The Ares 1-X File

At 28 Oct 2009 Ares 1-X was launched. There was before some fear that
the first stage may crash in the second after separation. A principle
problem by the use of big solids. The TV of the flight showed exactly
such an event. But NASA said telemetry failed just seconds before the
crash and they had to wait the readout of the onboard sensor recorder.
I never read about the content anywhere. Now, after 4 years, is any
final report about this flight published?


## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##

In article , n-
neckar.de says...

At 28 Oct 2009 Ares 1-X was launched. There was before some fear that
the first stage may crash in the second after separation. A principle
problem by the use of big solids. The TV of the flight showed exactly
such an event. But NASA said telemetry failed just seconds before the
crash and they had to wait the readout of the onboard sensor recorder.
I never read about the content anywhere. Now, after 4 years, is any
final report about this flight published?


## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##

Considering that Ares 1 and Ares V were the "brainchild" of the, then,
NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, I doubt that such "bad news" would have
been widely publicized, even inside NASA. That said, there is some info
"out there" (mind the wrap on the links):

Executive Overview, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
FEBRUARY 2011, APO-1096, Ares I-X Flight Data Evaluation
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/515784main_A...s%20I-X%20Flt%
20Eval%20Exec%20Overview.pdf

From above:

The completed flight evaluation is documented in ?Final
Flight Evaluation Report for Ares I Use of Ares I-X Data,?
APO-1041 which consists of 5 volumes totaling more than
1,600 pages of technical data, analysis, and evaluation
on the tasks that were performed. The report also contains
an executive summary, flight overview, brief summaries of
each task, and a summary of data quality and archival that
provides a level of detail this overview cannot.

So, there you are. If you want the "gory details", you'll need to find
a copy of the above document. A quick web search does not find this
document online, so you may have to look elsewhere.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

In article , n-
neckar.de says...

At 28 Oct 2009 Ares 1-X was launched. There was before some fear that
the first stage may crash in the second after separation. A principle
problem by the use of big solids. The TV of the flight showed exactly
such an event. But NASA said telemetry failed just seconds before the
crash and they had to wait the readout of the onboard sensor recorder.
I never read about the content anywhere. Now, after 4 years, is any
final report about this flight published?


## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##

Considering that Ares 1 and Ares V were the "brainchild" of the, then,
NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, I doubt that such "bad news" would have
been widely publicized, even inside NASA. That said, there is some info
"out there" (mind the wrap on the links):

Executive Overview, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
FEBRUARY 2011, APO-1096, Ares I-X Flight Data Evaluation
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/515784main_A...s%20I-X%20Flt%
20Eval%20Exec%20Overview.pdf

From above:

The completed flight evaluation is documented in ?Final
Flight Evaluation Report for Ares I Use of Ares I-X Data,?
APO-1041 which consists of 5 volumes totaling more than
1,600 pages of technical data, analysis, and evaluation
on the tasks that were performed. The report also contains
an executive summary, flight overview, brief summaries of
each task, and a summary of data quality and archival that
provides a level of detail this overview cannot.

So, there you are. If you want the "gory details", you'll need to find
a copy of the above document. A quick web search does not find this
document online, so you may have to look elsewhere.

Jeff

Thanks a lot Jeff. In other words, the result of the most expensive and
ambitious NASA SRM test flight is hidden somewhere in a 1600 pages
report at an unknown location. Ok. unlike the missing Apollo 13 final
report we know the title at least. I think its impressive how NASA
in the time of the internet can hide the main result of a well publicized
billion dollar program.



## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##

In article , n-
neckar.de says...

The completed flight evaluation is documented in ?Final
Flight Evaluation Report for Ares I Use of Ares I-X Data,?
APO-1041 which consists of 5 volumes totaling more than
1,600 pages of technical data, analysis, and evaluation
on the tasks that were performed. The report also contains
an executive summary, flight overview, brief summaries of
each task, and a summary of data quality and archival that
provides a level of detail this overview cannot.

So, there you are. If you want the "gory details", you'll need to find
a copy of the above document. A quick web search does not find this
document online, so you may have to look elsewhere.

Thanks a lot Jeff. In other words, the result of the most expensive and
ambitious NASA SRM test flight is hidden somewhere in a 1600 pages
report at an unknown location. Ok. unlike the missing Apollo 13 final
report we know the title at least. I think its impressive how NASA
in the time of the internet can hide the main result of a well publicized
billion dollar program.

This document (APO-1041) does not appear to be (currently) available on
the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS), even though a search for "Ares
I-X" turns up 1,578 documents (plenty of reading there).

I'm not sure if you could find this document (APO-1041) by other means
(e.g. FOIA request).

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/FOIA/

My best guess is that this document might be considered proprietary data
(since this was a test by a contractor), so it might never be publicly
available.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 17:05:20 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote:


This document (APO-1041) does not appear to be (currently) available on
the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS), even though a search for "Ares
I-X" turns up 1,578 documents (plenty of reading there).

I'm not sure if you could find this document (APO-1041) by other means
(e.g. FOIA request).

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/FOIA/

My best guess is that this document might be considered proprietary data
(since this was a test by a contractor), so it might never be publicly
available.

Or it might have been ITAR'd by the crusading anti-China Congressman
who got NTRS taken down for months on-end.

Brian

In article , bthorn64
@suddenlink.net says...

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 17:05:20 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote:


This document (APO-1041) does not appear to be (currently) available on
the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS), even though a search for "Ares
I-X" turns up 1,578 documents (plenty of reading there).

I'm not sure if you could find this document (APO-1041) by other means
(e.g. FOIA request).

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/FOIA/

My best guess is that this document might be considered proprietary data
(since this was a test by a contractor), so it might never be publicly
available.

Or it might have been ITAR'd by the crusading anti-China Congressman
who got NTRS taken down for months on-end.

Also a possibility. You know those huge SRB's look an awful lot like
big missiles. :-P

My guess is that this document won't see the light of day.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer