Talk:Ares IV

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Please keep all updates brief and supported by cites. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bchan (talkcontribs).

I've done some major cleanup to try and bring the article (and citation) format in line with Wikipedia standards. Still, you made a good start on it. --StuffOfInterest 18:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nice Idea, But What If???[edit]

I like the idea of using the Ares IV for an Apollo 8-style mission (Orion CEV only, no lander), but the idea of launching two separate Ares IVs and doing the on-orbit assembly around the Moon does bring up the question, "What if another Apollo 13-type situation occurs?" With the current EOR/LOR plan, if an Apollo 13-like problem occured during the trans-lunar flight, the LSAM would be able to let the astronauts get on home, and even keep the Orion crew module stay powered in the process. On the other hand, if they went with this alternative plan, you may be spelling trouble.

Although this idea is good on paper, if NASA wants to spend the money on an Ares IV rocket, then just strip the two 5-segment SRBs off of the core booster, rename it "Ares II" and use the powered-down booster as a replacement to the already problem-plagued Ares I. Rwboa22 21:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which would be useless. Removing the boosters would result in a rocket which probably does not have enough power to get off the ground, and certainly lacks the power needed to reach orbit. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 12:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Carpathia and Titanic?[edit]

Now I'm not a fanatic history buff, but how would the proposed "rescue mission" end up being similar to how the Carpathia rescued Titanic survivors? Aksmth 12:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Outdated ?[edit]

I think that Ares IV was an idea at the beginning of 2007, but does not seem on the table anymore at the end of 2007. Therefore, presenting it at the same level as Ares I or Ares V seems to me somewhat misleading. This is now a historical concept, nothing more. Hektor (talk) 08:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]