Ares-1 second stage MYSTERY

.

Could a crane with HALF its max power lift TWICE the weight??? Clearly, it CAN'T.

But that's EXACTLY what "should" happen with the (latest) Ares-1 second stage!!!

The problem is explained in detail in my new article "Ares-1 second stage MYSTERY"

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts/017aresmystery.html

.

Your "jokes" are getting better. Of course I moved it to "Space Entertainment & Humor", as you accidentally posted it under "Technology"

Btw, I've found a very educative website: http://www.coolmath.com/

no problem, when THIS and other Ares-1 problems will become "official" you'll move again to "Technology"...

just read my latest "joke" that come TRUE:

from my "Ares-1 can't fly" (Nov 4) article... "There is another problem I've remarked over one year ago on a Space forum... the SRBs are NOT born to have any "upperstages' mass" since they fly side-mounted on the Shuttle... then, my question was and still is: CAN the SRB structure (especially the RINGS junctions) support up to 200 mT of upperstages' mass without any risks to crack due to the strong flight's stress? If real tests (like the Ares 1-X launch in 2009) will show that a standard structure can't support so much upperstages' mass, the new SRB must be reinforced adding much more weight to the (already too heavy) 1st stage of the Ares-1."

then, read this... http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums ... =2&start=1



.

.

some users on other forums said me that the Ares-1 can fly since it's similar to the Apollo 7 launch, but my answer (below) is a further evidence that the Ares-1 can't fly:

.

the Apollo 7 and Saturn 1B mission is NOT a good example nor a good comparison

just read this:

http://www.astronautix.com/flights/apollo7.htm

and scroll the chronology to the Apollo 7 launch in Oct. 11, 1968

the Apollo 7 payload mass was: Apollo CSM 101 14,674 kg (32,350 lb) while the (current design) Orion mass is over TWICE that: 30.5 mT

the "lunar" Apollo CSM was about 30.5 mT but over 18.4 mT was the PROPELLENT mass for Lunar Orbit
Insertion and Trans Earth Injection, while, the "orbital" Apollo CSM (or the "orbital" Orion) needs only a small amount of propellent to deorbit

also, the Saturn 1B + the Apollo 7 total upperstages' mass was ONLY (118,800 kg second stage gross mass + 14,674 kg Apollo 7 mass) 133,474 kg. while the Ares-1 upperstages' mass (2nd stage, Orion, SM, LAS, propellents) is 192 mT ... 50% more than Apollo 7 and its 2nd stage!!!

just add that the Saturn 1B first stage had liquid engines that could have a constant thrust, while, the Ares-1 will use an SRB that has a thrust that QUICKLY FALLS after the first 90 seconds from lift off:

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts/IMAGES/012srbthrust.jpg

last, the 5-segments SRB burn time is only 5 seconds more than a standard SRB (123 sec.) then just 128 seconds, while, the Saturn 1B first stage burn time was 155 seconds:

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnib.htm

that means the J-2 started at an higher altitude, acceleration and speed

that's why a 231,913 lbf thrust J-2 was ENOUGH for the job, while, the CLV was early designed around the (twice the J-2 thrust) SSME, while, clearly, the 294,000 lbf thrust J-2X has NOT enough power to lift an (over twice the Apollo 7) Orion

.

Can't believe you missed the Vibration issue G.

that's since the 5-segments SRB doesn't exit (while, the 4-segments SRB never flow alone) and "vibrates" ONLY in the engineers' minds...

that are just "good vibrations" (read: "excuses") to scrap the Ares-1 without need to admit that it's a bad designed and flawed rocket that NEVER can fly...

.

Again you use a bad analogy. A better one would be to ask if a crane that could lift 200 tones but is never used to lift more than 100 tones at a time could be replaced by a crane that could lift 210 tons but will never be used to lift more than 120 tons at a time, and could both cranes move 10,000 tons in a day.

In other words your childishly over simple analogies are worse than useless. They cover up the real issues which are quite subtle and complex.

and example can't be perfect

however, a better example could be this:

take the SaturnV, scrap two of the five J2 engines from its 2nd stage and add 15% more payload

well... can it fly after these changes?

I think it can't

then, can the Ares-1 fly with +15% payload and a -40% of 2nd stage engine's power?

again, I think it can't

.

That example is worse than the other one. These childish attempts to pick a few numbers off a chart and just add them up are just hopelessly naive! You need to use calculus to integrate the varying thrust and weight and aerodynamic loads for the whole vehicle throughout powered flight.

if you launch a parachutist with an HALF sized parachute you don't need any calculations to know that he will fall and die...

.

Yeah ya do.

Another hopelessly wrong and over simplified analogy.