|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
December 7th 09, 12:51 PM
posted to sci.space.policy
|
|||
|
|||
the BIG Ares-1 MYSTERY
--
about the Ares 1-X test... it's STILL really NOT clear why NASA defines a "success" a flight that has reached ONLY the (very low) 35 km. of altitude (or 39 km. adding the SRB inertia) while, the Shuttle SRBs reach over 45 km. (10 km. more) and the 1st stage of the Ares-1 MUST reach (at least) 55 km. of altitude (20 km. more than the 1-X) despite the SRB-5 has only 7% more power than a standard SRB, rather than (nearly) TWICE (as needed to reach nearly TWICE the altitude with the same upperstage mass) -- http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html -- 
|
|
#2
December 7th 09, 04:01 PM
posted to sci.space.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
the BIG Ares-1 MYSTERY
On Dec 7, 7:51�am, gaetanomarano wrote:
-- about the Ares 1-X test... it's STILL really NOT clear why NASA defines a "success" a flight that has reached ONLY the (very low) 35 km. of altitude (or 39 km. adding the SRB inertia) while, the Shuttle SRBs reach over 45 km. (10 km. more) and the 1st stage of the Ares-1 MUST reach (at least) 55 km. of altitude (20 km. more than the 1-X) despite the SRB-5 has only 7% more power than a standard SRB, rather than (nearly) TWICE (as needed to reach nearly TWICE the altitude with the same upperstage mass) --http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html -- it got off the ground  NASA PR, for a otherwised dead program...........
|
|
#3
December 10th 09, 08:49 AM
posted to sci.space.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
the BIG Ares-1 MYSTERY
gaetanomarano wrote:
-- about the Ares 1-X test... it's STILL really NOT clear why NASA defines a "success" a flight that has reached ONLY the (very low) 35 km. of altitude (or 39 km. adding the SRB inertia) while, the Shuttle SRBs reach over 45 km. (10 km. more) and the 1st stage of the Ares-1 MUST reach (at least) 55 km. of altitude (20 km. more than the 1-X) despite the SRB-5 has only 7% more power than a standard SRB, rather than (nearly) TWICE (as needed to reach nearly TWICE the altitude with the same upperstage mass) -- http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html -- You might as well ask how they can consider it a successful test despite the fact that it didn't land two men on the moon. Whether a test is successful depends on whether it showed what it was intended to show. Sylvia
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Ares-1 second stage MYSTERY | gaetanomarano | Policy | 72 | January 5th 08 05:09 AM |
| I've added FOUR updates to my Ares-1 article with some NEW calculations that (clearly) show WHY the new Ares-1 can't fly | gaetanomarano | Policy | 0 | November 12th 07 10:21 AM |
| NewSpace rockets __ EELVs __ Ares-I __ REVISED Orion/Ares-I __ FAST-SLV __ chances of success | gaetanomarano | Policy | 9 | June 16th 07 12:03 AM |
| in my opinion (both) Ares-I and Ares-V could NEVER fly once! ...could NASA rockets win vs. privates on launch date and prices? | gaetanomarano | Policy | 0 | May 10th 07 11:11 PM |
Linear Mode
