Article

2009-10-28 Science & Technology

Ares Rocket Test a Soaring Success | VIDEO

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2009-10-28 14:25|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 Lots of people wanted this to fail. Check all the general topic blogs that usually have an orgasm over anything space-related and note the sound of crickets. Whatever the bureaucratic outcome down the road, good for the propellerheads at NASA today...

Posted by M. Murcek 2009-10-28 16:12|| 2009-10-28 16:12|| Front Page Top

#2 It's another shuttle; it'll cost hundreds of millions of dollars per _flight_.

Whether this test is a success or a failure, the whole program is built around the idea that the main problem with the shuttle is that it was reusable and there is nothing whatsoever wrong with building large solid rockets to launch really big payloads into orbit.

This first-stage plus dummy cost 400 million dollars. If the completed vehicle is cost-comparable to the shuttle, it'll cost about 600-800 million per launch.

Imagine if the air force conducted close air support by crashing F-22's into enemy targets.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-10-28 20:37|| 2009-10-28 20:37|| Front Page Top

#3 ION PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUMS > EUROPE'S SCIENTISTS WANT TO MAKE AN ARTIFICIAL SUN IN 2018.

Constant Nukulaar engine.

D *** NG IT, BUT CAN YOU MAKE STAR WARS' "TIE FIGHTERS/X-WINGS" WITH IT, or does that Guy from Guam have to do it [again]???

Posted by JosephMendiola">JosephMendiola 2009-10-28 20:41|| na]">[na] 2009-10-28 20:41|| Front Page Top

#4 "Imagine if the air force conducted close air support by crashing F-22's into enemy targets."

You mean like the ~~Iranians~~ ~~Pakistanis~~ ~~Russians~~ ~~Chinese~~ ~~Syrians~~ NorKs, Thing? ;-p

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2009-10-28 20:43|| 2009-10-28 20:43|| Front Page Top

#5 I'm sorry to say, but it all looks so lacking in real innovation.

Rivets FFS.

It's still at heart a big firework. Maybe I'm just on a downer today but I feel real innovation in launches will only come with some market driven innovation.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2009-10-28 21:18|| 2009-10-28 21:18|| Front Page Top

#6 Solid rockets are far cheaper and safer than liquid fuel rocket engines. The Space Shuttle's solid boosters are around $40M each, the R&D paid for and reusable, though it's probably cheaper to just throw them away.

Posted by ed 2009-10-28 21:50|| 2009-10-28 21:50|| Front Page Top

#7 I would love to drop a bug in NASA's ear and use the Dummy load to loft "Rods from God" into orbit, 40 tons is a lotta kaboom if done right, say one ton each? That's equal to 40 nukes, and a hell of a lot cheaper as well.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2009-10-28 22:35|| 2009-10-28 22:35|| Front Page Top

23:58 trailing wife
23:43 S.
23:39 trailing wife
23:23 Skunky Glins****
23:11 ed
23:02 Skunky Glins****
23:00 Redneck Jim
22:55 Skunky Glins****
22:55 Lumpy Elmoluck5091
22:51 Skunky Glins****
22:49 VietVet68
22:46 Redneck Jim
22:44 Sgt. Mom
22:35 Redneck Jim
22:24 Redneck Jim
22:19 S.
22:18 ed
22:17 whitecollar redneck
22:15 phil_b
22:15 Anguper Hupomosing9418
22:11 JosephMendiola
22:11 Scooter McGruder
22:10 Anguper Hupomosing9418
22:10 Annon