MOSCOW. (Konstantin Bogdanov for RIA Novosti) – At 6:30 p.m. Moscow time on Wednesday, October 28, a thin white candle with an American flag on its side lifted off into the serene sky at the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral, FL. This is how the first flight of Ares I-X, a prototype of the Ares I carrier rocket, began.
The launch was initially scheduled for Tuesday, but the thunderstorm clouds that passed over Florida on that day frustrated NASA’s plans. The three-minute countdown started nonetheless, but the launch was suspended due to surging gusts of wind. “We had some opportunities, we just didn’t get there – the weather didn’t cooperate,” launch director Edward Mango said with bitter irony at the end of the day.
Only on the following day, half an hour before the end of the four-hour launch window, the weather offered a minor chance, which NASA managed to use virtually propelling the rocket into a break in clouds. The future carrier rocket of the space program Constellation took off from the launch pad, rose to the height of 40 kilometers in two minutes, and the first stage successfully separated. An upper stage mass simulator with over 700 sensors, which kept the launch team updated on the flight progress, splashed down in the Atlantic Ocean.
The Constellation program, which employs the Ares I rocket, is a new stage in the U.S. manned astronautics development, aimed at preparing a manned flight to the Moon, deploying a permanent base there and in the long run organizing a manned flight to Mars.
The program envisions the development of two carrier types, a heavy Ares V, capable of taking up to 188 metric tons of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO), and a new workhorse of the American astronautics Ares I, which is intended to replace space shuttles. Ares I is planned to deliver 25 metric tons of payload to LEO. Also, there is a bright outlook for the development of the manned spacecraft Orion with a six-person crew, which will be able to reach the Moon.
Constellation became one of the symbols of the forthcoming renaissance of international space exploration, with China’s manned flight achievements and a possibility of India’s far-reaching space programs spurring NASA’s activity. The agency proceeds from a fair assumption: We must do it today – otherwise tomorrow it will be done by others.
However, NASA’s lobbying its ambitious projects encounters Washington’s increasingly tough criticism, which is testimony to serious disagreement within the American establishment over the ends and means of the U.S. manned space exploration development.
In September, a panel of experts under the U.S. administration lambasted NASA’s Moon plans describing them as unjustified. A week ago Ares I, which is being prepared for launch, was bashed as well. According to experts, the rocket draft is raw, and a great many structure details were not properly thought out even at the design stage. The safety of the spacecraft crews that the rocket will put into orbit is very questionable. Experts have been reasonably pointing to abnormally high vibrations caused by the booster stage, also noting a deficient design of the Orion manned spacecraft, which turned out heavier than planned, a factor that may jeopardize a return from the orbit.
However, the last nail in the project’s coffin was driven when the panel of experts pronounced Ares I inefficient, stating that a manned Moon program can be implemented on a different carrier system. It must be noted that the experts did not suggest any actual alternatives, with their pretty obscure recommendations focused on extending the shuttle’s lifetime, gradually developing the Ares V heavy lifter to ultimately put it into operation and increasing annual budget allocations, which currently stand at $17.6 billion, by $3 billion. In addition, it was recommended to involve private companies in the U.S. space industry. The experts also believe that NASA should develop all major branches, rather than concentrate on a single project.
Outwardly it may seem that the experts came up with a lame solution that nips America’s tentative breakthrough in space in the bud, but this situation can be viewed from a different prospective if one takes into account the sufficient U.S. experience in fostering technology development and innovation funding via large-scale and long-term programs. This was initiated by the Roosevelt administration, with Reaganomics considered to have made the most notable contribution. In this context, the experts’ verdict appears in a different light: What they suggest is to end the rush for an immediate Moon landing, expanding the scope of work as far as possible and supporting the U.S. high-tech industry through heavier investment in cutting-edge developments.
It’s not clear whether this evolutionary plan guarantees America’s successful return to the Moon, but this time-tested means of financing innovations in engine construction, control system and construction material development is not so bad. In any case it’s better than another arms race.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti