A full-scale separation test of the forward skirt extension for the Ares I-X flight test at its facility in Utah (NASA/ATK)
[/caption]
The successful test of NASA’s Ares I-X Forward Skirt Extension on Thursday represents a “major milestone” in the development of the launch system, according to Alliant Techsystems (ATK). The “skirt extension” in question is a solid ring of aluminium (or aluminum) connecting the first stage with the upper stages of the rocket.
This summer, the first flight of the Constellation Program is scheduled to blast off from a Cape Canaveral launch pad. The ATK pyrotechnics deep in the Utah Desert has proven to NASA that a key portion of this test flight will go as planned, allowing the reusable portion of the Ares I to return to Earth for recovery…
To say 2008 was a turbulent year for the Constellation program is an understatement. Although there have been a number of successful tests (including the test firing of the jettison motor, launch abort system and an old Shuttle engine; plus parachute tests), political tensions, criticism of the technology and budget uncertainty have all taken their toll. The future of the Constellation Program is in doubt (or shaky at best) and there’s not many media headlines with anything positive to say. So, when there is a successful test of any Ares component, it is certainly worth reporting, in an attempt to redress the good-news/bad-news balance and give credit where credit is due.
Artist impression of the Ares I-X at the launchpad, plus labelled sections of the rocket (NASA)So, last week, ATK successfully tested the explosive charges that will perform the most important task of the test launch of the Ares I-X. The Forward Skirt Extension is located between the first and second stages of the rocket (pictured left). This 1.8 metre (6 ft) long by 3.7 metre (12 ft) diameter aluminium cylinder will allow the first stage booster to separate at the frustum (a cone-shaped connector that attaches the first stage to the larger diameter upper stage). During the launch, separation will occur at an altitude of around 40 km (130,000 ft).
This section will also be important as it will need to store the recovery parachutes for the first stage and it will need to support the mass of the upper stages (plus payload) during launch. It is for this reason that the skirt is forged from one solid lump of aluminium and reinforced with a unique internal support structure, housing three main parachutes.
Data from the charge detonation will be used to measure the shock generated, understanding how this might affect the Ares I-X mission and future Ares I launches. Thursday’s test appears to have achieved this as well as severing the forward skirt extension.
Roll on summer, I’m looking forward to seeing the Ares X-I first stage parachute to Earth…
The Common Extensible Cryogenic Engine, or CECE. Image Credit: Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne
[/caption]
Yes, you’re seeing this image correctly. There are icicles forming at the rim of this rocket engine bell, and this particular engine generates a scalding 2,760 C (5,000 F) degree steam and a whopping 13,000 lbs of thrust. How can that happen? Cryogenics. NASA is developing the engines that will be used for the next generation lunar lander, the Altair. These engines are called the Common Extensible Cryogenic Engine (CECE). CECE is fueled by a mixture of -182 C (-297 F) liquid oxygen and -253 C (-423 F) liquid hydrogen. The engine components are super-cooled to similar low temperatures–and that’s where the icicles come from. As CECE burns its frigid fuels, hot steam and other gases are propelled out the nozzle. The steam is cooled by the cold nozzle, condensing and eventually freezing to form icicles around the rim. Watch the video.
More about the engine.
CECE, is a deep-throttling engine, which means it has the flexibility to reduce thrust from 100 percent down to 10 percent — allowing a spacecraft to gently land on the lunar surface. During the test, the engine was successfully throttled from a high of 104 percent of the engine’s potential down to eight percent, a record for an engine of this type. A cryogenic engine is needed to provide high performance and put more payload on the surface of the moon. The CECE demonstrator has evaluated two engine configurations during three rounds of hot-fire testing.
The tests are being done by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne in West Palm Beach, Florida. This was the third test for these engines. Previous tests in 2006 and 2007 showed the engines needed some fine tuning. Tony Kim, Deep Throttling Engine project manager at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala, said, “Testing in 2007 provided an in-depth examination of low-power-level throttling and engine performance characteristics. This third cycle we actively addressed and found solutions to the challenges we faced.”
The team carefully assessed test results that showed pressure oscillations in the engine at lower throttle levels called “chugging.” Chugging may not be a concern for the engine itself, but the resulting vibrations could have the potential to resonate with the structure of the rocket and cause problems for the lander or crew.
Injector and propellant feed system modifications successfully eliminated engine chugging by controlling liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen flow to the combustion chamber. The latest engine configuration incorporates a new injector design and propellant feed system that carefully manages the pressure, temperature and flow of propellants. And it seemed to work quite well.
On Launch Pad 39B at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, a crane completes construction of one of the towers in the new lightning protection system for the Constellation Program. Credit: NASA
[/caption]
Things are a-changing over at the Kennedy Space Center launch complex. The first lightning tower for the Ares rockets has been completed, dwarfing all the other structures on pad 39B. The tower is for the new lightning protection system for the Constellation Program. Other towers are being constructed at left and behind the service structures on the pad. Each of the three new lightning towers will be 152 meters (500 feet) tall with an additional 30 meter (100-foot) fiberglass mast atop supporting a catenary, or overhead wire system. This compares to the height of the shuttle Fixed Service Structure at 105.7 meters (347ft) to the top of the lightning mast. The new and improved lightning protection system allows for the taller height of the Ares I rocket compared to the space shuttle. Pad 39B will be the site of the first Ares vehicle launch, including the Ares I-X test flight that is targeted for July 2009. See image below for what the completed system will look like.
This is an artist’s rendition of what the new lightning protection system being built at Launch Pad 39B will look like when fully completed. The launch pad will also be modified to support future launches of Ares and Orion spacecraft.
Obama is in for a rough ride to get the economy back on track, but NASA cutbacks are not the answer
[/caption]There’s no denying it, President-elect Barack Obama will have one of the toughest jobs in presidential history. The challenges the 44th President of the United States will face are deep and varied. Everything from the economy to housing, from health care to warfare, from energy to security; everything appears to be in a state of “crisis”. So, of the incoming administration’s priorities, getting man back to the Moon is low on the list. Unfortunately, the exploration of space is often viewed as a luxury rather than a necessity, policy changes interfere with long-term projects, and the NASA budget can become an easy target for cutbacks.
It will come as no surprise then, that news is surfacing about some friction between Obama’s new administration and the existing top brass in NASA. Some reports point to direct non-cooperation by NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, an allegation that both NASA and the Obama transition team deny. Regardless, there is tension building, especially when it is becoming clear that the transition team may be eyeing up NASA budget cuts, postponing the Constellation program, possibly putting long-term US manned access to space at serious risk.
A space exploration crisis is on the horizon, but what damage would it cause?
Writing about NASA’s endeavours in space can be a frustrating experience. On the one hand, the US space agency is responsible for mankind’s biggest space-faring achievements. NASA has always led and the world has followed. NASA pushes back the frontiers of manned and robotic exploration, and now the agency’s expertise is being passed down to commercial spaceflight companies (such as SpaceX support through COTS contracts) to fill in the void behind NASA’s advances.
We are reaching an age where other nations are investing in space exploration too. The European Space Agency (ESA) is rapidly growing, Russia has one of the most robust launch systems on the planet, China is making huge leaps in manned spaceflight, India has sent a probe to the Moon; the list is growing by the month. Therefore, the US is beginning to feel competition from the international community, and although the US won’t be toppled as #1 in space any time soon, what about a decade from now? Will the playing field turn against NASA’s dominance in Earth orbit and beyond? Fortunately the US has close collaborative ties with ESA and Russia, but what happens if this situation changes?
NASA recently extended their use of the Russian Soyuz vehicle to fill in US manned access to space during the “5-year gap” between Shuttle decommissioning in 2010 and (proposed) Constellation launch in 2015. Although it is reassuring to know astronauts will still be able to fly with cosmonauts to-and-from the International Space Station (ISS) beyond 2010, what happens if relations between the US and Russia chill even further (the South Ossetia conflict is a prime example of how the politics between the two nations can freeze solid)? The Russian government could very quickly pull the plug on US manned access to space.
Artist impression of the SpaceX Dragon approaching the space station (SpaceX)And so, all eyes on US space companies accelerating their development of alternative means of transportation. Elon Musk’s SpaceX for example, is a front-runner when it comes to commercial manned spaceflight. In a recent interview I conducted with SpaceX, Diane Murphy (Vice-President of Marketing and Communications) was very optimistic about SpaceX’s Dragon module providing the answer to manned spaceflight. “I think we’ll surprise them [NASA] with how quickly we are moving so they can use us for crew as well. We’ll be ready!” she told me. Judging by the speed at which the company is developing, it certainly seems to be a possibility.
But, for now, we are stuck in an awkward position. NASA gets a minuscule budget when compared with other government departments. The US government has underfunded the agency for many years, and the funds it does receive are constantly open to erosion by changing administrations and space policy. Now Barack Obama’s administration must balance the needs of NASA with the worsening financial crisis hitting the world, so a transition team has been sent to look into NASA business to understand where work needs to be done.
Now it seems as if tensions are coming to a head. According to reports in the Orlando Sentinel, Michael Griffin, who was attending a book launch with members of the Obama transition team (including ex-NASA senior administrator Lori Garver), accused Garver as being “unqualified” to be assessing whether funds should be cut from the development of the Constellation Program. According to witnesses at the book launch, Garver tried to reason with Griffin saying, “Mike, I don’t understand what the problem is. We are just trying to look under the hood.”
Griffin apparently disliked this assertion and said, “If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar. Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood.”
Associates who attended the book launch said the exchange between Griffin and Garver was not an argument, it was simply “a discussion about stuff.” Still, whatever tone the discussion was pitched at, there seem to be problems brewing. To calm rumours that he was not cooperating, Griffin wrote an email to NASA employees saying, “This report, largely supported by anonymous sources and hearsay, is simply wrong. We are fully cooperating with the [transition] team members.”
Hemorrhaging the NASA budget? Stern cites the MSL as a prime example of damaging overspending (NASA)This could be the symptom of recent accusations by Alan Stern, ex-NASA Associate Administrator for Science, that there was a “cancer” in the administration’s management structure. According to Stern, the result of this “cancer” is zero-accountability for project budget overspending and wasteful practices. His words came when NASA announced it would be removing a sample storage box from the Mars Science Laboratory after it had been developed and constructed (thereby throwing away $2 million), then followed by an announcement about a two year postponement of the mission. Needless to say, Stern is highly critical of the mission, prompting him to say that the “Mars Program is slowly committing suicide before our very eyes.”
Putting government underfunding, and alleged NASA mismanagement to one side, it appears to be a continuing misconception that the exploration of space (whether it be manned or robotic) is an academic endeavour. Personally, I’d argue that manned exploration of space is essential for the long-term survival of our species, but politics only thinks about the next four-year term in office. Although politics is a fantastic motivator for space exploration in some cases (cue: Apollo Program during the Cold War in the late ’60’s and early ’70’s) to fulfil short-term goals, during periods of social and economic upheaval, space exploration becomes an unnecessary luxury and policies become a lot more introverted.
To finish off, let’s look at the European Space Agency. Although ESA is a completely different entity from NASA–it is not politically-driven (although some leaders want it to be), it is a consortium of many nations and its budget is smaller than NASA’s–its outlook for Europe’s efforts in space are far more optimistic. Rather than trying to cut funding to save money, ESA appears to have a renewed vigour toward using space exploration as a means to stimulate the economy:
These decisions have particular relevance at the present time, showing as they do Europe’s determination to invest in space as a key sector providing for innovation, economic growth, strategic independence and the preparation of the future. – ESA press release
To avoid any regrets in space policy, the upcoming US administration needs to look hard at ESA’s motivation. Investment in space provides independence, economic growth and preparation for the future. Alas, by making cutbacks to the Constellation Program, the US will start depending on Russia for manned access to space (if a commercial alternative isn’t available in time), economic influence of a manned space program will be cancelled out, and as for the future? Well, we’ll just have to hope for the best.
The solid rocket test fire on Thursday, and the Ares rocket patch (NASA/Spaceflight Now)
[/caption]Despite being the subject of some bad news of late, development of the Ares rocket system and Orion crew module pushes ahead. In the Utah Desert on Thursday, the oldest ever Shuttle engine was tested. The seven-year old rocket (two years past its “guarantee”) performed a 123 second burn, simulating how long it would be in use during an optimal Shuttle launch. You may be asking, what does this have to do with Ares? Data from the Shuttle engine tests will be applied to the design of the Ares 1 rocket system, aiding engine nozzle design and boosting the robustness of the future Constellation Project. Environmental change measurements caused by pressure and sound during the firing will also be assessed.
While the Utah Desert rumbles with the sound of rockets, over at NASA’s Langley Research Center, in Hampton, Virginia, the Orion crew module and tower-like launch abort system simulators are rapidly being constructed toward the goal of full-scale Ares I-X atmospheric tests in 2009…
NASA Langley technicians work to attach the external panels for the Ares I-X crew module simulator (NASA/Sean Smith)“This test is an example of the aggressive testing program NASA pursues to assure flight safety,” said David Beaman, manager of the Reusable Solid Rocket Booster Project Office at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, about Thursday’s rocket test in the Utah Desert. “It also allows us to gather information on how motors with different ages perform.”
These are significant tests for NASA, as the space agency certifies the use of the reusable shuttle solid rocket engines for five years past the date of manufacture. This most recent test was carried out on a seven-year old shuttle engine, and it appeared to function exactly as it should, if not better. This test was ground-breaking as the engine used was the oldest of its kind to be ignited.
During a shuttle launch, each solid rocket booster generates an average thrust of 2.6 million pounds for 123 seconds. The seven-year old engine surpassed this average, generating 3.3 million pounds for slightly over two minutes. The data from this test firing will be used in the continuing development of the Ares I engine and rocket nozzle.
Development of the Constellation Program doesn’t stop at exciting rocket tests, the Orion crew module is slowly taking shape too. The next hurdle for NASA engineers is to prepare Orion for full-scale launch tests beginning in 2009, including more work on assembling the Orion pad launch-abort simulator. The two-minute full-scale launches will carry an Ares test vehicle (called the Ares I-X) to an altitude of 25 miles to test the first stage performance and first stage separation, plus the parachute recovery system.
Kevin Brown, project manager for the Ares I-X Crew Module/Launch Abort System (CM/LAS) project commented on the complexity of the task in hand, saying a lot of people from NASA and external contractors are working in tandem to arrive at a common goal, on schedule. “We have a team doing fabrication and assembly work in conjunction with an off-site contractor, and we have another team readying to install about 150 sensors once the crew module and launch abort tower are completed,” he said.
All going well, next years tests will be successful, acting as a key stepping stone toward the first crewed launch to the International Space Station in 2015 and then carrying explorers to the Moon in 2020…
The Launch Abort System motor at full thrust (NASA)
[/caption]When the Constellation Program is completed, we’ll have a brand new generation of rocket design (Ares) and a hi-tech space ship (Orion). It only seems fair that we should also have a new kind of emergency mechanism that will carry the crew to safety should a problem during launch threaten the astronauts.
Enter the Constellation Launch Abort System, delivering a million pounds of thrust, carrying the crew a mile from any danger. Looks like it would be one hell of a ride!
Last July, I reported that the first full-scale test firing of the Orion jettison motor was successful, and it would seem the tests are continuing. Lighting up the Utah landscape, the awesome power of the Launch Abort System is abundantly clear and it looks like we are well on the road to the full-scale launch abort mock-up.
Apollo pad abort test in 1965 (NASA)In this latest series of tests, the jettison motor delivered a million pounds in thrust. This is impressive as it will quickly clear the crew of Orion from any accident during launch atop the largest rocket system designed since the Apollo Program. In fact, the Orion jettison system is an advancement of the original Apollo pad abort rocket (left).
The Constellation safety measure can be used should there be an emergency on the launch pad or as the Ares I blasts through the atmosphere. Although the experience would be a violent one (the G-force will be several times that of a normal shuttle launch), at least the crew will be carried to safety.
[/caption]There’s been a lot of bad news surrounding the development of the Constellation Program of late. We’ve had news of general design flaws, rebelling NASA engineers, failed parachute tests, budget overruns, vibrational issues and job losses. Now we have a new one to add to the mix, the Ares I launch vehicle could bump into the launch tower during blast-off. According to a Florida report, only a tiny gust of wind is required to cause the rocket to hit the tower or scorch it, causing catastrophic failure and/or costly damage to the pad.
You’d be forgiven for thinking Constellation is a failed project, that is obviously going to overrun, obviously going to cost too much and is obviously a waste of time. But forget the media naysayers for a moment. Despite the challenges faced by NASA engineers, a bumpy road on the way to launching the most advanced rocket system ever devised is well worth the ride…
The Orion parachute test drop didn't go so well... (NASA)
Back in August, I reported on the testing of the Ares and Orion parachute systems. Very little news was available about the Ares parachute successes, so the focus was placed on the spectacular failure of the Orion test vehicle, which fell to the ground like a stone (captured in full video glory). This wasn’t a critical failure of the technology, it was more of an experimental anomaly. After all, isn’t that what test flights are all about?
Ares V: Heavy lift capability comes with a price (NASA)Then there was much emphasis placed on the predicted vibrational problems facing Ares I during launch. Fortunately, as Nancy reported on August 19th, NASA engineers had a solution. Just when the NASA engineers thought they were winning, a few days later a report comes out saying the old Apollo era crawlerway would not be able to support the weight of a fully laden Ares rocket (cue more budget over-stretching).
More bad news has come from other areas too. During the transition from the Space Shuttle to Constellation, it was estimated that 8,000 jobs would probably be lost. Even after this projected number was reduced to 3,000-4,000 job losses, US Senator Bill Nelson said that NASA job losses and an increased dependence on Russian space vehicles will result in “generating jobs in Russia.” However, this argument may not hold water for much longer as the Russian Soyuz manufacturer has run out of money.
Protesting over job losses (Canaveral Port Authority)Now prepare yourself for some more bad news. The Orlando Sentinel has published an article entitled “Is NASA’s Ares doomed?” Oh dear.
This headline comes in response to computer models that show the Ares I rocket could get blown into the launch tower during lift-off. Ares I could experience “liftoff drift”, a phenomenon that occurs when the rocket’s solid-fuel motor ignites, making the 309 ft (100 m) Ares I “jump” sideways. If this should occur during a breeze of a little over 12 mph (19 kmh), Ares I could fall into its launch tower, or cause severe and expensive damage to the tower under the extreme heat of its boosters.
“We were told by a person directly involved [in looking at the problem] that as they incorporate more variables into the liftoff-drift-curve model, the worse the curve becomes,” said an anonymous NASA contractor. Contractors are not authorized to talk about Ares development, but the contractor continued, “I get the impression that things are quickly going from bad to worse to unrecoverable.”
The future of space travel - Artist impression of Ares V on the launchpad (NASA)But are these problems insurmountable? Surely NASA engineers will find a solution to this difficulty (much in the same way as they found an answer to the vibrational problems)?
“There are always issues that crop up when you are developing a new rocket and many opinions about how to deal with them,” said Jeff Hanley, Constellation Program manager. “We have a lot of data and understanding of what it’s going to take to build this.”
The Orlando Sentinel also posted information about continuing rifts in NASA pointing out that a growing number of engineers are quitting the Constellation program through fears of unrealistic goals and safety concerns, calling the whole Constellation concept into question.
“If they push hard enough, yes, it will fly,” said one disgruntled NASA engineer working on Ares. “But there are going to be so many compromises to be able to launch it, and it will be so expensive and so behind schedule, that it may be better if didn’t fly at all.”
In my view, any massive project like Constellation will attract its critics. Ares and Orion are new technologies where NASA engineers will have to make some huge strides to make it work. As already mentioned, the Ares rocket system is going to fly, but it might overrun in spending and schedule. However, all these challenges will be worth it when we see the first Ares I launch from Cape Canaveral in six or seven years time.
Astronaut Eugene Cernan from Apollo 17, the last mission to the Moon (NASA)Never before have we had the opportunity to build a space technology not only used for transportation to the space station, it will be used to facilitate the next lunar mission, and eventually a trip to Mars. These projects come at a huge cost for the entire nation, but like the run-up to the Apollo missions in the 1960’s, the US needs to build an enthusiasm for the future of space flight. We are on the cusp of a huge advance for mankind, there’s no budget or timescale for that kind of achievement.
It may not be politically or economically realistic, but more money should be ploughed into NASA and Constellation. This is a momentous challenge requiring a momentous effort from the nation. Let’s just hope some of the spending promises of the presidential candidates last beyond November 4th…
Matt Gasch of NASA Ames and Betsy Pugel of NASA Goddard examine the remains of a 1966 Apollo test vehicle heat shield (Smithsonian Museum/Eric Long)
[/caption]NASA scientists currently working on the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle had the rare opportunity to unpack a little piece of history. A visit to Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum led them to uncover crates containing the heat shields used during the development of the Apollo Program, some 35 years ago. The shielding has not seen light of day since 1966 when it was dropped from low Earth orbit and protected a test vehicle from fiery re-entry. The NASA scientists hope to learn more about the thermal response of the old heat shield to improve the shielding of the Orion return vessel a whole generation after the pioneering lunar missions…
On July 31st and August 1st, the NASA crew descended on Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum Garber Facility to do a bit of space-age archaeology. The facility makes it their job to collect, preserve and restore anything space and aircraft related, ensuring the Apollo heatshieilds were in perfect condition (or as “perfect” as they can be after undergoing re-entry over three decades ago) for the Orion development teams from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California. What they unpacked was a space geek’s dream.
“We started working together at the end of June to track down any Apollo-era heat shields that they had in storage,” said Elizabeth Pugel from the Detector Systems Branch at Goddard. “We located one and opened it. It was like a nerd Christmas for us!”
Scientists examine the 1966 Apollo test vehicle heat shield (Smithsonian Museum/Eric Long)
The NASA team managed to eventually track down heat shield material from a test re-entry from low Earth orbit on August 26th, 1966. This material will prove useful in the continuing development of the Constellation Program’s Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle so more information can be gained about the material’s reaction to extreme heat as it was dropped through the atmosphere.
“We are examining the design of the carrier structure (the metal structure that connects the heat shield to the vessel that contains the astronauts) and the heat shield material’s thermal response,” Pugel added.
“The Smithsonian has been generous in their providing large pieces of the heat shield that we will be doing destructive and non-destructive testing on during the months before Orion’s Preliminary Design Review,” said Matthew Gasch from NASA Ames. “This information will further our confidence in our design and materials development.”
It might seem strange that NASA scientists are researching re-entry technology from the Apollo era, after all the Orion cone-like design borrows its shape from the Apollo Program’s Saturn V Command Module (amongst others), but that is where the 20th century similarity ends. Orion will be packed with the most advanced 21st century computing, electronics, life support, propulsion and heat protection systems.
Orion aside, I would have loved to have been there when the NASA Orion scientists cracked open the wooden Apollo crates (using crowbars, naturally), to find them filled with the dusty artefacts from the beginning of the space age (but then again, I might be watching way too much Indiana Jones movies…).
[/caption]
According to an internal email, NASA staff have been instructed to initiate a study into extending the operational lifetime of the Shuttle to bridge the 5-year gap between planned Shuttle retirement and Constellation commencement. In an apparent U-turn in the US space agency’s policy, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin has ordered a feasibility study to assess whether the ageing space vehicle fleet, first launched in 1981, can operate until 2015. This news comes at a time when concern is mounting for the US dependence on the Soyuz system after 2010, especially since the recent political chill between the US and Russia…
This news may come as a surprise to many, especially since Michael Griffin’s remarks that to extend the life of the Shuttle fleet could put astronauts in danger and cripple the agency’s fledgling Constellation program. However, there has been mounting political pressure on NASA to find an alternative to depending on the Russian space agency’s Soyuz spacecraft to access the International Space Station in the five years before the brand new Constellation Program is scheduled to launch by 2015. The recent military action in the South Ossetia region of Georgia has helped to increase political tensions; this is possibly one of the main contributing factors to the initiation of this feasibility study. Both US Presidential candidates, Barack Obama (Dem) and John McCain (Rep), are also pushing for a solution to the problematic “5-year gap.”
NASA officials have confirmed the internal email’s authenticity received by the Orlando Sentinel, a Florida-based news agency, but were keen to point out that it was too soon to say what the study’s reach would be.
In the email sent out on Wednesday by John Coggeshall, manager of manifest and schedules at Johnson Space Center in Houston, he said, “We want to focus on helping bridge the gap of U.S. vehicles traveling to the ISS (International Space Station) as efficiently as possible.” However, NASA spokesman John Yembrick was keen to point out to an Associated Press journalist that although the email was sent out, it was premature and “…the parameters of the study have not yet been defined.”
Griffin has, until now, been opposed to extending the Shuttle program primarily due to financial reasons; the effort and funds required could hurt the Constellation Program. But it would seem that world events and politics could be forcing him to reconsider…
Ares V: Heavy lift capability comes with a price (NASA)
[/caption]
There’s a big problem with Kennedy Space Center playing host to the Constellation Program: The heavy-lift rocket, Ares V, may be too heavy for the infrastructure to cope with. The crawlerway is a 40 year old road designed for the Saturn V (Apollo Program) crawler-transporters and is currently used to carry the Shuttle up to 6.8km (4.2 miles) from assembly building to launch pad. The crawlerway may be unable to withstand the weight of the fully-laden Ares V, transporter and mobile launch pad; a combined weight 33% heavier than anything the Kennedy crawlerway has ever supported. With the Constellation budget getting tighter every day that passes, the possibility of a multi-billion dollar crawlerway upgrade will only create more problems for NASA…
It seems the Good News:Bad News ratio for NASA’s Constellation Project is getting smaller with every news item that is posted. This week, the good news is: NASA may have solved the Ares vibration problem, but the bad news is: NASA has just released images of the failed Orion parachute test, the Constellation spacesuits will need to be produced by a different manufacturer and now we have concerns for the sub-standard infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center. So this week’s ratio so far is 1:3… not good. OK, that wasn’t a very scientific statistical analysis, but it is clear that the Constellation is off to a bumpy start. You could argue that bad news is more likely to make the headlines than good news, but the complications for NASA are becoming problematic and many are concerned that the gap between Shuttle decommissioning and Constellation launch could widen. This issue is now cropping up in the US Presidential race, with both frontrunning candidates (Obama and McCain) making promises for increased space agency funding.
Space Shuttle Discovery inching its way along the Crawlerway to pad 39B (NASA)
So what is wrong with Kennedy’s crawlerway? The combined weight of NASA’s Ares V cargo launch vehicle, its mobile launcher and Constellation crawler-transporter may be too heavy for it to support. After all, the 6.8 km (4.2 mile) crawlerway was built with the Apollo program’s Saturn V in mind, 40 years ago. Fortunately it didn’t require an upgrade when transporting the Shuttle, but the difference in weight from the Shuttle to Ares V is stark. The fully-laden Shuttle (plus crawler and empty external tank) has a mass of 7.7 million kg (16.9 million lb); the fully-laden Ares V could weigh as much as 10.9 million kg (24 million lb). This mass increase could cause significant damage to the crawlerway and, ultimately, damage to Ares V should the existing road be used.
The crawlerway is designed as two 12 metre-wide lanes, separated by 15 metres. It has a surface of the road has 20 cm of river gravel on top of 90 cm of compacted limerock. Under that is two layers of “select fill” 1.1 metres deep.
“Given the projected weight of the Ares V vehicle, mobile launcher and transporter, the total weight is about 33% higher than the crawlerway has ever supported there is a possibility that the crawlerway could fail to support the load, resulting in severe impacts to the Constellation programme.” – Constellation vertical integration element risk assessment.
Unfortunately, in July, NASA administrator Michael Griffin stated that there was no Constellation money left for Kennedy upgrades. So what can be done? For now it looks like Ares V will have to stay inside the assembly building until NASA comes up with a plan (or roll it down the crawlerway and hope for the best! This is probably why I’m not a NASA employee…)
