This is just sad. It's an embarrassment for America. What are we going to do next? Make vacuum tube computers that are the size of houses? We seem to be moving back in technology, not moving forwards.
They should be launching the next version of the space shuttle, not a piece of crap rocket that anyone and their grandmothers can make. #aresix
@Noobs-R-Us: The problem with the space shuttle as I understand it (at least in it's current incarnation) is that while reusable, it's wildly inefficient in terms of cost and fuel. Launching the mass of the shuttle, which itself is effectively dead weight in terms of science value since it doesn't do anything, takes a huge amount of fuel. And all that has to be launched by rockets, as does the Ares program.
On the flip side we have the Soviet approach with Soyuz that,while less glamorous, consists of cheaper, mass produced spacecraft that are lighter, simpler, safer, and again...much cheaper.
Replacing the shuttle in all likelihood won't mean building another piece of equipment that complicated, or that cool. It will mean shorter-lifespan capsules atop modern rocket systems.
Anyways, it isn't easy to build a brand new rocket system...just look at SpaceX's awesome record. #aresix
In technology you usually take your last incarnation and take what you’ve learned from the mistakes and improve on it by making the next version much better. Here, we seem to be saying that we don't have will and are too lazy to make the effort. Instead, well just go back a couple of version and stick to that.
What we should be doing is making the next replacement a reusable, flyable, cost efficient etc next generation craft. Something out of Star Trek. But instead, we sit back like a bunch of losers in shop class just passing time until the bell rings.
@Noobs-R-Us: would you rather have 'something out of Star Trek' sucking up NASA's entire budget for decades before any real payoff, or a practical, relatively cost effective method of putting men and payloads into space ASAP? #aresix
@Noobs-R-Us: I don't think NASA engineers would take too kindly to you calling them lazy. perhaps re-read the explanations the others gave you and realize that while cool and everything, the shuttle is an inefficient platform to launch into space. This IS taking what you learned and applying it to the next stage. #aresix
@soulfinger: I don’t think that they thought of the solutions carefully enough. I think they went for the simplest and therefore, cheapest solution. One idea I had was to make another shuttle type vehicle but with lighter weight, then use another vehicle that can reach the outer atmosphere (SR-71 like) to piggy back into space. Certainly that’s got to be safer and cheaper than the current shuttle?
The piggyback shuttle would only need to carry enough fuel to carry it the rest of the way into space which isn’t that far off. It will also then be able to fly back and reused just like the shuttle now.
@Noobs-R-Us: right. because building cars is totally the same thing as rocket science. back on topic, why do you have a problem with cutting ineffeciencies and reducing costs? don't you want a space program that makes sense budgetarily while still being scientifically productive? #aresix
@Noobs-R-Us: Go take physics, then come back and have a discussion. The rocket model has a MUCH higher lifting capacity than a shuttle model, or a piggyback model, or a space plane model. Some of the chief concerns regarding the space planes and the SR71 is weight. If you add the weight of a shuttle to the SR71, it can't reach the outer atmosphere. The space shuttle (and it's model for being a lifter and a maintenance platform) is a money pit. We should put heavy gear into space with lifters like the Ares, as effeciently as possible, while a space plane or piggyback shuttle may be a more viable option for light things like people.
Also, fuck off with that Japanese car crap. They make better cars. They're not as advanced as our space program. We are the most advanced in the space race. We've been by and on and around Mars more than another space program on the planet, and we've launched the farthest flying currently operating probes in the history of man. I'm just stuck wondering if you're just wantonly uninformed, or if you're trolling, because your argument doesn't make a lick of sense. #aresix
@wishnias: No beacuse space is the final frontier. ha ha.
Seriously though, all this space stuff is fantasy to begin with. It's not suppose to make sense "budgetarily." It suppose to push the envelope of human exploration. Anytime you're pushing the envelope, it costs a premium. So, either do it right or don't do it at all because then you're really just wasting money. #aresix
@Noobs-R-Us: wow... just... wow... you're accusing our greatest scientists of not thinking much before spending billions of dollars on manned space exploration, criticize an admittedly 'simple and cheap' solution with no real explanation, and then propose you're genius concept as if you're the first one to think of it? hello? mcfly? #aresix
@wishnias: Yea, what’s so great going back to gen 1? How would you feel if Apple decides to release their gen 3 iPod next year with next year’s parts? Do you call that progress? Apparently you do…. #aresix
@PorkPie: Go take physics? OK Mr. Genius, riddle me this. If we move along the space track at 2 mph and China moves at 6mph, how long before China passes us? Do you get what I’m saying?
So what we’re the most advanced in space? We will be superseded by China in no time if we let NASA run by a bunch of slackers like you who can only think of past glories. And before you open your big trap think of those idiot slackers now in Detroit who are still stuck in the past glory days when they were the most advanced automobile manufacturer in the world. #aresix
@Noobs-R-Us: Your opinion about going "backward" by using a rocket instead of a shuttle is completely uninformed. This debate happened almost a decade ago. You're probably not old enough to remember it.
You probably don't even know that there are five planned rockets. The Aries 1-X is just one of those. The different types of rockets will carry different things. Some will carry people, and some will carry objects. Having five independent platforms for space travel is far more efficient than one gigantic "does all" platform. Its the difference between driving a SUV and a prius. You don't always need an SUV, and many times a prius will fit the job better.
Furthermore your "idea" about having a smaller shuttle on top of the "regular" shuttle is exactly how the shuttle operates. Go back and look at a picture of the shuttle. Its a small craft that sits on top of two gigantic rockets and a fuel tank. It rides those rockets up most of the way, and then jettisons them right before aligning for orbit. So basically, exactly what you described... already happening... which shows how much you really know.
@traviscollins: You’re a funny guy. As a matter of fact, during the 80’s when I was in high school, there was a pilot program (NORSTAR), in Norfolk Virginia where I grew up, that chose talented students from the area’s high schools to participate in designing an experimental payload to go up in the shuttle. My second year in the program was when the Challenger blew up with the first teacher Christa McAuliffe. My program director, Ron Fortunato, was one of the finalist that was competing to be the first teacher in space. He obviously was very disappointed when he didn’t get the slot but I guess he now also feel lucky to not have been chosen. Here’s a link to the project.
@Cliff_Dangers: It's not bigger than a Saturn V in any way. It's almost as tall. That's what people mean when they say "Largest rocket since the Saturn V". #aresix
@avconsumer2: It did appear to almost "jump" off the pad. Watching the Shuttle or old Saturn V footage - they both seem to take a few seconds to even get moving. #aresix
@Disco-Stu: Liquid fueled rockets take a little bit to build thrust. Solid fueled rockets leap off the pad.
"T-Zero is totally different—there is no kick, since there are no solid rocket strap-on boosters. The liquid engines are very smooth. The thrust builds up gently until the rocket simply rises off of the pad. You have to go by your watch, and the announcement from the launch control bunker, to know that you are flying!" -Leroy Chiao, Contributing Astronaut for Gizmodo's Space Week. #aresix
@Con Seannery: Note that the first stage of Shuttle is partially solid-fueled, so it has the kick and the shakes, but it's still partially liquid fueled then, and a heavier vehicle. This one's lighter and ONLY solid-fuel. #aresix
@chabig001: It was changed since the Mercury era. It appeared that saying things like "We have liftoff. I hope to god that socket I lost when we wrenched the damn thing together didn't fall somewhere important" scared the astronauts. #aresix
@D.A.: I heard something about "tumble engine", and NASA did say that only the first stage would be firing... so I suspect it went pretty much as-planned.
I'm excited... we need to get back in to real space exploration. Without the ability to exploit resources on the moon in the asteroid belt, our industrial base won't last much longer. (Relatively speaking...) #aresix
Let's just hope we don't have to watch a failure to launch. Besides not liking Matteo McConaughey, I'm pissed Sarah Jessica Parker beat my Dad's horse in a claiming race yesterday. #aresix
@GitEmSteveDave_Right: 1 Wrong: ∞: Thank Blam for the commenter star system. Without it I might never have had the pleasure to read your wonderful comment... #aresix
10/29/09
10/28/09
They should be launching the next version of the space shuttle, not a piece of crap rocket that anyone and their grandmothers can make. #aresix
10/29/09
On the flip side we have the Soviet approach with Soyuz that,while less glamorous, consists of cheaper, mass produced spacecraft that are lighter, simpler, safer, and again...much cheaper.
Replacing the shuttle in all likelihood won't mean building another piece of equipment that complicated, or that cool. It will mean shorter-lifespan capsules atop modern rocket systems.
Anyways, it isn't easy to build a brand new rocket system...just look at SpaceX's awesome record. #aresix
10/29/09
In technology you usually take your last incarnation and take what you’ve learned from the mistakes and improve on it by making the next version much better. Here, we seem to be saying that we don't have will and are too lazy to make the effort. Instead, well just go back a couple of version and stick to that.
What we should be doing is making the next replacement a reusable, flyable, cost efficient etc next generation craft. Something out of Star Trek. But instead, we sit back like a bunch of losers in shop class just passing time until the bell rings.
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
The piggyback shuttle would only need to carry enough fuel to carry it the rest of the way into space which isn’t that far off. It will also then be able to fly back and reused just like the shuttle now.
10/29/09
10/29/09
Also, fuck off with that Japanese car crap. They make better cars. They're not as advanced as our space program. We are the most advanced in the space race. We've been by and on and around Mars more than another space program on the planet, and we've launched the farthest flying currently operating probes in the history of man. I'm just stuck wondering if you're just wantonly uninformed, or if you're trolling, because your argument doesn't make a lick of sense. #aresix
10/29/09
Seriously though, all this space stuff is fantasy to begin with. It's not suppose to make sense "budgetarily." It suppose to push the envelope of human exploration. Anytime you're pushing the envelope, it costs a premium. So, either do it right or don't do it at all because then you're really just wasting money. #aresix
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
So what we’re the most advanced in space? We will be superseded by China in no time if we let NASA run by a bunch of slackers like you who can only think of past glories. And before you open your big trap think of those idiot slackers now in Detroit who are still stuck in the past glory days when they were the most advanced automobile manufacturer in the world. #aresix
10/30/09
You probably don't even know that there are five planned rockets. The Aries 1-X is just one of those. The different types of rockets will carry different things. Some will carry people, and some will carry objects. Having five independent platforms for space travel is far more efficient than one gigantic "does all" platform. Its the difference between driving a SUV and a prius. You don't always need an SUV, and many times a prius will fit the job better.
Furthermore your "idea" about having a smaller shuttle on top of the "regular" shuttle is exactly how the shuttle operates. Go back and look at a picture of the shuttle. Its a small craft that sits on top of two gigantic rockets and a fuel tank. It rides those rockets up most of the way, and then jettisons them right before aligning for orbit. So basically, exactly what you described... already happening... which shows how much you really know.
10/30/09
[ntrs.nasa.gov]
I was the Chief Engineer on that project by the time I left that program. So you have to excuse me if I laugh at some of the comments.
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
"T-Zero is totally different—there is no kick, since there are no solid rocket strap-on boosters. The liquid engines are very smooth. The thrust builds up gently until the rocket simply rises off of the pad. You have to go by your watch, and the announcement from the launch control bunker, to know that you are flying!" -Leroy Chiao, Contributing Astronaut for Gizmodo's Space Week. #aresix
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
And they say our SUVs are our problem...
/sarcasm
(Seriously, people never get my sarcasm) #aresix
10/28/09
/serious #aresix
10/28/09
10/28/09
Yellow Star: Sarcasm
Yellow Rose: Texas
Yellow Snow: Do Not Eat
... more to come, no doubt ... #aresix
10/28/09
/godwin
10/29/09
#2 - I thought my star was gold, heh. #aresix
10/28/09
10/28/09
I'm excited... we need to get back in to real space exploration. Without the ability to exploit resources on the moon in the asteroid belt, our industrial base won't last much longer. (Relatively speaking...) #aresix
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/28/09
10/27/09
10/27/09