A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Orion PDR slides to mid 2009



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 2nd 08, 08:31 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009


"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Alan Erskine" wrote:
They're having all sorts of problems; is this kind of thing unusual in a
major program? I mean, to have this many problems this early (booster, CM
etc)...


It's not unusual at all - the capsule programs of the 60's had it just
as bad, as did the Shuttle. The difference it that because of the
'net the problems are visible to thousands of armchair engineers very
nearly in real time.


The difference was with Apollo, von Braun didn't believe the initial weight
estimates for the CSM and LEM. So he put in generous performance margins in
the design of the Saturn V.

That didn't happen with Ares I and Orion, which is why mass budgets are so
tight on both programs. In other words, today's NASA management thought
there wouldn't be problems when they set the initial mass/payload
requirements for Orion/Ares I.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein


  #12  
Old September 2nd 08, 08:33 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009


"Alain Fournier" wrote in message
...
There is also the difference that in the sixties, those building space
ships were considered the cutting edge of engineering. Problems were
considered normal. Nowadays, people expect engineers to be able to
re-solve the problems that were already solved in the fifties and sixties
without much difficulty.


Today management expects that as well.

I don't believe Ares I's original requirements had as much performance
margin as von Braun quietly slipped into the Saturn V. von Braun did this
specifically because he did not believe the initial mass estimates for the
CSM and LM (i.e. he believed they would both grow in order to solve problems
with the initial designs). He was right.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein


  #13  
Old September 2nd 08, 09:56 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

Jeff Findley wrote:
"Alain Fournier" wrote in message
...
There is also the difference that in the sixties, those building space
ships were considered the cutting edge of engineering. Problems were
considered normal. Nowadays, people expect engineers to be able to
re-solve the problems that were already solved in the fifties and sixties
without much difficulty.


Today management expects that as well.

I don't believe Ares I's original requirements had as much performance
margin as von Braun quietly slipped into the Saturn V. von Braun did this
specifically because he did not believe the initial mass estimates for the
CSM and LM (i.e. he believed they would both grow in order to solve problems
with the initial designs). He was right.


I recall he had to be convinced that hydrogen in the upper stages was a
good idea. They ran some quick performance simulations on a computer
(that must have been a trick back in those days) and he was convinced.
  #14  
Old September 2nd 08, 09:58 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Jochem Huhmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

"Jeff Findley" writes:

I don't believe Ares I's original requirements had as much performance
margin as von Braun quietly slipped into the Saturn V. von Braun did this
specifically because he did not believe the initial mass estimates for the
CSM and LM (i.e. he believed they would both grow in order to solve problems
with the initial designs). He was right.


I'm quite sure he did that also because he didn't knew exactly how much
he would be able to squeeze out of the Saturn V and so was very
conservative with the design.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  #15  
Old September 2nd 08, 10:34 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Rick Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 685
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

In sci.space.history Jeff Findley wrote:
That didn't happen with Ares I and Orion, which is why mass budgets
are so tight on both programs. In other words, today's NASA
management thought there wouldn't be problems when they set the
initial mass/payload requirements for Orion/Ares I.


Is it they didn't think there would be problems, or was it that to
add-in the extra margin to cover problems would have even more clearly
called into question the whole Ares I and (not)being a "just shuffle
shuttle components" at the beginning?

rick jones
--
The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as
it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose."
- Rick Jones
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
  #16  
Old September 3rd 08, 04:24 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,999
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

"Jeff Findley" wrote:


"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Alan Erskine" wrote:
They're having all sorts of problems; is this kind of thing unusual in a
major program? I mean, to have this many problems this early (booster, CM
etc)...


It's not unusual at all - the capsule programs of the 60's had it just
as bad, as did the Shuttle. The difference it that because of the
'net the problems are visible to thousands of armchair engineers very
nearly in real time.


The difference was with Apollo, von Braun didn't believe the initial weight
estimates for the CSM and LEM. So he put in generous performance margins in
the design of the Saturn V.


Von Braun's actions have no bearing whatsoever of the question of
whether or not such problems are unusual.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
  #17  
Old September 3rd 08, 05:29 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009



Derek Lyons wrote:
Von Braun's actions have no bearing whatsoever of the question of
whether or not such problems are unusual.


Since building manned spacecraft shares a lot in common with building
high performance aircraft, when's the last time you heard of a aircraft
coming in significantly _under_ the planned weight? :-)

Pat
  #18  
Old September 3rd 08, 09:34 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,999
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

Pat Flannery wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
Von Braun's actions have no bearing whatsoever of the question of
whether or not such problems are unusual.


Since building manned spacecraft shares a lot in common with building
high performance aircraft, when's the last time you heard of a aircraft
coming in significantly _under_ the planned weight? :-)


Or [combat] ships and submarines.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
  #19  
Old September 3rd 08, 11:25 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
disgoftunwells
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

On 1 Sep, 20:26, "Alan Erskine" wrote:
"Alain Fournier" wrote in message

...

There is also the difference that in the sixties, those building space
ships were considered the cutting edge of engineering. Problems were
considered normal. Nowadays, people expect engineers to be able to
re-solve the problems that were already solved in the fifties and sixties
without much difficulty.


Then why can't they? *Why do such problems keep happening?


NASA hasn't developed an all new launcher since the Space Shuttle in
the 70s. The engineers who made that happen have retired.

The performance problems with Ares 1 are also having a knock on effect
with Orion. Not so much Orion being overweight, as Ares 1 under
performing.
  #20  
Old September 12th 08, 04:51 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 262
Default Orion PDR slides to mid 2009

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:26:18 GMT, "Alan Erskine"
wrote:

"Alain Fournier" wrote in message
...

There is also the difference that in the sixties, those building space
ships were considered the cutting edge of engineering. Problems were
considered normal. Nowadays, people expect engineers to be able to
re-solve the problems that were already solved in the fifties and sixties
without much difficulty.


Then why can't they? Why do such problems keep happening?


Because they're different problems. They just look the same. New
materials, new designs, new problems. I mean, there's not that much
difference, practically, between a 707 and a 747-400, except for the
materials, aerodynamics, structure, propulsion, performance, avionics,
cabin electronics, and a bunch of other things.

Mary "Even the external lighting is different"
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
We didn't just do weird stuff at Dryden, we wrote reports about it.
or
Visit my blog at
http://thedigitalknitter.blogspot.com/
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Orion PDR slides to mid 2009 Pat Flannery Policy 21 September 14th 08 07:59 AM
Printing slides(2) C. Balci Amateur Astronomy 1 January 11th 05 12:20 AM
printing slides C. Balci Astronomy Misc 9 January 10th 05 02:00 PM
printing slides C. Balci Amateur Astronomy 7 January 10th 05 05:31 AM
Scanning Astro Slides Norbert UK Astronomy 6 July 14th 03 12:20 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.