019s number one invention. Nobody on our team had a clue that this was being considered as one of the top inventions by Time. It also made the front-page article of The Huntsville Times, above the fold,\u201d added Constellation manager Bob Armstrong on the mission review memo.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt proves the hard work of this team for the last four years has been valuable, and to be recognized says a huge thing about this team. Give yourself a hand. This is really awesome. I haven\u2019t stopped smiling or bragging since I heard about the Time article. I got emails all day from folks who saw the article. It\u2019s really a big deal. I can\u2019t describe how cool it really is. A big part is what we\u2019ve done on Ares I, but also the significance of the Ares I-X test flight.\u201d<\/p>\n
Recent \u2013 over the past one year period \u2013 Ares I-X Articles on NASASpaceflight.com can be found on this link:
\nhttp:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/tag\/ares-i-x\/<\/p>\nAres I-X Prime:<\/p>\n
First suggested by Ares I manager Jeff Hanley as part of his multi-point plan to try and keep Ares I\/Orion on a 2015 launch date, Ares I-Y is being deleted from the Constellation schedule, to be replaced by Ares I-X Prime \u2013 a five segment First Stage booster version of Ares I-X, with further advancements \u2013 such as on the Upper Stage, Orion and Launch Abort System (LAS) testing \u2013 yet to be confirmed.<\/p>\n
![\"A6\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A67.jpg\" "\\"A6\\"")
\u201cAt Constellation Program (Level II) board, we decided to delete the Ares I-Y test flight from the manifest. Approval has to be done at Level I by ESMD (Exploration Systems Mission Directorate). We assume Level I will approve it and we\u2019ve stopped work on Ares I-Y,\u201d noted Teresa Vanhooser, Acting Manager of the Ares Project Office.<\/p>\n\u201cOur rationale involved timeliness. Ares I-Y was too late to impact the Orion I or Orion II design. It required unique software builds. A whole \u2018uniqueness\u2019 that took the team off the baseline. Lots of discussion around this; whether it was smart to spend dollars on keeping the team on the Program of Record, rather than on doing drawings and software for Ares I-Y.<\/p>\n
\u201cAfter this decision was made, the discussion centered on doing something earlier to influence the design in the 2012 timeframe. We\u2019re still looking at test objectives and what hardware is available. We are considering what part of mainline program we can put in to an Ares I-X prime flight that will gain something in the final design. Send us your ideas. We are looking for creative thought processes on what we can do and how we can do it.\u201d<\/p>\n
The aim is to have Ares I-X Prime set for an early 2012 launch date, although that schedule remains fluid \u2013 based on the availability of hardware and funding.<\/p>\n
\u201cJanuary 2012 is only 25 months from now. That\u2019s the goal. I (want) the team stays focused toward the baseline. I don\u2019t want to divert manpower in to doing something else. The agency is focused on doing another test flight. We need to make it valuable to Ares I and Constellation.\u201d<\/p>\n
Due to the budget decisions that are being worked on by lawmakers, the approval of Ares I-X Prime as a confirmed test flight is yet to become fully official \u2013 as Constellation continue to battle against limited funding.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are still under a continuing resolution through mid-December. It will probably go through mid-January. I doubt anything will be approved before then. That limits the amount of funding. Level II is trying to distribute it equally across projects to keep everybody running,\u201d added Ms Vanhooser.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is no fluff. It is minimal. It covers workforce and a few hardware bills incurred in August\/September where bills don\u2019t come in until October\/November. We are frozen at FY09 levels and are not able to ramp to where we need to be for FY10. Be patient. As soon as the President passes the budget, we will hopefully get back on plan.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are trying to put a schedule compliant budget together under the constraints we are under. We will continue to work hard decisions back through the elements. We will make sure we keep critical items in mind that we want to get done for FY10.\u201d<\/p>\n
Questions followed from engineers on the design and test parameters of Ares I-X Prime, along with the team makeup and what appears to be a tight schedule.<\/p>\n
\u201cAres I-X prime is very early in the planning stage. Vehicle Integration Office will coordinate the Ares Project office Ares I-X prime activities. We will try to get planning done by mid-December. We want to have a set of objectives, how organization would work, and a plan,\u201d noted the answers, which were delivered by several managers.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe will probably not have a separate Ares I-X organization again. This time, we may have a broader organization. The flight may involve some Orion hardware.<\/p>\n
![\"A7\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/A73.jpg\" "\\"A7\\"")
\u201cWe would want a 5-segment first stage. It will be up to us to help define what it is and what we can have available, even if it is development hardware, rather than production hardware. We\u2019d like to see our roll control system and a more representative separation system. I heard someone say frangible joint would be great to test. We will try to get as much in as possible to replicate the real flight design.\u201d<\/p>\nAlso stated was the need for additional room in the budget to be able to achieve the next test flight within the proposed schedule, given the test flight vehicles \u2013 apart from the now cancelled Ares I-Y vehicle \u2013 lack full commonality with the Ares I baseline vehicle.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere has to be extra dollars to go with this. If you build tuna cans (the dummy Upper Stage), you need extra dollars. It is not in the baseline program. All this is contingent on a lot of things. We need to have our plan ready if they have the money and want us to go to it,\u201d the answers continued.<\/p>\n
\u201cWas surprised they wanted to fly that early in 2012. It\u2019s 2012 and 2013 that they are looking at it. (We will) want the team to have an idea by Christmas. Then in January\/February, it will need to become part of our budget and planning process. We\u2019ve really got to have it by then to get it in the budget.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ares I\u2019s future:<\/p>\n
A cloud continues to hang over the Ares Program\u2019s future, following the Augustine report into NASA\u2019s Human Space Flight program \u2013 which noted that the \u201cProgram Of Record\u201d (Namely Ares I\/Orion and Ares V) are on an \u201cunsustainable\u201d path.<\/p>\n
Constellation workers asked managers for any insights into the timing of the White House decisions on the fate of Ares I and Orion.<\/p>\n
\u201cNot much insight. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) directors have been to OSTP (Office of Science and Technology Policy) and OMB (Office of Management and Budget) several times. No idea when we would know anything. I would say by the time we get a budget in January some decision will have to be made to put budget out. My hope is after the first of the year, we will have a direction to head in,\u201d came back the answer.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the meantime, (our) job is the current project and getting it done. We will provide all the relative data they need to make their decision. We want to make sure they have what they need to make the right decision for the agency and the country.\u201d<\/p>\n
While face-to-face meetings are set to take place on December 1, relating to the Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLLV \u2013 or HLV as it is being classed) in addition to several alternatives \u2013 (with an article on the latest documented notes due to be published later this week) \u2013 sources note Ares I is in real danger of failing to become the crew transport booster in NASA\u2019s future.<\/p>\n
With no decision made, four options were presented to the White House around a week ago, pre-empting a mid-December announcement. Sources note all four options had commercial crew for LEO access. Ares I was not included in any scenario.<\/p>\n
One date was also mentioned by sources, speaking of a Crew Space Transportation Development (CCDev) program winner announcement by the White House\/OSTP on December 15. This announcement \u2013 should it remain on schedule \u2013 may prove to be one of the opening indicators into the fate of Ares I.<\/p>\n
L2 members<\/em><\/em>: Documentation \u2013 from which the above article has quoted snippets \u2013 is available in full in the related L2 sections, now over 4000 gbs in size.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Despite apparently failing to be short listed for President Obama\u2019s upcoming decision on the forward path for NASA\u2019s Human Space Flight program, the Ares I teams are pushing forward with new plans to follow up the Ares I-X test flight with a 2012 to 2013 flight of Ares I-X Prime \u2013 a replacement test launch […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[9166,9203,9204],"class_list":["post-40924","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news","tag-ares-i","tag-ares-i-x","tag-ares-i-x-prime"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40924"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40924"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40924\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40924"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40924"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40924"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}