Should we wait to build a heavy lift rocket???

Graphic courtesy of NASA. Image depicts the
heavy lift rocket Ares V which is built largely
from existing Space Shuttle technology.

Space News recently reported of an August 19th meeting between NASA Commercial Crew Planning Lead Phil McAlister and a group of space industry executives where he pledged that regardless of what Congress does, NASA will be able to provide the $5.8 billion in funding to keep the commercial crew “space taxi” programs in place (click for article). While this is certainly welcome news to both companies such as SpaceX and Orbital, it is also welcome news to those of us who believe that pedestrian deliveries to the International Space Station can best be provided by NASA supervised commercial contractors.

What was troubling about this article however was a blurb inserted in the final paragraphs that quoted some group called the “Planetary Society.” This group has sent an open letter to legislators suggesting that they support the Obama plan to not build a heavy lift rocket until a extra orbital destination is decided upon. This is just ridiculous on its face. There are only a very few possible destinations for the cargo of an Saturn V or Ares V class heavy lift rocket and the one thing that they have in common is the fact that to get there, you need a heavy lift rocket. The rocket does nothing more than put large payloads into Earth orbit. What that payload does once it is up there has next to nothing to do with the rocket itself.

Image courtesy of NASA. Image depicts
the heavy lift rockets Saturn V on the
left and the Ares V on the right. To the
right of the Space Shuttle is the crew
carrying Ares I

This nation needs a heavy lift rocket to serve whatever purpose may arise. That purpose may be nothing more than putting large payloads into low Earth orbit, and there is nothing wrong with that. The rest of the world, and by that I mean Russia, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, etc., seems intent upon becoming space-faring societies. I find it impossible to believe that the United States is so willing to cede the high ground to other nations when we currently enjoy such a huge technological advantage. Does anyone believe that any of these nations would be as dedicated toward peace and cooperation in space as the United States has been over the years? Has anyone looked at the distribution of the building and operational costs associated with the “international” space station?

A heavy lift rocket is a heavy lift rocket. While it certainly cannot be considered to be a heavy lift vehicle in the mold of a Saturn V, the much deserved retirement of the Space Shuttle has left the United States with no way to put large payloads into orbit. Do we as a country want to wait on politicians and NASA administrators (not sure that they are all that different) to decide on a extra-orbital destination before we build the capability to put large payloads into LEO? I personally cannot imagine why we should do that.

White Knight Two Gear Collapse

Stock photo courtesy of Virgin Galactic. Photo does not
depict the White Knight Vehicle during the flight 37
landing gear incident.

While Scaled Composites has not yet published the details of White Knight Two test flights 36 and 37, apparently flight 37 ended with a port side landing gear problem and apparent collapse (see photo below). The left fuselage on WK2 that contains the port side landing gear is not currently equipped to carry passengers or pilots. Scaled has provided very few details of the incident but has referred to the incident as minor and that there were no injuries to the crew. They also report that it was not a captive carry flight and as such, SS2 was not involved.

Given the fact that they seem to be practicing for the first glide flight of SS2, it is likely that they were performing various sorts of SS2 approaches and perhaps discovered a weakness in the WK2 landing gear design. If this is the case, then it is a good thing that this happened on a non-SS2 carrying flight. It is also a good thing that they have flown 34 non-SS2 test flights to discover these weaknesses. Hopefully the solution to the problem will not involve a major re-design of the landing gear.

Photo courtesy of FlightGlobal.com.

Given Scaled's proven ability to make rapid changes and repairs to their vehicles, it seems likely that barring a major re-design, this incident will present not much more than a short delay in the SS2 development process.

If this incident shows nothing else though, it does show the advantage of a 4 post landing gear design. The failure of any one still leaves three. I assume that elevator, aileron, and rudder authority are sufficient to keep the airframe from contacting the ground at all but the lowest airspeeds.

Two Week Old SpaceShipTwo Info

After my last SpaceShipTwo post, two more updates have popped up on the Scaled website.

Flight: 32 Date: 1 Jul 10
Flight Time: 5.3 hr
Pilot: Siebold CoPilot: Stucky
FTE: Harvey
Objectives:
SS2 GF01 mission practice
SS2 approach practice
Crew proficiency and training
Results:
All objectives achieved. Multiple SS2 approaches flown.
-----------------------------------
Flight: 31 Date: 30 Jun 10
Flight Time: 5.3 hr
Pilot: Stucky CoPilot: Siebold
FTE: Agold
Objectives:
Payload ECS heat characterization
SS2 release dry run
SS2 GF01 mission practice
SS2 approach practice
Crew proficiency and training
Results:
All objectives achieved. Multiple SS2 approaches flown to touchdown.

Since these posts are two weeks old, I am assuming that the first glide flight of SpaceShipTwo has already taken place. If so, then I hope it went well!

What Happened to Ares?

Please understand that I am not now, nor have I ever been a rocket scientist. I am also not a structural or aerospace engineer of any kind, but I do know how to read. Twelve or so years ago, I read a book by Robert Zubrin called "The Case for Mars" where Dr. Zubrin (who not so incidentally IS a rocket scientist and engineer) argued for what he called "Mars Direct" which was a plan for not only sending humans to Mars but also to extensively explore, set up colonies, etc.

A crucial component of Dr. Zubrins plan was a heavy lift rocket called "Ares" that was primarily a redesigned Space Shuttle stack. This heavy lift rocket was composed of the main engines off of the Space Shuttle, mated to a redesigned Space Shuttle external fuel tank, with the two solid rocket boosters also used by the Space Shuttle. The only difference was that instead of mounting an unbelievably complex Shuttle on the side, the payload would be mounted on the top as was done with the Moon bound Saturn V.

Now of course I realize that the stresses placed on the external tank in this new configuration are significantly different than those of the Space Shuttle, but seriously, is this really that big a deal? I have personally watched in awe as bridges, skyscrapers, supertankers and Airbus A380s have been built and put into service. I have watched an International Space Station be constructed in the vaccum of space and I have watched an underwater oil well leak be fixed ONE MILE beneath the surface of the ocean.

We, as a country, have now been arguing over Ares V for quite some time and in the meantime NASA's manned spaceflight operation has all but ground to a halt. With all that NASA and its suppliers now know about space travel and building rockets, I ask this question: why has this not been done already? Why do we not have Ares V vehicles sitting on their launch pads at this very moment? The components have all been proven over and over again and where there have been failures (ie Shuttle Columbia) there have also been corrections. The SRBs work, the main engines work, and I'm assuming that given the advances in electronics that have taken place in the last thirty years, the new avionics should be rather simple to design and build. It sure didn't take SpaceX long to develop the avionics that control the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets.

As I mentioned before, I am not a rocket scientist, I am a historian. I realize that I am enormously ignorant of the complexities involved with developing a new launch vehicle such as the Ares V. But as a historian however, I am rather good at ferreting out details from the past, even if they are from the recent past. I may now be ignorant of the specifics of why NASA has found itself without a launch vehicle but I won't be ignorant for long, and neither will you; the readers of this blog.

I am announcing that I will be focusing much of my efforts in this blog to try (if only to satisfy my own curiosity) to make sense of why NASA has not been able to cobble together hardware that it already possessed into a usable heavy lift rocket and a sister ship, light rocket, for placing humans into orbit. I have to tell you, that I am rather angry at what I have witnessed. The country that at one time had what Tom Wolfe correctly described as "the right stuff", has degenerated into a bunch of whimpering children unable to figure what to do with their Legos.

Stay tuned, there is more to come...

SpaceShipTwo First Glide Flight Pending???

For those of us who check the Scaled Composites website a bit more often than we should, any update to the status of the SpaceShipTwo tests can be rather exciting. If you are not one who frequents the Scaled site, here is a general overview of what has taken place as of July 13, 2010.

For one thing, the WhiteKnightTwo mothership "Eve" has flown thirty test flights. Prior to flight 25, most of the flights seem to have been primarily oriented toward shaking down the mothership. Flights 25 and 27 were the first and second captive carry flights of SpaceShipTwo, where both vehicles were flown but SS2 was not released from the mothership.

In June of 2010, Eve was flown without SS2 on flight 26 and flights 28, 29, and 30. The purposes of these flights seems to have been to practice both the release of SS2 and practice the a first glide flight of SS2. Flight 30 in particular is reported as "GF01 glide card practice." For the uninitiated (aka the person with a real life...) this refers to the card or checklist of items to be performed during the first release and glide flight of SS2.

Seeing as this flight is reported to have taken place on June 24, 2010, it is likely or at least possible that this first glide flight has already taken place but the rather tight lipped Scaled organization has yet to report it. If so, I hope that it was or is going to be successful. Good luck to all associated with the program!