The Liberty rocket (whats left of the Ares1 concept) is much improved. It looks like they went with the better escape system and worked out a fix for the major vibration SRB problem. On this sub orbital test launch there was some damage to the pad when the SRB almost hit the side of the launch tower.
@mainstreetgse Oh, and by the way, NO it does not require a HUGE escape system. The Ares / Constellation fell back on many of the Apollo concepts including the very simple escape rocket system. It had a simple rocket attached to a shroud the covers the crew module during lift off. Up to a certain altitude, the rocket could be fired and it would pull the crew module away from the rocket. If it ended up not being used, it simply pulls the shroud off at a designated altitude.
The interesting thing is the core booster was damaged during lift off and held up The booster’s performance paved the way to Artemis 1 in the terms of SRBs
@@AudioArcturia No, that wasn't the reason it was cancelled. The Aries was not a dangerous rocket at all. Where do you get your facts? You're so far from the mark, it's like you made that up. For the record, the reason the Constellation launch program was cancelled comes down to funding. The Republican-controlled Congress and Barack Obama, the Democratic President, couldn't agree on a budget. In short, mandatory budget cuts kicked. These were known as "sequestration". Look it up; this is almost entirely why Constellation was cancelled. Next time, don't post. At all.
I mean it was canceled due to funds mainly but the reason it probably wasnt funded anymore was because of the fact it costed so much and had a lot of issues that were safety related such as the guidance system for the APCP booster was not super effective and there were problems during separation. So it was both. This wasnt a particularly safe system. And that may have been why it lost funding. If it were a very safe system that was very promising, maybe it would have been less frowned upon by the government.
Depends on the rocket. Typically it's about 10,000$/kg. Subsidies sometimes push it down to 4000$/kg. A Falcon 9 costs, for a commercial contractor, 56.5 million $, which puts it at 4500-5000$/kg to LEO. This does not change how much money NASA gets. Which is half a penny for every tax dollar.
@FoulOwl I never claimed to be a professor (that'll be the day ;) ) but as i understand it to achieve anywhere near escape velocity you're already going many times faster than the speed of sound, and breaking the sound barrier means a build up of pressurized air around the craft, which leads to the hydrogen and oxygen condensing into water (Prandtl-Glauert singularity). This then freezes to form the ice you often see. But feel free to prove me wrong, i'm always open to learning new things :)
And there are plenty of solid fuel rockets on Soyuz like the "soft landing" rockets. Space X on the other hand, uses zero solid fuel motors/rockets, that includes frangible nuts for separations, the Falcon heavy even used a hydraulic system to separate the side boosters.
@@riccardodambrosio3855 That was a political problem due to the politicians failing to accept their asking of money for spacesuits. Soyuz didn't badly fail, just a tiny malfunction, it landed with the corpses PERFECTLY, they would have survived. Had not been for the politicians, Russia would have zero deaths in space.
While your comment is 12 years old, for any who come along, the upper stage tumbled because it was simply a dummy load. No control, it was a fairing with weight in it is all. Had it been a real vehicle, a booster motor or RCS thrusters or something would have kept the vehicle straight.
Now i dont how about you, but I would consider this as a nuclear torpedo lol (if they even produce a capital space ship). That is the biggest hobby rocket i have ever seen. Those boosters are soo... mean.
SLS is basically a redesigned Ares V. It has four engines in its first stage instead of five, and bigger SRBs to make up the difference. It also has a cheaper upper stage.
@mainstreetgse No it won't because it was cancelled many months ago. The current Administration has ensured that we nolonger have a viable space program.
Which will make them ship off even more jobs. The only reason one would move jobs overseas, while getting rid of the jobs in country is if it's no longer profitable. If you have a factory making a profit here, and build one that makes an even bigger profit over seas, it makes no sense to shut the local one down, because you'd be losing that profit.
@@Blarnix well you could say that about any rocket... "it's just a fuel tank... that people got strapped onto" The srb is safe and even if something happened the emergency escape system is there for a reason
@@jacobdaniel6135 It’s not “just a fuel tank”. It’s not even a tank at all. It’s solid fuel. I’m sure you probably don’t know this, but when an SRB is ignited, there is absolutely zero chance of turning it off. That means that if there’s a problem with the engine or the crew needs to escape, it becomes a HUGE issue with that SRB flying around at full thrust for however long. This could burn the parachutes, vaporize the spacecraft, explode the upper stage, etc. It wasn’t worth the risk. It was almost as risky as the space shuttle and it’s no wonder the program was shut down.
@@Blarnix I know it's not a fuel tank, I was just referring to any other rocket. And the space shuttle program was shut down because of lack of funding not safety... it was very safe in the end. And the emergency escape system has controls that steer it away from the rocket in case of an emergency
Does anyone know why this project was canceled? It was a brilliant and cheap way of getting into LEO. I heard that the amount of vibration the SRB made was to much for the rocket to handle with humans inside but yet the space shuttle had two and 7 humans could survive it. Just not sure why they cancelled such a good project.
+MrxFivexAlive shuttle boosters were side mounted easing the stress, plus shuttle had a 70 ton orbiter to carry to space, In ares mode it isnt and it takes off like a bat outta hell
Yep, the shuttles boosters are to this day the most powerful SRB's. Wonder what would happen if ya put the first stage of a Saturn V on the orbiter with two SRB's to the side of it. Wow, you'd really get going.
I was honestly crushed when this was cancelled, but in retrospect Falcon/Dragon is a way better system and Im glad we are using that instead. Safer, reusable, more versatile, and sexier.
The first stage wasn't supposed to impact the 2nd stage like it did though. The first stage was supposed to have a clean separation and continue flying straight.
Eh... a test not really as impressive as lobbing a car into heliocentric orbit using three nearly identical boosters practically Kerbal'd together. Two of which comes back and lands itself. (The third, unfortunately, hit the water) Honestly, I think part of the reason why funding to NASA kept getting cut was the lack of publicity to keep the people interested. If people were interested, then Congress wouldn't have a reason to cut funding. Imagine if NASA hyped up these things just like how SpaceX gets everyone interested? They might have had mighty beasts like this in operation rather than launch a prototype just to cancel it later.
while i agree we need more money i dont want terrorists to win so im all for expensive military budgets if they give slightly higher space program budgets as well
bur the military doesn't need a lot of money anymore, they have more than enough assets to sustain the war. NASA, however, needs everything it can get.
Not true, you see that long thing on the top? That’s a LES, or launch escape system. It has powerful solid motors that would pull a capsule away in the event of an emergency
@@coffeespy1133 a study by the airforce 45th space wing determined if the crew had to abort between 30 to 60 seconds after launch, they would have a 0% chance of survival research some facts you idiot
The problem with this is that the vibration was too crazy. And the research and development cost far too much for what is supposed to be a "cheaper" solution. Personally I don't trust NASA after two preventable shuttle loses.
I have friends on unemployment who have college degrees and who worked 10+ years until they were laid off or their company downsized. So they are lazy bums? It's no jobs out there bro........That's the truth
This looks like my first orbital craft from ksp
Lmao. but true
"testing concepts for the future of new rocket designs" it even has the same purpose.
Ikr
For me space flight simulator
@@ErrorGamingReal me too !
Woah, that thing REALLY got off the pad quick, that was a very aggressive gravity turn as well. Doesn't look like it would've been fun to ride.
I would for the hell of it though
Looks like an ICBM lol
Space Shuttle was 3 Gs I think. It wasn't as bad as the Soyuz.
Anon They all rotate at relatively the same rate is just more noticeable with the shape of the shuttle.
Jeff Vader it’s cuz it’s a SRB instead of a liquid fuel enhine
My first KSP orbital mission. Right on top of a Clydesdale 👌
lol i just put a m3 command pod right on top of a clydesdale booster and now jeb is orbiting the sun
2:16 my usual ksp rocket launch
🤣
Just time warp a tiny bit
0:48 love that pressure cloud
horizonflyer9 that’s it breaking the sound barrier
0:48
@@subswithnovideos-ej9jf i think thats wrong
The upper stage was a dummy. Had this been a real flight, the upper stage's engines would have ignited and separated from the spent booster.
The Ares 1 is, in my opinion, the best looking rocket. Really sad it didnt go anywhere in the end, but SLS is really cool too.
Obama scrapped it
I agree tbh
That separation was scary
That upper stage was also a dummy so there was no controls on it, so tumbling was expected.
@@effervescentrelief first stage ram second stage
The Liberty rocket (whats left of the Ares1 concept) is much improved. It looks like they went with the better escape system and worked out a fix for the major vibration SRB problem. On this sub orbital test launch there was some damage to the pad when the SRB almost hit the side of the launch tower.
This is so cool for me right now because my dad is Robert Ess, the mission manager of the Ares 1-X!!
So sad it ot cancelled. I would've loved to see Ares fly more missions
this did not age well
Oooof.
2:17 - Whoops! That would have been a hairy separation with a crew and a working J-2 engine about to be fired.
It had a tumble motor to purposely do that to this stage
That stage sep would kill the astronauts so I dont know if that was a good idea
@@coolguy13333 that was planned, the second stage was just a dummy payload
This launch was just to test the first stage.
@@friendlydispatch6283 dummy” I did not see it live
This is such a cool concept. I wish they stuck with it
For crewed flight? No, thanks.
Yeah nah super dangerous and expensive.
It was (one of) the most kerbal rocket NASA every built. it was a single SRB with a upper stage.
@@thetomgamerboi6817 Literally the best way of putting it lmao
I would be scared asf to ride on a rocket with an extra beefy shuttle srb as a first stage. I always thought it looked cool though.
Putting a solid rocket booster as the first stage of the rocket... That's the most dangerous thing ever, just imagine the amount of g force on there.
Another quality HD upload!
f****** great quality! Thank you 4 this video!
@mainstreetgse Oh, and by the way, NO it does not require a HUGE escape system. The Ares / Constellation fell back on many of the Apollo concepts including the very simple escape rocket system. It had a simple rocket attached to a shroud the covers the crew module during lift off. Up to a certain altitude, the rocket could be fired and it would pull the crew module away from the rocket. If it ended up not being used, it simply pulls the shroud off at a designated altitude.
such good quality!
The interesting thing is the core booster was damaged during lift off and held up
The booster’s performance paved the way to Artemis 1 in the terms of SRBs
This was such a cool system, too bad it got cancelled.
It looks sexier than SLS in my opinion. I too would have loved to see people go up on that baby.
Rory Shields ITS BACK!!!!!!! DONALD TRUMP TO THE RESCUE!!!!!
It was incredibly dangerous. That is the primary reason it was canceled.
@@AudioArcturia No, that wasn't the reason it was cancelled. The Aries was not a dangerous rocket at all. Where do you get your facts? You're so far from the mark, it's like you made that up.
For the record, the reason the Constellation launch program was cancelled comes down to funding. The Republican-controlled Congress and Barack Obama, the Democratic President, couldn't agree on a budget. In short, mandatory budget cuts kicked. These were known as "sequestration". Look it up; this is almost entirely why Constellation was cancelled.
Next time, don't post. At all.
I mean it was canceled due to funds mainly but the reason it probably wasnt funded anymore was because of the fact it costed so much and had a lot of issues that were safety related such as the guidance system for the APCP booster was not super effective and there were problems during separation. So it was both. This wasnt a particularly safe system. And that may have been why it lost funding. If it were a very safe system that was very promising, maybe it would have been less frowned upon by the government.
There was actually a time people sat around and thought _Why don't we strap payloads to a single solid rocket motor?_ 🤣
Great!
thanks for the upload!
Too bad the constellation program got canceled. Now we have Artemis.
It was such a beautiful craft :(
fantastic video!
Why does the rocket look tilted a little?
People go on about how unsafe this is, but then again, it's better than the space shuttle.
Should’ve continued it, for sending cargo.
Expensive
Doc Nathan it was a stupid design
This is exactly what i would do to cut costs in ksp
I agree with you except that the booster cost NASA 6 Billion dollars
@@tzardogex7836 I assume most of that was due to development costs. The actual cost would be something more like 500 million I assume.
Depends on the rocket. Typically it's about 10,000$/kg. Subsidies sometimes push it down to 4000$/kg. A Falcon 9 costs, for a commercial contractor, 56.5 million $, which puts it at 4500-5000$/kg to LEO.
This does not change how much money NASA gets. Which is half a penny for every tax dollar.
some bad ass camera
That upper stage must have re-entered like a boxcar coming through the air sideways.
The width made CRAZY pressure waves
It looks like they toasted the launch pad.
Ares is such a cool mission name
WAIT THIS THING ACTUALLY FLEW WHAT THE FUCK I THOUGHT IT NEVER GOT PAST CONCEPT STAGE LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOO
This is cool, but I don't think anything will beat the awesomeness of the Space Shuttle Launch.
Jaja starship is crazy nowadays
@FoulOwl I never claimed to be a professor (that'll be the day ;) ) but as i understand it to achieve anywhere near escape velocity you're already going many times faster than the speed of sound, and breaking the sound barrier means a build up of pressurized air around the craft, which leads to the hydrogen and oxygen condensing into water (Prandtl-Glauert singularity). This then freezes to form the ice you often see. But feel free to prove me wrong, i'm always open to learning new things :)
holy crap what was that turn man
@FoulOwl Also - do they even paint rockets?
😮 I think that first stage was the srb of space shuttle
That maneuver at the end seems familiar.... as if ive seen something similar recently 🤔🤔🤔
Shuttle SRB with some upper stage connected, way to go NASA!
Humans should never ride a rocket with solid propellant engines, but they are great for cargo or satellites.
Ghostbusters3 tell that to the shuttle. Liquid fueled engines are MUCH more likely to malfunction and kill you
Flashgasm actually you are wrong, soyuz has killed 3 people on soyuz 1 from asphyxiation upon reentry
And there are plenty of solid fuel rockets on Soyuz like the "soft landing" rockets. Space X on the other hand, uses zero solid fuel motors/rockets, that includes frangible nuts for separations, the Falcon heavy even used a hydraulic system to separate the side boosters.
@@riccardodambrosio3855 That was a political problem due to the politicians failing to accept their asking of money for spacesuits. Soyuz didn't badly fail, just a tiny malfunction, it landed with the corpses PERFECTLY, they would have survived. Had not been for the politicians, Russia would have zero deaths in space.
Riccardo D'ambrosio yeah but this was not an issue with the engines
It’s sad they don’t fly now
They don't fly now? They don't fly now!
@PchanStitch You're definitely not alone if you do.
sweet
@FoulOwl That's not paint, that's condensation.
Neat
THANKS OBAMA.... !!! Asteroid Redirect my foot **Sarcasm**
Stupid waste. Trump was right to cancel that.
Sticc
Do you know how much is cost to launch rockets into space?
that was awsome but the separation was strange... wonder why they had both parts "tumble"
testing
While your comment is 12 years old, for any who come along, the upper stage tumbled because it was simply a dummy load. No control, it was a fairing with weight in it is all. Had it been a real vehicle, a booster motor or RCS thrusters or something would have kept the vehicle straight.
It's all about a Saturn V launch.
And to think that Felix Baumgartner jumped from near enough the same altitude on Sunday 14th Oct 2012.
Now that you think about it this was the most recent nasa launch from their own rocket not spaceX or esa NASA so yeah they gotta step up their game
One word to describe that monstrosity: *STICK*
Now i dont how about you, but I would consider this as a nuclear torpedo lol (if they even produce a capital space ship). That is the biggest hobby rocket i have ever seen. Those boosters are soo... mean.
when will the Ares V come out?
+Duderocks5539 Cancelled
SLS is basically a redesigned Ares V. It has four engines in its first stage instead of five, and bigger SRBs to make up the difference. It also has a cheaper upper stage.
SgtBaker16 luckily we can still count on SpaceX, they’re privately funded and can work on stuff faster
That looked good, till the point it started rotating....
It doesn't have a propulsion system or a guidance. The second stage is just a dummy payload.
It was rotating on purpose
@@someinternetperson it wasnt
@@ulu9208 yes, it was a test, they rotated it on purpose look it up
@@ulu9208 2:21 “we have a tumble motor ignition” u deaf?
I can't believe this was supposed to be a crewed vehicle.
Are they tilting the camera or is the rocket really going sideways?
All rockets go "sideways" to achieve orbit
lol how is something supposed to orbit if it just goes straight up?
Woah a srb can fly
I dont care what anyone says this rocket is cool as hell
Yeet that mass simulator into the sea
@mainstreetgse No it won't because it was cancelled many months ago. The current Administration has ensured that we nolonger have a viable space program.
Which will make them ship off even more jobs. The only reason one would move jobs overseas, while getting rid of the jobs in country is if it's no longer profitable. If you have a factory making a profit here, and build one that makes an even bigger profit over seas, it makes no sense to shut the local one down, because you'd be losing that profit.
Long way from Vangard eh? ^_^
Literally the strangest and most dangerous rocket NASA ever made.
Wrong. it was safe, the whole mission went according to plan and it looks amazing.
@@jacobdaniel6135 it was a solid rocket booster. That people got strapped onto.
@@Blarnix well you could say that about any rocket... "it's just a fuel tank... that people got strapped onto"
The srb is safe and even if something happened the emergency escape system is there for a reason
@@jacobdaniel6135 It’s not “just a fuel tank”. It’s not even a tank at all. It’s solid fuel. I’m sure you probably don’t know this, but when an SRB is ignited, there is absolutely zero chance of turning it off. That means that if there’s a problem with the engine or the crew needs to escape, it becomes a HUGE issue with that SRB flying around at full thrust for however long. This could burn the parachutes, vaporize the spacecraft, explode the upper stage, etc. It wasn’t worth the risk. It was almost as risky as the space shuttle and it’s no wonder the program was shut down.
@@Blarnix I know it's not a fuel tank, I was just referring to any other rocket. And the space shuttle program was shut down because of lack of funding not safety... it was very safe in the end. And the emergency escape system has controls that steer it away from the rocket in case of an emergency
We have come a long way to get back to this point, in just three years we will be back on the moon.
Why murica why would u cancel the Area family
@PchanStitch no
Keep in mind even today Ares 1 is the only rocket since the Space Shuttle NASA developed tested and launched
@@geocam2 It will not fly in 2021 but it will roll out to the pad this year
I will come back to this comment when SLS launches
@@tvre0 If SLS doesn't scrubs again, haha
@@fedora997 I never specified it would launch this saturday. It might, but then again it could also launch next year.
@@tvre0 you can now be free
well this isnt the god of war at all
n̶e̶w̶ old rocket design
The world's most powerful pointless yeet.
Still a more successful first launch that Starship
You do know that NASA takes about 1/10 of 1% of the total federal budget, plus they end EVERY year in the black.
Does anyone know why this project was canceled? It was a brilliant and cheap way of getting into LEO. I heard that the amount of vibration the SRB made was to much for the rocket to handle with humans inside but yet the space shuttle had two and 7 humans could survive it. Just not sure why they cancelled such a good project.
They found in order to continue they had to put a lot more money into it so they just cut it instead.
Ah okay, good thing like commercial crew is stepping into play now.
+MrxFivexAlive
shuttle boosters were side mounted easing the stress, plus shuttle had a 70 ton orbiter to carry to space, In ares mode it isnt and it takes off like a bat outta hell
Yep, the shuttles boosters are to this day the most powerful SRB's. Wonder what would happen if ya put the first stage of a Saturn V on the orbiter with two SRB's to the side of it. Wow, you'd really get going.
MrxFivexAlive you should look up the Saturn-Shuttle concept.
Shuttle needs to stay in service and have the whole program overhauled.
😔
9 years later and we got better alternatives to reach the ISS. Space Shuttle was way too dangerous.
0:48
It could’ve been used for ISS Resupply missions instead of the Orion.
I was honestly crushed when this was cancelled, but in retrospect Falcon/Dragon is a way better system and Im glad we are using that instead. Safer, reusable, more versatile, and sexier.
I prefer a simpler design
This is about as simple as you can get... using 2 already existing designs and putting them together
i dont understand the end
oh ok
The first stage wasn't supposed to impact the 2nd stage like it did though. The first stage was supposed to have a clean separation and continue flying straight.
test article
Wonderful!! this is the spaceship of the first martian humans!!
What did the rocket carry ?
@PchanStitch or better yet raise taxes on profitable companies that continue to ship jobs overseas whilst taking advantage of tax breaks.
here after Scott manly's video?
Eh... a test not really as impressive as lobbing a car into heliocentric orbit using three nearly identical boosters practically Kerbal'd together. Two of which comes back and lands itself. (The third, unfortunately, hit the water)
Honestly, I think part of the reason why funding to NASA kept getting cut was the lack of publicity to keep the people interested. If people were interested, then Congress wouldn't have a reason to cut funding. Imagine if NASA hyped up these things just like how SpaceX gets everyone interested? They might have had mighty beasts like this in operation rather than launch a prototype just to cancel it later.
Nowhere near Kerbal'd together, you can't just "strap more boosters" unless your first stage is designed to be suitable to hold (and be) a booster.
@@1312_PV *MOAR BOOSTERS*
Thanks Obama.
while i agree we need more money i dont want terrorists to win so im all for expensive military budgets if they give slightly higher space program budgets as well
bur the military doesn't need a lot of money anymore, they have more than enough assets to sustain the war. NASA, however, needs everything it can get.
The mission in one sentence:
*Task failed successfully*
Didn't really fail at all... everything went exactly as planned
@@jacobdaniel6135 It looks like a launch failure at first glance
@@KerbalHub the upper stage was just a mass simulator and had no controls and was expected to tumble
Ooo thats an embarrassing separation, no wonder it got cancelled
This was just a test with a dummy upper stage and it was supposed to separate like that
If humans rode on this they would pretty much have a 0 percent of survival if a failure happened
also isn't this just a space shuttle SRB??
Not true, you see that long thing on the top? That’s a LES, or launch escape system. It has powerful solid motors that would pull a capsule away in the event of an emergency
@@coffeespy1133 bro you see the thing on the long skinny bottom? that's one of the worlds most powerful srbs
@@tomintheholee8901 duh. And? The launch escape system would ensure the astronauts are fine
@@coffeespy1133 a study by the airforce 45th space wing determined if the crew had to abort between 30 to 60 seconds after launch, they would have a 0% chance of survival
research some facts you idiot
@@tomintheholee8901 highly doubt they would even put an LES there if that were the case
A total boondoggle.
The problem with this is that the vibration was too crazy. And the research and development cost far too much for what is supposed to be a "cheaper" solution. Personally I don't trust NASA after two preventable shuttle loses.
The Columbia was less preventable than challenger but you do have a point
NASA gets half a penny per dollar of tax money.
So glad Obama replaced this with nothing.
SLS AND ARTEMIS
@@jgtrx yeah nothing. IT'S AIN'T HAPPENING
@@Thunderchild-gz4gc its launching around this month lol
@@jgtrx "gets rolled back to vab"
Is it wrong of me to hate Obama for cancelling this?
No :(
@@elsebas3167 why
Stop talking gibbery goo. Go back to school.
I have friends on unemployment who have college degrees and who worked 10+ years until they were laid off or their company downsized. So they are lazy bums? It's no jobs out there bro........That's the truth