NASA Launches Ares I-X Test Flight

Rocket is Precursor to Spacecraft Planned for Next Generation of Space Exploration

(CBS/ AP)  Updated 5:24 p.m. EDT

NASA's newest rocket successfully completed a brief test flight Wednesday, 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 tremendous 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.

The 327-foot-tall rocket roared to life at 11:30 a.m. EDT and majestically climbed away from launch complex 39B at the Kennedy Space Center atop a torrent of 5,000-degree flame and a cloud of churning exhaust, reports CBS News space analyst Bill Harwood.

Liftoff came three-and-a-half hours behind schedule because of overnight thunderstorms and nearby lightning strikes that required unplanned tests.

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.

For in-depth space coverage, visit the CBS Space Place

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.

It was also the first launching in NASA's post-Columbia Constellation program, which calls for development of manned and unmanned Ares rockets, Orion crew capsules and landers designed to support Antarctica-style moon bases in the 2020s, Harwood reports.

But the Obama administration is re-evaluating NASA's manned space program and whether it makes sense to return to the moon while assessing a report from an independent panel of experts that concluded NASA did not have enough money to carry out the Constellation program.

The panel suggested it would make more sense to abandon the Ares I rocket in favor of rockets and crew capsules provide by private industry on a commercial basis. Under that approach, NASA could focus on development of the heavy lift rockets needed to carry astronauts a variety of deep space targets.

Given the political uncertainty in Washington, it's unclear if the Ares I rocket that Tuesday's test flight was designed to support will ever actually fly.

The test flight 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., 3½ 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.

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 direction the Obama administration takes, NASA managers expect to learn a lot from Wednesday's experimental flight, even if it's for another type of rocket. They said they already have learned a lot.

Hanley, for one, does not want to hear anymore about the cloudy, electrically charged conditions — triboelectrification — that made it so difficult to get this test rocket off the ground. Future rockets will have proper protection.

"Whatever we end up flying, this will not be a problem," he promised.

[bobnjersey]

["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.

The flight cost $445 million. ]

very impressive jeff ... but c'mon ... you had $455 million ... for a six minute flight that went 28 miles?

lewis & clark was funded with $2500 for their expedition in 1804 ... lasted two years ... and travled over 7500 miles.

'Clark made most of the preparations, by way of letters to Jefferson. He bought two large buckets and five smaller buckets of salt, a ton of dried pork, and medicines.'

[casionova]

Yes but, adjust that $2500 for inflation, and keep in mind they didnt need to invent a new more efficient and cost effective vehicle for their journey.

[bobnjersey]

[adjust that $2500 for inflation, and keep in mind they didnt need to invent a new more efficient and cost effective vehicle for their journey.]

yea ... do that adjustment. is it $455 million? only by government expenditure standards would a $455 million dollars be classified as efficient and cost effective.

a new vehicle for their journey? you mean like a shiny new bike ... maybe one they'll never ride again? was that 28 miles and six minutes really 'exploration' ... as in discovering new things they didn't know before?

[pjk12354]

The way this country is going.........a trip to the International Space Station will become deep space travel.......show us some balls.........fund NASA now!

[wdh3007]

$445 million for something that looks more like a ballistic missile than a space craft I wonder if they could strap a warhead on it.

[Skruffy1]

Either NASA is doing a really poor job of explaining this thing to us taxpayers, or the media just doesn't have any idea what they are reporting (like THAT would ever happen, eh?)... but billing this as a "replacement for the shuttle" doesn't make sense. The shuttle's replacement we've been told for years was under development was supposed to be an improved airplane-like craft with a similar capacity, and even more re-useability than the shuttles. While yes, the new rocket may be able to do SOME of what the shuttles do, I fail to see this as a replacement in any significant way. Can someone in the know please enlighten me and the rest of the world? NASA and the media don't seem to be doing that. I want to think this new rocket is a step forward, but what I see so far puts us where we were about 50 years ago -- with a big heavy-payload rocket.

[anonymous010]

As I understand it, the Orion crew module is the actual supposed shuttle replacement; it's what would dock with the ISS and/or carry out orbital missions. The Ares rocket itself is just the vehicle used to get it up there (like the boosters that the shuttles ride to get to orbit), as well as possibly beyond, depending on the data. I could be completely wrong, though.

[rwsmith29456]

Also, the thinking has changed from having one big vehicle carry all the cargo and crew like the shuttle to having a separate vehicles for both. The shuttle was a fantastic development but has proven to be very complex. Instead, they've combined old, conventional rocket and capsule technology with some new ideas to create the Ares/Orion. I think they are on the right track.

[thesevenveils]

how can rocket launches from a commercial sector be more cost efficient than NASA's program when there is an added profit margin to the total cost of launch?

[anonymous010]

Because NASA won't be their only customers, and there will be competition across the different commercial companies. It's the same reason why it's cheaper to buy a plane ticket as opposed to building your own plane.

[bubbadubba]

"The panel suggested it would make more sense to abandon the Ares I rocket in favor of rockets and crew capsules provide by private industry on a commercial basis. Under that approach, NASA could focus on development of the heavy lift rockets needed to carry astronauts to a variety of deep space targets."

What a joke. "Deep space targets"? Like Mars? With rockets? A total waste of money until we find a better way to get spacecraft into deep space and that is over a hundred years off.
Just another pay off to get them to shift tax money to private corporations to rip off the taxpayer and put money in rich people's pockets like they always do. It's call "cost overrun" or as I call it "profit overrun". I have no doubt the contracted spacecraft would be made in China.
Either let NASA do it, or shut the whole thing down for good.

[ibsteve2u]

Was that a true "separation" at the end of the flight?