NASA is planning to launch the new Ares I-X rocket — the precursor to the bigger Ares series of rockets that will be the mainstay of the Constellation program — at 08:00 EDT (12:00 GMT) Tuesday October 27. It’ll be shown live on NASA TV and probably on a few TV channels as well.
I do want to watch this, so I may struggle to get my carcass out of bed at 5:00 a.m. local time. If I do, then keep an eye on my BANews Twitter feed for live updates. And I may have to call someone at NASA and tell them to schedule these things for a more convenient time…
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Well based on the report on the BBC website it looks like this is the first and last flight of the Ares I program.
The most likely outcome of the Augustine Report seems to be some sort of ‘taxi’ capsule on a smaller commercial rocket, SpaceX’s Dragon being a likely candidate, followed by ‘Ares V lite’ launching Orion for deep space missions, oh and the ISS fuunded until 2020.
Basically the Ares I was supposed to be the simple, cheap, and most importantly, quick option to get US manned flights going again. Since its failed to be any of those hardly surprising it’s for the chop.
Link to the BBC article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8321353.stm
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:52 pm
I’m hoping to get a glimpse of this thing during this suborbital test flight from my location in Tampa, Florida. Fingers crossed for good weather.
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Don’t they schedule these based on sat orbits and orbit mechanics?
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 pm
i live on NASA TV
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Phil Plait:
A real astronomer does not go to bed until well after sunrise and does not get up earlier than 2:00 p.m. local time!
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:36 pm
As I am an old frog, I have watched every televised first of a kind launch ever( with the exception of the first V2). I sure won’t miss this one. Anyone remember the first Jupiter-C?
Froggy (Eddy) ex Apollo veteran
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
I was alive for the launch of the ‘Grapefruit’, but we were living on Taiwan, did not have a TV, and I was only 10 months old…. my first memory was at 5 years old, watched Shep lift off, we had just purchased a color TV… never thought the plume would be orange.
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
I’ll be recording the launch on Mythtv!
So, what are your opinions on this new ship? I’m going to need some convincing still that NASA hasn’t taken a step backward with this. I think a next generation shuttle would have been better than going back to Apollo type stuff.
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Is there a payload or they’re just trying out the rocket?
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
NOOOOOOO…. they MUST launch at precisely 0800! Otherwise chances are low that I can watch it. Or they slip past 1000, which would be ok, too. But not between 0800 and 1000.
Phil, can we agree on this?
@Michelle
No real payload, AFAIK a thing that simulates the Orion capsule, but that is probably just a few pieces of metal.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Good luck nasa
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
@ Michelle,
They are just testing the rocket; extract from Wikipedia — Ares I-X:
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I missed Neil Armstrong’s historic giant leap in 1969 because it occurred at about 4 AM British time (I was 12 at the time). These things happen, especially when you live outside the U.S.
(Edited after I checked the actual time of Armstrong’s leap as 2:56 UTC, which would have been just before 4 AM British Summer Time.)
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:35 pm
@ Mike/#1: Yeah, I have a very bad feeling that this will be the first & only Ares I flight after hearing the news yesterday (which was even more grim than the preliminary report), which is a dirty, rotten shame considering how much engineering has been put into it already.
What REALLY got my goat, however, was when–during Q&A–they said outright that they didn’t think it was reasonable to expect that a commercial company could have the funding to build said launch vehicle on their own, so if they went that route, they would likely end up largely subsidizing the “commercial” company with federal money.
What?!
So, wait… let me get this straight: you’re going to stop paying one set of companies to build rockets for you to launch, putting thousands of people out of work at current NASA contractors, and essentially turn around & pay another set of companies to build rockets for you?
Just how frakking stupid do they think we are? This whole push for “commercial” spaceflight is a ginormous joke. Do people really think that NASA is building the Space Shuttle & Ares? Seriously? Let’s look at who builds them today: ATK. Lockheed. Boeing. United Space Alliance/Rockwell. So how exactly is it different if we stop paying them to build the rockets and pay SpaceX, Scaled Composites, or any of these other so-called “commercial” spaceflight companies?
I would have thought the former head of Lockheed (Norm Augustine) would have known better… I guess not.
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:47 pm
LOL !!!! All the flaming liberals voted for Obama and now he’s gutting NASA!! Good job are you proud of yourselves? Now he is on track to cancel the Moon and Mars shots, is this the change you voted for Phil?
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:41 pm
5. IVAN3MAN AT LARGE Says:
A real astronomer does not go to bed until well after sunrise and does not get up earlier than 2:00 p.m. local time!
Dang, I must be an Astronomer!
Wait.. shouldn’t that be in UDT?
J/P=?
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:22 pm
For everyone with an iPhone, NASA just released a great app to deliver news, video, and images. It includes a countdown timer for the Aries I-X launch which will presumably switch over to a countdown for STS-129 after next week.
I also don’t understand the logic of the Augustine report suggesting that NASA kill the Aries I and then give private industry $5 billion to start from scratch – especially since up till now no private company has accomplished any human flights other than suborbital tests. Give the $5 billion to NASA. Let them finish the Aries I, and then turn that system over to a commercial effort. NASA should get out of the low-Earth-orbit transportation business once it becomes a run-of-the-mill operation. But it’s nowhere near being that yet for human spaceflight.
Replacing the Aries 5 with “Aries Lite” is also a short-sighted decision that will hamstring mission planners ten years and more down the line. Heavy launch capability is an absolute necessity for the next wave of human exploration. Downgrading the Ares now will save development money in the near term, and add substantial operational costs in the long term. That’s a politician-style decision and unworthy of the folks on the Augustine panel.
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:58 pm
I tend to agree with #1 Mike Mullen. I am only a layman, and have no ‘rocket science’ background., but never liked this idea from the outset. The only way that SpaceX and other private companies will come on board is if there is money to be made. So, how much is NASA willing to cough up to make it worthwhile for these private companies? As much as I like Obama, and his view on science, so far it has been all talk an no action. What I hope comes from this Commission are concrete actions from the Obama Administration. Either tell us that you are going to fund this, or not.
However, I never liked the Ares concept. Hopefully something better will come out of this. As of this moment, I fear for the US Manned Program. Maybe the next giant leaps for mankind will come from Asian Countries such as China and India.
#17, Garfield:
$5 Billion is nowhere near enough to get Ares finished. Private enterprise can do it cheaper and much more efficiently! Invest the 5 Billion in SpaceX, and I can almost guarantee you will see results far quicker! Less red tape, and more opportunity for “out of the box thinking”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:40 pm
17. Garfield Says: “Downgrading the Ares now will save development money in the near term, and add substantial operational costs in the long term. That’s a politician-style decision and unworthy of the folks on the Augustine panel.”
This is the exact reason the current Shuttle is such a money hog when it was supposed to be cheap to fly. We let Congress dictate the design by holding the purse strings. How many dozens of different configurations were evaluated? The genuinely cost effective designs like fly-back booster stages and liquid propellant strap-ons were eliminated because they were expensive (VERY expensive) to develop, but are an up-front investment that pays off in lower operating costs. The eventual design was the cheapest (but not cheap) to develop but the most expensive, by a huge margin, to fly.
It would be interesting to see an analysis of the total 30 year program costs of the real shuttle vs. one of the other designs given the number of missions and vehicle losses the program has had.
- Jack
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:41 pm
#17 MichaelL
That $5 billion dollars is the Augustine report’s suggestion, not mine!
The report proposes one “path” that would have NASA abandon the Aries I, then provide up to $5 billion to private companies to develop a commercial crew transport to LEO. (That’s in addition to the additional $3 billion per year the report says is crucial to NASA continuing a meaningful manned spaceflight program.)
I agree that a commercial crew transport path makes a lot of sense for the future, and would have made even more sense back when President Bush presented the Vision for Space Exploration. But now that the money has been spent to develop a NASA-designed crew transport system, what sense does it make to simply abandon all that work and start from scratch? Complete the Aries I system, then transfer that operational system to a commercial venture and allow them to revise it with out-of-the-box innovations.
One of the biggest flaws of the Augustine report is its almost cavalier treatment of crew safety. The report simply assumes that any privately-developed crew transport system would adhere to NASA standards. If I were an astronaut, I’d rather sit on top of a NASA-designed system than a commercial system that hadn’t proven itself. Let the commercial companies develop a track record with safe cargo launches, then transition to the delivery of humans.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:06 am
To quote the great Al Shepherd, America’s first ever astronaut :
“Lets light this candle!”
Great to hear & can’t wait to see it!
I’d love to see Ares fly.
Failing that I’ll settle for plan B but ideally I’d like to see plan A succeed.
Best wishes and here’s hoping all goes well.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:32 am
Phil – I like the new post style, now a reasonable amount of a post appears in a feed reader. This is great!
October 24th, 2009 at 5:50 am
Is it just me thinking this or is that one sleek & beautiful bird? If I don’t have an opportunity to watch it live I’ll damn well TiVo the thing. Go, baby, go!
October 24th, 2009 at 5:56 am
@20 Garfield
You are hitting on something very important here. Remember that in the end it is Congress and the President who will decide where things go. These are just recommendations. Also remember this probably won’t be the final word on it since who knows what the next president is going to want.
I just hope the US learns that when you commit to a program and tell people to expect a certain amount of funding, to give the agencies that funding. If you read the report, it’s budget issues that led to delays that has hurt the Ares program the most, not any managerial or technical problem.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:56 am
Not just you Fred Edison. That rocket looks the goods to me too!
October 24th, 2009 at 7:35 am
Tsk. Shame on you, Phil. You know NASA doesn’t actually schedule the availability of the Atlantic Range. That’s all up to the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, and if they say Ares I-X can have *this* window, *that* is the window NASA must use. (Yes, I know the BA was making a joke. Still, it was a good opportunity to toss up this fact.)
Meanwhile, as I read it, the Augustine Commission report doesn’t say “Scrap the Ares” or anything of the sort. It does say there may be better options that should be seriously looked at. Changing programs in mid-course would be expensive in money and time, yeah, but if it yields a better long-term outcome, then please do. I think it’s really sad in America that once you stake a position, you’re supposed to adhere to it for the rest of your natural life. That doesn’t leave any room for learning, adapting … not useful at all.
And #20 Garfield, I kindly commend your notice to the Dragon capsule by SpaceX which was designed from scratch with NASA manned spaceflight safety regulations in mind. It’s not like NASA has a mysterious monopoly on those rules — they’re published government regulations, and anyone with the wherewithal to build and follow them is worthy of attention.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:49 am
“LOL !!!! All the flaming liberals voted for Obama and now he’s gutting NASA!! Good job are you proud of yourselves? Now he is on track to cancel the Moon and Mars shots, is this the change you voted for Phil?”
You would look a little less foolish if you had bothered to read up and realize that the committee concluded that those plans, inhertied from the last administration, can’t be accomplished based on the current budget, the one also inherited from the previous administration. Fact is Bush, like the previous several administrations, was good at offering up gran plans for space, and very bad at actually funding them.
As to Ares/Orion versus commercial flights the Orion seems like a good design for missions beyond LEO but for ferrying crew to the ISS it would be like using a stretch limo instead of a regular cab.
October 24th, 2009 at 10:24 am
“Don’t they schedule these based on sat orbits and orbit mechanics?”
They might, if it were going into orbit. It’s not.
In this case, weather, visibility and availability of the launch range are probably the main schedule drivers.
“Is there a payload or they’re just trying out the rocket?”
That’s pretty much it, yes. Ans only the solid-fueled first stage. The upper stage/capsule structure is a properly weighted dummy load.
“Complete the Aries I system, then transfer that operational system to a commercial venture and allow them to revise it with out-of-the-box innovations.”
What kind of ‘commercial venture?’ ATK already tried to market Ares-1 as a satellite launcher as well…there was pretty much zero interest from potential customers.
If they won’t put their Very Expensive Satellites on it, that should tell you something…
“The report simply assumes that any privately-developed crew transport system would adhere to NASA standards. ”
Standards (which many commercial launchers are already pretty close to, or involve features they simply can’t use, like failure sensors for a launch escape system) that have been bent many times by the agency itself…
October 24th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Tom asked: “So, what are your opinions on this new ship? I’m going to need some convincing still that NASA hasn’t taken a step backward with this. I think a next generation shuttle would have been better than going back to Apollo type stuff.”
In fact, my thinking is exactly the opposite of yours. I think the Ares style vertically stacked rocket is far superior to the Shuttle, largely because it’s so much more practical.
1. Being vertically stacked makes a Challenger-style accident impossible. Even if exhaust gas was to leak out a join between two segments of the first stage, there’s nothing for it to damage.
2. Being vertically stacked means foam falling off can’t strike anything vulnerable, making Columbia-style accidents impossible.
3. By making the crew compartment separate from the fuel and engines, the crew has an escape option at all points of the launch, from before launch until the first stage burns out. They simply hit the abort button and leave any distaster behind them. By contrast the Shuttle has no abort capability while the SRBs are burning.
4. Because the Orion spacecraft doesn’t need to land on a runway, its abort and landing options are much more flexible. If the weather’s bad at the Cape, the Shuttle either has to stay in orbit or land at Edwards Air Force Base, while the Orion will simply be able to shift its landing point by a couple of hundred kilometres to avoid the bad weather. It also means the launch weather rules are much easier – the weather only needs to be good at the Cape, rather than at the Cape plus the abort landing sites around the world.
5. The Ares system (as planned) is modularised – different rockets for different jobs. The Shuttle is, by contrast, an expensive do-everything system.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
wow. 28 posts and no four legs good, dwo legs baad. Private good, government baad post yet.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
12:00 GMT, perfect. I can watch it over lunch at my desk. Cut me a big slice!
Bob(Big)
October 24th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Ares-1 has been in construction & development for 2 years (2007-2009). It will remain so for 6 more years (2015 at least; 2017 has been mentioned).
At a guess, much less than 1/3 – 1/4 of the final development sum has been spent.
October 24th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
@ Garfield
In regards to the free iPhone app you are talking about, you can see a timer for the STS 129 mission by going down the list to the space shuttle option on the front page. So both countdowns are available at the present =)
October 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
I was wondering, how far to the north would a launch from Kennedy be visible, assuming perfect weather conditions?
October 25th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
@ 29 Peter B : Good analysis with which I entirely agree.
Mind you, having a reuseable orbiter, a spaceplane component is cool too. I love the shuttle too – I just wish it was more like what was originally hoped for and expected rather than what we got.
Grew up reading SF and imagining things like the shuttle or like spaceships such as Enterprise. Perhaps unrealistic but any and all steps towards those sort of craft fill me with hope and longing.
Ares and Orion the whole Apollo redux idea is great -I just want to see progress being made once again because for the past three or four decades since Apollo 17 Human spaceflight has been going nowhere boldly. Yes, the space stations like Skylab and the ISS, the space shuttles and perhaps the start of some some private space programs eg. Spaceship Two are something, yes they’ve achieved a lot such as launching Hubble and more people than ever into orbit.
But somehow its not quite enough. We’re missing the “going further” and “seeing people on new worlds” factors.
Returning the Moon – especally for long durations with a base being built there – is worthwhile and I’d love to see it happen but I was really hoping to see Humanity land on Mars and on some near Earth asteroids in my lifetime. I really thought we’d be achieving that within twenty or thirty years after Apollo. I thought we’d have gone so much further.
Its not just one administration or side of politics or NASA leadership group that’s failed to do this these past few years. Its all of them & both sides of politics. Its time, overdue in fact, that we revived some momentum
when it comes to space exploration.
Ares,is a good start – or restart really. I’d like to see plans for more beginning to get taken seriously. I’d love to see the “beyond” part take shape and for us to pick up the pace and ambition as far as sending Humans to new places within our solar system.
So good luck and best wishes to them all – but, please sirs, can we have some more and soon!
October 26th, 2009 at 11:40 am
From #29: “The Ares system (as planned) is modularised – different rockets for different jobs. The Shuttle is, by contrast, an expensive do-everything system.”
If memory serves, an earlier conception of the shuttle program included two configurations: one (smaller) to launch people, one (larger) for cargo. It mutated into the one-size-fits-all, money sucking design.
This current fight is about a change in contractors. It’s going to leave us with nothing.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:01 am
Wake up BA!
T-40 minutes and counting!
October 27th, 2009 at 10:25 am
its one of biggest moment to watch launch of aries I – x on NASA aerospace ….its incredible… i hope succesfuly to nasa team…..search and monitoring the out of space…. and find something new….and use for human development in the world…. may God Bless U….
October 28th, 2009 at 4:14 am
I thought this site was all about debunking false beliefs. One of the biggest false beliefs out there is the belief in the original published launch date. (:
Here we go again!
I hope she goes today.