Ares 1-X now on pad

In sci.space.history message ,
Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:43:17, Jeff Findley
posted:

1. A bad separation to begin with, which would be odd, since the ground
test of the separation procedure went well.
2. The SRB did separate from the upper stage, but the separation motors
could not overcome residual acceleration of the SRB caused by non-zero
pressure in the SRB casing, resulting in the SRB pushing the upper stage
along even after the rigid physical connection between them was severed.

If I were a betting man, I'd place my bet on #2.

No doubt Elon Musk and the rest of SpaceX are doing their best to
conceal broad grins.

Contrary to another post of yours, this was a successful TEST flight,
since (AFAIK) all the data and the expected hardware were recovered, and
all parts intended to be tested did get tested (unlike Vanguard I, for
example).

Remember : a test which cannot in any way go other than as intended is a
waste of effort.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

On Oct 25, 2:00*pm, " wrote:
If 1-X is your goal vehicle, that's all well and good. If it's not,
you're spending a lot of money for nothing useful.

nasa is excellent and wasting money...........

But the DOD is better and has more to waste.

Do you know the difference between the DOD and NASA budgets? Look them
up!