NASA is the topic and what they do or have done is what we want to read. So let us begin...


CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — NASA's newest rocket successfully completed a brief test flight Wednesday, taking the first step in a back-to-the-moon program that could yet be shelved by the White House.

The 327-foot Ares I-X rocket resembled a giant white pencil as it shot into the sky, delayed a day by poor weather.

Nearly twice the height of the spaceship it's supposed to replace — the shuttle — the skinny experimental rocket carried no passengers or payload, only throwaway ballast and hundreds of sensors. The flight cost $445 million.

NASA said the flight was a success, based on early indications.

"Oh, man. Well, how impressive is that," said Jeff Hanley, manager of NASA's space frontier program, known as Constellation. "You've accomplished a great step forward for exploration," he told launch controllers.

It was the first time in nearly 30 years that a new rocket took off from Kennedy Space Center. Columbia made the maiden voyage for the shuttle fleet back in 1981.

Liftoff, in fact, occurred 48 years and one day after the first launch of a Saturn rocket, a precursor to what carried astronauts to the moon during the Apollo program. The Saturn V moon rockets were the tallest ever built, an impressive 363 feet.

Wednesday's launch, years in the making, attracted a large crowd.

The prototype moon rocket took off through a few clouds from a former shuttle launch pad at 11:30 a.m., 3 1/2 hours late because of bad weather. Launch controllers had to retest the rocket systems after more than 150 lightning strikes were reported around the pad overnight. Then they had to wait out interfering rain clouds, the same kind that thwarted Tuesday's try.

The ballistic flight did not come close to reaching space and, as expected, lasted a mere two minutes. That's how long it took for the first-stage solid-fuel booster to burn out and separate from the mock upper stage 25 miles up. But it will take months to analyze all the data from the approximately 725 pressure, strain and acceleration sensors.

Parachutes popped open and dropped the booster into the Atlantic, where recovery ships waited.

The upper portion of the rocket — all fake parts — were hurtled to an estimated altitude of 28 miles and then fell uncontrolled into the ocean. Those pieces were never meant to be retrieved.

It was all over in six minutes.

"Think about what we just did. Our first flight test and the only thing we're waiting on was weather," launch director Ed Mango told his team.

Wednesday's launch represented the first step in NASA's effort to return astronauts to the moon. The White House, though, is re-evaluating the human spaceflight program and may dump the Ares I in favor of another type of rocket and possibly another destination.

NASA contends the Ares I will be ready to carry astronauts to the International Space Station in 2015, four to five years after the shuttles are retired. But a panel of experts said in a report to President Barack Obama last week that it will be more like 2017, and stressed that the entire effort is underfunded.

The first Ares moon trip would be years beyond that under the current plan.

No matter what happens, NASA managers said they will learn a lot from this experimental flight, even if it's for another type of rocket.

"A lot of the gold that we had to mine in doing this Ares I-X test flight, we've already realized in the people," Hanley said earlier this week. "The investment that we've made and the people and the learning is preparing us to do whatever the nation asks this team to do in the months and years ahead."

time to go back to the moon to check up on our secret city.....on the dark side.....

a few weeks ago we crashed into the moon with a couple of probes.....we were told we would see the plumes of dust from the impact......

There were no plumes......Why?.......because the probes crashed through the ceiling of the sub lunar causeway......

or maybe not!


you decide

I am curious what was found or what they gathered. I haven't seen anything reported to the public yet concerning that project you are talking about.

There are signs that the manned spaceflight program will be severely curtailed or canceled by the Obama administration.

NO! Not good

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — The booster rocket used in a test flight was badly dented when it fell into the Atlantic because of a deflated parachute, NASA said Thursday.

The new Ares I-X — the precursor to NASA's planned moon rockets — completed a two-minute flight Wednesday. The launch itself went well, officials said, but one of the three parachutes on the booster failed to work properly.

All three parachutes opened, but one ended up deflating for unknown reasons, said NASA spokesman Allard Beutel. That caused the booster to hit the ocean with extra force.

The first-stage booster — similar to what's used for the space shuttles — was found to be dented near the bottom when it was recovered from the ocean. It was expected back on shore Friday.

The Ares I-X is a prototype of what's supposed to replace the space shuttles and ultimately fly to the moon. The White House, though, may nix those plans.

Shuttle managers, meanwhile, have chosen Nov. 16 for the launch of Atlantis on a space station delivery mission. That assumes an unmanned rocket flies Nov. 14 with a communication satellite; a one-day postponement for that launch would bump the Atlantis flight to the 17th.

NASA's space operations chief, Bill Gerstenmaier, said the Ares I-X parachute trouble will not impact the Atlantis launch. They are different parachute designs, he noted.

The shuttle program has had its share of parachute trouble.

During Discovery's launch in August, a parachute on one of the two boosters ripped slightly. The other parachute compensated, however, and the retrieved booster was not damaged. Engineers still do not know what caused the problem.

LOL

The "word" is that the program will be nixed. This is the replacement for the shuttle.



The space shuttle is about to be retired. Time is already being purchased on the Russian launching systems as the US has no other way to put men in space.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to read between the lines.

No! I don't want the Space Shuttle to be retired. It is the coolest spaceship we got.

"The program started in the late 1960s and has dominated NASA's manned operations since the mid-1970s. According to the Vision for Space Exploration, use of the space shuttle will be focused on completing assembly of the ISS by 2010, after which it will be retired from service..."

there was an advisory committe a couple of weeks ago or a month ago or so that reported to Obama that the current plans and funding are incapable of getting us to the moon again

I'd have to spend awhile finding it but I read about it a couple of weeks ago

and it's kinda irrelevant

the civilian space program will overtake and pass NASA in the next 20 to 50 years or so

and in the big scheme of things that is as it should be

The culmination of this research was undoubtedly the March 30, 2004 successful flight of NASAs experimental X-43 hypersonic research vehicle. Part of the space agency's Hyper-X program, which seeks alternate propulsion technologies for access to space and high-speed flight within the atmosphere, the X-43 not only marked the first successful flight testing of a scramjet, but also managed to set the speed record for air-breathing flight by accelerating past Mach 7.23

The X-43 was attached to a Pegasus booster rocket in order to reach the supersonic velocity needed to start the scramjet engine. Once started, the X-43 separated from the booster and achieved positive acceleration while climbing. Although the powered portion of the flight lasted only 10 seconds, it marked a tremendous leap for air-breathing technology.

In the last decade NASA has cut funding to several promising programs, including the X-30 National Aerospace Plane which was designed to take off and land on standard runways and cruise between any two points on the Earth in 2 hours, at cruise speeds of up to Mach 12, using a scramjet.

Another victim of budgetary setbacks was the X-33, the most promising Space Shuttle replacement program to date. Perhaps the success of the X-43 will spark a resurgence of funding for similar programs, which would undoubtedly benefit the next generation of Space Launch Vehicles.

The Space Shuttle has served us well and will always be remembered as a brilliant technological achievement, but the tremendous advances in recent years have warranted taking the next step forward in space flight.

It is time for the design of a new RLV that will make space flight cheaper, safer and more flexible so that as a society we can continue to satisfy the age-old desire to explore the cosmos and advance science.

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/newshuttle/overview.php

The Russians, after making the deal to supply NASA with "lifting capability' are now jacking up the price dramatically knowing that the US has no choice if they want to stay in the game. There is a good chance that China will catch up fast if their current plans work out. For a lot of reasons, China can put men in space for a tiny tiny tiny fraction of the money spent by the US.

I don't think we ever landed on the moon!

This shows the degree of knowledge the general public has about the events discussed above.

about time. we have the space shuttle to service the space station and we have the space station so the shuttle will have someplace to go. as carl sagan once said, we've seen enough tricks by astronaughts in zero gravity. now lets get down to some real science. providing for the safety of men in space costs countless billions of dollars that could be spent doing that real science.

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/

Manned space travel will continue. No robot or computer can do a fraction of what a human can do. No spacecraft can fix itself if something goes wrong. Ironically, Apollo 13 did more to show why men should be in space than any other mission.

There is no question of "if" anymore. Manned spacetravel will be covered by private companies or foreign nations regardless of the Orion project sought by NASA.

The primary problem with the US space program is that it became a federal civilian agency. Like every other federal agency, it instantly required more people and money to do less work. Current estimates are that China will do exactly the same "stuff" as the US for less than one tenth the cost. Everyone is aware of this problem which is why private companies are starting up space firms at this time (see quietman's post above). The sad part of the story is that the US military (not the most cost effective entity in the world) could have done everything NASA has done and more for a tiny fraction of the money spent so far by NASA. This fact is easily shown by the NASA policy of "Clean Slate Design" vs the military's method of "Incremental Improvement".

Some years ago the US Air Force embarrassed NASA by throwing together a lunar orbital satellite out of spare parts for the tiniest fraction of the cost which would have been spent by NASA to do the same job. Air Force's Project Clementine was studied (at great cost) by NASA to determine how was this possible.

Chuck Yeager is well know for breaking the sound barrier in his X-1 rocket plane. The military gradually improved the rocket planes until the X-15 was almost space capable (we are talking a long time ago). The X series showed way too much capability and was then in direct competition with the goals of NASA at that time so the program was halted. It was felt that the push into space should not be dominated by the military.

The US military has continued to participate in the space program by launching satellites (some on military booster rockets and some by the space shuttle). And, of course, many astronauts are the cream of the military pilots.

Burt Rutan (my hero) showed the world what could be done recently.