Ares 1-X Pad Avoidance Maneuver only ....1 Degree???

Ares 1-X rocket arrives at launch pad for test flight
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: October 20, 2009


"Flight designers have programmed the rocket to execute a slight
avoidance maneuver moments after liftoff to keep from damaging
the pad with its fiery hot motor plume. The rocket's nozzle will be
gimbaled about 1 degree for the "walk off" maneuver. "We've
designed a flyaway maneuver for the nozzle to cant over ever so
slightly -- 1 degree -- not that much to us, but with 2 million pounds
of thrust, that's going to take the vehicle and help it to fly away
from the pad," Stelzer said.

"Stover said engineers predict there will be about 15 feet of clearance
between the pad and the rocket at liftoff, so there is no threat of
physical contact. Officials are only concerned about the affects of the
booster's plume.
http://spaceflightnow.com/ares1x/091020pad/




If anyone believes the 'pad maneuver' was only one degree...
that the turn at launch was 'slight'.... well then I have a
few bridges for sale you might be interested in.

Looked closer to ten degrees to me.

And isn't the booster plume being pushed ...towards...the pad
not away from it???


High-Definition Ares 1-x Launch Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn-xza2m8so




s





s

On Dec 6, 1:25*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
If anyone believes the 'pad maneuver' was only one degree...
that the turn at launch was 'slight'.... well then I have a
few bridges for sale you might be interested in.

Looked closer to ten degrees to me.


It was slight and no where near 10 degrees. Its length exaggerated
the effect.

Why do you insist on seeing for problems where there are none.

Two reasons: first, he's anti-Ares (though he's never suggested any
alternative other than the unbuilt and untested SpaceX), and second, he's a
troll. Killfile him ASAP.
"Me" wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 1:25 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
If anyone believes the 'pad maneuver' was only one degree...
that the turn at launch was 'slight'.... well then I have a
few bridges for sale you might be interested in.

Looked closer to ten degrees to me.


It was slight and no where near 10 degrees. Its length exaggerated
the effect.

Why do you insist on seeing for problems where there are none.

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
Two reasons: first, he's anti-Ares (though he's never suggested any
alternative other than the unbuilt and untested SpaceX),

Yes I am anti Ares. But I've never mentioned spacex that I
recall, and I've ranted about the replacement I want, Space
Solar Power, probably a thousand times and at length.
Are you sure you have the right guy?



and second, he's a
troll.

A troll is someone that tries to make fools of others
just for the fun of it, mean spirited practical jokes.
I am none of that. Perhaps you should look up what
words mean before you use them. I am certainly
bombastic, persistent and single-minded, but I'm
no troll. People tend to use that label for anyone
that whoops their ass in a debate. Which I do
regularly around here.

Killfile him ASAP.

Why don't you leave?



"Me" wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 1:25 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
If anyone believes the 'pad maneuver' was only one degree...
that the turn at launch was 'slight'.... well then I have a
few bridges for sale you might be interested in.

Looked closer to ten degrees to me.


It was slight and no where near 10 degrees. Its length exaggerated
the effect.

Why do you insist on seeing for problems where there are none.

"Jonathan" wrote:

A troll is someone that tries to make fools of others
just for the fun of it, mean spirited practical jokes.

Maybe in parallel universe where you reside. But here on planet
Earth, the accepted internet definition is contained in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet). (Since that comes
through mangled... try http://preview.tinyurl.com/2bjua8.)

I am none of that. Perhaps you should look up what
words mean before you use them. I am certainly
bombastic, persistent and single-minded, but I'm
no troll. People tend to use that label for anyone
that whoops their ass in a debate. Which I do
regularly around here.

ROTFLMAO. To "bombastic, persistent and single-minded" I'd add
"ignorant, deluded, and pompous".

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

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Derek, you forgot to add egotistic, self-centered, and all-around pain in
the ass in describing the...creature.
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan" wrote:

A troll is someone that tries to make fools of others
just for the fun of it, mean spirited practical jokes.

Maybe in parallel universe where you reside. But here on planet
Earth, the accepted internet definition is contained in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet). (Since that comes
through mangled... try http://preview.tinyurl.com/2bjua8.)

I am none of that. Perhaps you should look up what
words mean before you use them. I am certainly
bombastic, persistent and single-minded, but I'm
no troll. People tend to use that label for anyone
that whoops their ass in a debate. Which I do
regularly around here.

ROTFLMAO. To "bombastic, persistent and single-minded" I'd add
"ignorant, deluded, and pompous".

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

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Derek Lyons wrote:
"Jonathan" wrote:

A troll is someone that tries to make fools of others
just for the fun of it, mean spirited practical jokes.

Maybe in parallel universe where you reside. But here on planet
Earth, the accepted internet definition is contained in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet). (Since that comes
through mangled... try http://preview.tinyurl.com/2bjua8.)

Though note should be taken of this heading within that article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29#Usage

Well, got the decimal point in the wrong place and the sign wrong, could
happen to any rocket scientist.......
thud.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jonathan" wrote in message
...
Ares 1-X rocket arrives at launch pad for test flight
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: October 20, 2009


"Flight designers have programmed the rocket to execute a slight
avoidance maneuver moments after liftoff to keep from damaging
the pad with its fiery hot motor plume. The rocket's nozzle will be
gimbaled about 1 degree for the "walk off" maneuver. "We've
designed a flyaway maneuver for the nozzle to cant over ever so
slightly -- 1 degree -- not that much to us, but with 2 million pounds
of thrust, that's going to take the vehicle and help it to fly away
from the pad," Stelzer said.

"Stover said engineers predict there will be about 15 feet of clearance
between the pad and the rocket at liftoff, so there is no threat of
physical contact. Officials are only concerned about the affects of the
booster's plume.
http://spaceflightnow.com/ares1x/091020pad/




If anyone believes the 'pad maneuver' was only one degree...
that the turn at launch was 'slight'.... well then I have a
few bridges for sale you might be interested in.

Looked closer to ten degrees to me.

And isn't the booster plume being pushed ...towards...the pad
not away from it???


High-Definition Ares 1-x Launch Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn-xza2m8so




s





s

..

why STILL talk about the X-fake-version of a DEAD rocket???

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html

..

Well, if that is really the case, how could they get the sums so wrong. I
guess in the Shuttle you have an ever lightening load as you are burning
fuel from the main tank all the time you are burning the propellant in the
srb. In Ares, you are lifting a fixed dead weight all the way to sep.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"gaetanomarano" wrote in message
...
.

why STILL talk about the X-fake-version of a DEAD rocket???

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html

.