| Science Forum Index » Space - History Forum » Ares I-X uses Jupiter-C painted roll pattern... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| noauth... |
 Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 7:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 1:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
noauth wrote:
[quote:6fed7c5815]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/medium/2009-4672-m.jpg
[/quote:6fed7c5815]
That's the first shot of it where you can really tell just how tall and
skinny it is, even though the first stage is shorter than the
operational design.
"Pencil" might be a better nickname than "stick".
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Hugh Jarse... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:56 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Pat Flannery" wrote:
[quote:1d48aba214]http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/medium/2009-4672-m.jpg
That's the first shot of it where you can really tell just how tall and
skinny it is, even though the first stage is shorter than the operational
design.
[/quote:1d48aba214]
That had passed me by. How much shorter is the I-X than the operational
design? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rick Jones... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Pat Flannery <flanner at (no spam) daktel.com> wrote:
[quote:80e9bb98fe]"Pencil" might be a better nickname than "stick".
[/quote:80e9bb98fe]
Might "pencil" imply a bit more robustness than indicated? How about
"The Reed" if we aren't going to call it "The Schtick?"
rick jones
--
The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as
it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose."
- Rick Jones
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... 
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rick Jones... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Pat Flannery <flanner at (no spam) daktel.com> wrote:
[quote:d20ebe3a46]Rick Jones wrote:
Pat Flannery <flanner at (no spam) daktel.com> wrote:
"Pencil" might be a better nickname than "stick".
Might "pencil" imply a bit more robustness than indicated? How about
"The Reed" if we aren't going to call it "The Schtick?"
"The Schtick"?
Now we know what's going to cause it to hit the tower during ascent...a
big wooden hook is going to come out and pull it off the pad from stage
left, after it says: "Take my funding...please!" 
Seriously, that's got to be one of the highest, if not the highest,
fineness ratios of any major rocket that ever flew.
About the only two I can think of that are anywhere near that skinny are
the core stage of the Soyuz once the boosters detach, and the Corporal
tactical missile: http://a0.vox.com/6a00d09e7bc293be2b00e3989ee8300005-500pi
[/quote:d20ebe3a46]
How about Vanguard?
rick jones
--
the road to hell is paved with business decisions...
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hugh Jarse wrote:
[quote:f59d765b6e]"Pat Flannery" wrote:
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/medium/2009-4672-m.jpg
That's the first shot of it where you can really tell just how tall and
skinny it is, even though the first stage is shorter than the operational
design.
That had passed me by. How much shorter is the I-X than the operational
design?
[/quote:f59d765b6e]
My slip, they are going to put a dummy fifth segment atop the standard
four segment Shuttle SRB, so the height will be identical to the
operational one...and that's pretty damn tall; nearly as tall as a
Saturn V: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Size_Comparison2.png
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:39 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Rick Jones wrote:
[quote:3c827bf8a9]Pat Flannery <flanner at (no spam) daktel.com> wrote:
"Pencil" might be a better nickname than "stick".
Might "pencil" imply a bit more robustness than indicated? How about
"The Reed" if we aren't going to call it "The Schtick?"
[/quote:3c827bf8a9]
"The Schtick"?
Now we know what's going to cause it to hit the tower during ascent...a
big wooden hook is going to come out and pull it off the pad from stage
left, after it says: "Take my funding...please!"
Seriously, that's got to be one of the highest, if not the highest,
fineness ratios of any major rocket that ever flew.
About the only two I can think of that are anywhere near that skinny are
the core stage of the Soyuz once the boosters detach, and the Corporal
tactical missile: http://a0.vox.com/6a00d09e7bc293be2b00e3989ee8300005-500pi
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 12:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Rick Jones wrote:
[quote:4e19a82319]About the only two I can think of that are anywhere near that skinny are
the core stage of the Soyuz once the boosters detach, and the Corporal
tactical missile: http://a0.vox.com/6a00d09e7bc293be2b00e3989ee8300005-500pi
How about Vanguard?
[/quote:4e19a82319]
That would have been right up there with the others, yes.
Proton/Zond was also pretty skinny for its height.
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
gcgassaway at (no spam) aol.com wrote:
[quote:70aeed2b7b]Of course, the fins were also part of the roll pattern, as copied
later by the Saturn-I and IB.
[/quote:70aeed2b7b]
Painting the fins differntially to detect roll during the rocket's
ascent went clean back to the A4/V-2 tests at Peenemunde.
[quote:70aeed2b7b]And also, the Scout was pretty darned long and thin.
[/quote:70aeed2b7b]
That may be the thinnest one of them all; I should have remembered it,
as I had a model rocket Scout once.
[quote:70aeed2b7b]
BTW - all of the Scout Stages were solids. It was the first all-solid
launch vehicle to orbit a payload, usually (if not all) launched from
Wallops.
[/quote:70aeed2b7b]
It was also a very economical launch vehicle - when they were first
made, Scout boosters cost around a million dollars each.
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider)... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Pat Flannery" <flanner at (no spam) daktel.com> wrote in message
news:aY2dnfpWEaGdxlvXnZ2dnUVZ_hidnZ2d at (no spam) posted.northdakotatelephone...
[quote:54749d2f72]gcgassaway at (no spam) aol.com wrote:
Of course, the fins were also part of the roll pattern, as copied
later by the Saturn-I and IB.
Painting the fins differntially to detect roll during the rocket's ascent
went clean back to the A4/V-2 tests at Peenemunde.
And also, the Scout was pretty darned long and thin.
That may be the thinnest one of them all; I should have remembered it, as
I had a model rocket Scout once.
[/quote:54749d2f72]
Well looking at it on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_(rocket_family)
So base was 1 m, entire height 25m, so 1:25 ratio
Ares-1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ares_I
Gives a width of 5.5m
Height of 94m
so 5.5:94 or 1:17
However, that's the entire vehicle.
The SRB itself is 3.71m in diameter.
If we use that, we get:
3.7:94 or 1:25.45
I couldn't find a number for just the Stage 1 segment.
But yeah, looks like the Scout beats it on overall ratio, but if you count
just the primary stage diameter (which for this purpose I think is
appropriate, you bet the Scout by a hair.)
And of course the Scout was widest at the bottom, Ares-I is widest at the
top. That's gotta really make the control moment interesting.
--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
[quote:435e907f19]
And of course the Scout was widest at the bottom, Ares-I is widest at the
top. That's gotta really make the control moment interesting.
[/quote:435e907f19]
It should behave a lot like a Soyuz booster once the four strap-on
boosters are jettisoned from the core stage, as it bears an uncanny
resemblance to that configuration.
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
