Ares V vs SLS
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- Today we are going to be comparing the Mighty SLS to the Monster Ares V! Hope you Enjoy!
Socials:
Twitter: / davidwillissls
Discord: / discord
Insta: / david_willi. .
Credits:
NASA
SpaceX
DIRECT Team
Myself!
Music:
The awakening
Battle of 1066
Valley
altered state
Myself
in your orbit
------------------------------
Track: In Your Orbit - tubebackr [Audio Library Release]
Music provided by Audio Library Plus
Watch:
• In Your Orbit - tubebackr | Free Bac...
Free Download / Stream: alplus.io/your...
![PURPEECH - นี่ฉันเองคนที่... (It's me) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NuhHd0hOOg8/mqdefault.jpg)
Don’t forget to tune in tomorrow for Jupiter DIRECT: LIVE!
YESSSS DIRECT GETTING MORE LOVE
Can you please describe it on Metric system?
Everyone in the world have a hard time understanding "Pounds", "gallons" and "yards"
I mean, All the Shuttle Derived launchers basically work the same way, with the finalized Ares 5 being the only one with different engines
Something you forgot to add was that the EDS, for a short time, retained the 8m diameter for Ares V before it too ballooned into the same diameter as the core stage.
Ares V looks like if SLS spent several years on steroids
For real man!
This guy is so underrated!
Question: Do you think SLS Cargo (Any Block) will ever be used? I've always thought that SLS would probably stick to just being a launch vehicle for Orion due to a non-competitive cost per launch, but I am curious to hear your thoughts!
It’s certainly possible, but if it does it won’t be any time soon
It's great to see some positive SLS media on youtube and amongst content creators about space and rockets.
I'm getting far too fed up with the anti SLS and Arianne 6 crowd who boohoo and belittle the designs simply because Starship and Super Heavy exist. Which sure, they do, but that combined stack has flown twice and ended both missions having achieved not even a third of their objectives and having blown up. Meanwhile SLS succeeded pretty much flawlessly, and Arianne 6, whilst I'm sad it wont fly this year, will most likely perform as well as its predecessor.
SLS offers the most payload to the Moon and beyond out of any rocket currently in production, including Starship which could only match it after close to 20 launches to give it the fuel needed to get beyond LEO. What's the point in having such a massive rocket if the upper stage is stuck in LEO without refueling?
Arianne 6 builds on the history of the massively successful Arianne family, making launches basically half the cost for ESA, and again will offer better payload to GTO than the Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy as well as again Starship without its in-orbit refueling.
Any case, loved the breakdown and comparison between SLS and the Ares V, I remember back in the day being so caught up in the Constellation program and I was quite upset when they cancelled it (though the Ares I did have some flaws, like notably the points in the launch that aborting would kill the crew). Whilst they may have been different vehicles, at least somewhat in spirit, the Ares V gets to live on in the other shuttle derived launcher SLS.
in my opinion sls is a objectively wierd rocket for now in a concept. like for now it can make very costly 1 launch per year (in best scenario) with one specific task to launch crew of 4 to lunar orbit and thats it. yes its the only rocket that could do it now, but again its 1 launch per year for only 1 task (for several years) and all other heavy lifting doing comerical companies. launching gateway - spacex, hls - spacex/blueorigin, providing supplies for gateway - spacex with dragon xl, there was plans to launch gateway segments on sls but even now no cargo version of sls in sight and even EUS still in development and costs rasing questions because nasa budget not really infinite and they cut out important science projects now.
I like more full DIRECT concept with their modular system because its more flixible at least. like now and within several years you could not launch on sls anything exept Orion to the moon, because its turns out even for test run in leo without tle you would need revamp whole rocket with Orion (and its additional development time and cost) because it was not considered until whole hsl leo test concept. and even sls block 1b with EUS 4 years away at least on 4th launch.
i like Orion because its the only craft that could safely return from lunar orbit but again with only sls it can do only that.
like for me whole concept of launching 2+ most powerful rockets then to throw at least 1 most expensive out (and for other +launch several tankers) then to dock them on very specific orbit around the moon its weird (and also its only once a year deal). its like you made 2 massive launches and expended most expensive when you in therory could use 1 massive launch for cargo or lander and reused it and one normal launch for orion on medium lv.
when nasa saying that they want to build sustainable lunar program/base sls its the sadly only avalible and worst system for it. like how you would sustain lunar base with 1 crew of 4 launch per year (that whole 1 launch per year thing its sad, of course it can change but not in near future as it seems).
its sad but i think sls not really has future beyond artemis especially if you consider new launch vehicles (as starship, new glenn) and especially without modifications. i like big orange rockets but they rare to fly and very costly...
also "SLS offers the most payload to the Moon and beyond out of any rocket currently in production" if you consider sls now as the most payload to the moon curently in production you need to think that for most close launches (2 and 3) you get close to 0 payload to the moon but yes 4 people, for block 1b you get around 27 metric tonnes yes net 2028 + crew. and over all its 0 useful payload for several years outsdie of artemis because cargo vesrion still not close to developing i feel.
"What's the point in having such a massive rocket if the upper stage is stuck in LEO without refueling?" i also can say that about sls: Whats the point of having massive rocket if only payload its 4 people in capsule around the moon without any means to land on it or sent station segments (without outside force as again like Starship or falcon heavy).
anyway now sls can not survive without starship and with it on orbit refueling so refueling needs to be solved and i feel would be solved. and also if sls and artemis could not make it without landers as starship or blue origin lander (that also needs refueling but with hydrogen), starship as a program can survive without sls even if nasa its biggest customer right now. (+ you can just launch starship with cick stage in payload bay when it would have normal payload bay)
about ariane 6, i not really have a strong opninion, i like arianes but even still ariane 6 was very long in development and now outdated a little, but i could see it in use
also i feel SLS and Ariane 6 now more political instruments or symbols more then true optimised or sustainible launch systems
sorry for my essay you got me thinking )
@@YuriKurokhtin I think that SLS is miles safer than starship. TBH, I don't care how reliable starship is, If something goes wrong and it blows up, how will the astronauts escape from starship.
@TanVasinTrains but no one is talking about crewed starship launch in near future, for 100% now we only know that starship/superheavy would launch starlinks and starship hls (also there is companies that would like to launch big cargo on starship, so cargo starship would be a thing faster then crewed launch starship varient most probably),
and without starship hls (human landing system) no one needs sls because sls could not launch lander with orion in one launch even if nasa had one and if launch sls orion and lander in 2 separate launches it still would need cargo varient that was not been developed also eus that also in development and money and hardware for another launch. and if we talking about general sls launch sls leo orion launch is not practical or almost imposible in current planned configuration.
when starship would be able to launch humans i think it is very possible that spacex would develop launch escape system or even launch/landing escape system, or at least nasa would ask them to do it.
and also there is possibility that when full crew starship would be fully operational sls already will not survive cost problems, schedule and mission profile problems, its not certain and no one knows when or will it happen (no one knows when crewed starship would be ready (spacex can accelerate development or wait for cargo varient to be fully successful) and for how far sls would be developed, could sls costs be lowered or will they always be rising to absurd amounts, what mission profile would sls be able to do in the future if it would be developed and essentially for how far sls would be funded)
tbh sls as rocket not bad one (orange rocket always good), if we not count money and time, if we imagine all main varients of sls ready with cargo varients with block 1b, orion and etc. its cool heavy lifting vehicle that could launch crew and cargo to the moon and return crew back home on orion that is only capsule now that can do this. but all things at the end goes to money and when all that capability would be ready and would it be funded, made, and how much flights it would perform. for now we have only one launch with most incapible configuration and we dont know when other launches will happen and how much it would cost at the end, in future there is hope for 1 launch per year but for now it could not even launch every year.
but if we look at starship and starship was less time in development (even if we have only developmental flights now) we can predict that it would cost way less per launch and spacex officially wants to launch 25 times per year from starbase (and they need to because of hsl refueling), and its still superheavy class vehicle that could be in theroy launched expandeble and cost less then sls per laucnh.
sorry again for my big comment... its for me interesting topic, and im worry for for artemis and sls too. and i want for artemis program to be successful
@@TanVasinTrains and to add to my massive comment my feeling, when crew launch starship would be ready i hope that spacex developes launch and landing escape system even if it would mean less people to orbit, at leats for early versions (but i think escape system would be always good idea, i want starship to be better than shuttle especially in that field)
@@YuriKurokhtin I wonder why orion didn't do what apollo did and added the lander inside the rocket.
damn, i follow you on twitter for some time and haven't realized you have a yt channel, just discovered.
nice content btw
Thanks!
Jupiter 246 stretched heavy looks so interresting but unfortently there isnt much Information on it but hey we have SLS looking back it felt like a uphill battle to get it onto the pad but it flew to the moon . Also thanks David for being factual about SLS and not saying "but spaceX " every five secons also side note SLS is my Favorit rocket becouse of all the hate it has gottan
Well, they scrapped all of that. As expected.
2018 was to orbit the moon. It never happened. I wonder why!
One more year until Artemis 2!!! 🥳
We’re closing in!
I saw your tweets in spitter recently, and just got time to watch. We could've saved so much time if Jupiter was selected from the start. Lunar Lander proposals might’ve begun in the mid 2010s instead.
And it's the perfect naming scheme! Jupiter after Saturn. Like Artemis after Apollo.
Nice work David Keep it up
thank you!
@@DavidWillisSLS YW ATS here.
I wish they would give the SLS an epic name isntead of just "SLS" It's so jaded.
Perfect rocket research for project Aquarius program, new Jupiter V Rocket family 🍀🍀❤️❤️
Essentially when Ares 1 turned into a complete disaster. Congress point out the A-5 could just as easily carry the Orion, and do it better, safer, and with lower program cost. So they had to drop Ares-1.
Then Obama wanted everything related to a lunar lander killed.
The two, Ares V and SLS-V, are pretty much derivatives or variations on a theme.
Bottom line they kept all the parts of the shuttle that killed folks and maximized the costs by mandating full expendability, even of parts like .Orion designed for reuse.
Good video, but the Ares V and SLS are absolutley related. They are both Shuttle-derived vehicles, and thus, are common ancestors of the Space Shuttle. The Ares V may not have been directly turned into the SLS, but they are still related.
He literally said that they both come from the shuttle and the entire section after the intro is about how they both came from Shuttle. I’m confused as to how you got this impression.
Ironically, not having some hard political mandate to land on the moon sounds like a good thing for SLS existence. NASA didn't had to plan for a bulky lander and could just call it a day
omg David willis from real life!
Very cool
The difference is that one is named Ares-V and the other is named SLS :3
Most important difference of all!
Ares V any day of the week. It's isn't Congress who's ass is going to be flying the thing. Our Astronauts deserve the very best. If we can afford unnecessary and illegal wars, tax cuts for the wealthy elites and corporate entities a militarized police then we and Congress's universal health care, then we can afford Ares V.
Woooooo
where did you get those new hls renders from? are they official?
Can’t say and yes
🎉
why will there be such a long gap between artemis 3 and 4?
Mobile launcher is taking longer to build than expected
@@DavidWillisSLSdont they already have one?
@@duckvs.chipanddale585 it’s only configured for the block 1, and too heavy to be converted for use on the block 1b, which necessarily means they need a new tower
Not the most powerful but yeah
Saying Ares V and SLS are not related is like saying you are not related to your sister because you don't like her.
Did you even watch the video
Their only connection to eachother is that they come from the space shuttle, which is at best a grandparent to SLS, and to ares V, a suggestion of inspiration
I think a lot of pepole in this comment section have never watched this Video
The real winner here are the Gulf Coast State Senators.
Will the SLS send humans to Mars???
NASA Wants it to
@@DavidWillisSLS by sending to mars, do you mean sending Orion to the lunar gateway where a mars transfer vehicle will await?
@@averiWonBTW Orion will have to go to mars for lifeboat purposes according to NASA’s plan