Ares 1: Now contractors are backing away

Robert Block posting at The Write Stuff for the Orlando Sentinel today takes note of a conspicuous "backing away" from Ares 1 by the Big Contractors:

• The aerospace giants contracted to help build NASA's next-generation spaceships are quietly hedging their bets and stepping back from the Ares rockets that the agency has staked its future on after the shuttle retires next year.
  
  In recent weeks, Lockheed Martin Corp. and the Boeing Co. have reached out to NASA officials, lawmakers and a presidentially appointed panel reviewing America's human-spaceflight plan, expressing a willingness to change plans or offering alternatives to the rockets that until recently they strongly advocated.
  
  With contractors distancing themselves, the future of the Constellation program of rockets and capsules to return astronauts to the moon looks bleak, especially if the panel endorses alternatives.
  
  Lockheed, which has a $4.5 billion contract to design and build the Orion crew capsule to ride on top of Ares I, now says it is "neutral" on which rocket takes its capsule into orbit.
  
  

The watershed moment appears to have centered on the presentation made by John Shannon of NASA demonstrating the notional Space Shuttle launch system "Side-Mounted" alternative, as a heavy-lift for both Altair and Orion, though both flight-ready spacecraft will again need some downsizing to accomodate a slight reduction is what is still, admittedly, a proven heavy-lift design.

Presentation to Human Spaceflight Review Committee, June 18

(NASA/John Shannon 2.35 mb pdf)

Because of Franklin Roosevelt's admonishment never to make the mistake of thinking anything happens in Washington by accident, and the contractors are obsequious followers rather than leaders in maintaining their generations-hold on NASA's long-term pay-out contracts, we have to conclude doubts about the Ares manned-launch vehicle, if not the whole Ares paradigm, percolating behind the scenes at NASA during the Mike Griffin Years.

The interest shown in the side-mounted alternative, which few seem to recall has problems of its own (e.g., the SRB O-Ring failure and blow-by that ultimately destroyed Challenger was any fault of an inherent flaw in the Orbiter), on the part of the Augustine Committee in Shannon's presentation, behind the scenes, has caused a lot of backing away from Ares I.

Now joined by the Big Contractors, they generally make up the rear end of a parade.

Side-Mounted Shuttle-design for Moon found capable by Panel

Presentation to Human Spaceflight Review Committee, June 18
(NASA/John Shannon 2.35 mb pdf)

Once again, as we mentioned in recent days, officials are now confirmed up on Side-Mounted Shuttle booster design for Constellation...

Robert Block
The Wright Stuff Orlando Sentinel Space Editor

July 6 -A study done by NASA engineers at various agency centers on behalf of the U.S. Human Space Flight Review Committee has found that shuttle program manager John Shannon's alternative to the Constellation rockets is capable and affordable.

The alternative rocket is similar to the current space shuttle, except that the orbiter mounted on the side of the fuel tank is replaced by a podlike container resembling a giant car-top carrier. The design is called the Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle, or HLV, and was presented to the committee at its first public hearing June 17.

The study concluded that while the HLV design "is less capable than the current Constellation" rocket plans, it is "capable as demonstrated here."

It found that the rocket "is technically viable and delivers 79.9 [metric tons] to [Low Earth Orbit] and 53.1 [metric tons to the moon.]”

It added: "HLV low development costs allow work to begin now and take advantage of essential contractor and civil service skills before they are lost."

The study was done by Rick Manella for Ralph Roe, the head of NASA's Engineering and Safety Center. Roe is working to help the presidentially appointed panel that is re-examining NASA's man space exploration plans and taking a hard look at the Constellation Program's Ares rockets and Orion capsule.

He was assigned to support the committee members looking at exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit, one of four working subgroups of the committee. The sub-group includes former astronaut Sally Ride, former Boeing engineer Bohdan Bejmuk, commercial space entrepreneur Jeff Greason, Princeton astrophysics professor Christopher Chyba, and the head of the Aerospace Corporation, Wanda Austin.

The Aerospace Corporation, an independent aerospace research group, separately has been asked by the committee to evaluate another alternative, the Jupiter rocket project developed by freelancing NASA engineers and rocket hobbyists called Direct Team.

You can read the Orlando Sentinel's story about the consideration of HLV and Jupiter alternatives here.

Read the Article HERE.

Alternative moon rockets to over-budget Constellation gaining traction

Presentation to Human Spaceflight Review Committee, June 18
(NASA/John Shannon 2.35 mb pdf)

As we mentioned in recent days, the official buzzdom is decidedly down on Constellation, showing... something...

Robert Block
Orlando Sentinel Space Editor

July 5 - Once dismissed as the work of cranks or "shuttle-hugging" engineers, alternative designs for rockets to take astronauts to the moon are being seriously considered as possible replacements for NASA's over-budget Constellation program.

In recent weeks, the 10 members of the U.S. Human Spaceflight Review Committee appointed by the White House to re-examine NASA's manned space plans have heard from a range of companies and individuals about their ideas to get astronauts into orbit quickly and affordably after the space shuttle is retired next year.

They have deemed some of these projects worthy of further study, including ideas written off by NASA engineers a few years ago as being underpowered, unsafe and unimaginative. One of them is being promoted by the head of NASA's shuttle program. Another is the product of a group of freelance engineers — some of them NASA employees working on their own time — and rocket hobbyists calling themselves the Direct team.

Last week, the committee said it wants Aerospace Corp., an independent-research group, to analyze Direct's Jupiter rocket, which would use the shuttle's giant external fuel tank and two solid rocket boosters to launch a capsule instead of an orbiter.

"This should show our detractors that we can't be dismissed as a bunch of people in tinfoil hats," said Stephen Metschan, who leads Direct.

Read the Article HERE.

A look at NASA's Side-Mounted Shuttle

Presentation to Human Spaceflight Review Committee, June 18
(NASA/John Shannon 2.35 mb pdf)