Orion shows how it's done

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by publiusr, Dec 5, 2014.

  1. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Here is the time lapse of the mission for those on the go:

    Orion https://www.youtube.com/watch?annot...i1r8ylxUoEA&src_vid=iCanbuiSywg&v=s98NtfIcuGg

    Jesus, Kafka and I walk into a bar--

    I sees this kid with his nose in an iphone right? And he's looking at Orion--and I sez to him:

    "Capsules to go to the moon, riots over cops in the streets--it really is 1968 all over again, isn't it?
    I half expect to pick up a newspaper and find McGovern running for office!"

    Kid looks at me and says:

    "What's a newspaper?"

    ...

     
  2. T J

    T J Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Location:
    milky way... there abouts
    Very cool! :cool:
     
  3. Metryq

    Metryq Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    "'Spaceman'?"
    "Spay-see-men!"
     
  4. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  5. JES

    JES Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Location:
    Ocoee, Florida
    To be fair, at least the Dream Chaser walked (towed away) in one piece.

    Though I suppose that being based off of a previous, well tested design helps.
     
  6. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  7. Brolan

    Brolan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Location:
    Backwoods Minnesota
    Why do we have to wait another seven years for a manned flight? Lack of money?
     
  8. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    Considering that NASA built three functional capsules in a decade (1958 to 1968), I think it is an excellent question on why it will take over a decade before there is a manned Orion mission. I am not comfortable with the fact that there will be one more test flight before the manned flight.

    Orion is not taking humans on a journey to Mars. One estimate I have heard for a Mars program is $500 billion. This is more than $467 billion spent on Apollo. (I am using the current value of the Apollo program, which is estimated at $33 billion dollars.)

    The point made above with pictures is ridiculous. NASA and the Soviet (now Russian) Space Agency have suffered numerous rocket failures.
     
  9. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    One of the websites I frequent is called "nextbigfuture."

    You have a bunch of mouthbreathers who love to put NASA down at every turn.

    Thankfully, you have this great poster who calls himself "Goat Guy."

    He knocks the stuffing out of a lot of handwavium hype by doing a Phil Plait and debunking a lot of crap.

    Here is some of his brilliant retorts to retarts

    http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/12/spacex-attempting-reusable-rocket.html

    "Indeed: while there is an endless stream of NASA badmouthers, which cite everything from "government waste" to "entrenched bureaucracy" to "stuck in the '70s" engineering … the truth is that they're just being prudent, shrewdly concerned about getting the missions to happen without flaw, to the greatest degree allowed by the power, cost and weight budget of the mission. This is why I tend to scoff at Musk's Vision."

    More:

    "Oh, I understand the negative critique of NASA and its programs. But they don't even have a tiny fraction of the funding that was invested in them in the post-Kennedy years, when trying to get to the Moon. They have 10× more mission objectives to service per year, ⅛ the funding, and cannot abandon the running experiments and missions that were invested in a decade back, just now coming to fruition. Well, they would abandon servicing these things, if egotists like Musk were in charge. "Mine first. No. MINE first."

    "I make no bones in saying it: NASA "got to the moon" because an assassinated and hugely popular president had set in motion a huge enterprise with his words, and the public's commitment to avenge our dead leader. That's why it worked. Because the people decided to fund it to the tune of over 7% of the national budget. Today, NASA exists on 0.3% of the national budget, and maintains a lot of mothballed hangers. Whaddya think is needed here? A new NASA, or a funded one?"


    A poster named James claimed that Orion--which went higher than any shuttle "barely got up there:"

    Dude… whaddya mean “barely got up there”? It performed as designed, and as expected.
    Its triple-thruster burn was exactly (to the second) as planned.
    The thrust profile was exactly as planned.
    The emergency abort tower and rocket worked as planned.
    The ejection of the liquid-fueled boosters happened without flaw.
    The "common core" 1st staged resumed high-thrust profile delivering exactly the ΔV needed.
    The Orion MPV was not an empty shell filled with brickwork (like the Russian mock up last year), but a real CM and SM combination, less the blokes to drive it.
    Indeed, one could make a pretty convincing media-spin argument that it was robotically flown or some such hay.
    The SM and CM combo performed exactly as planned, getting the orbiter 8,000 miles up to MEO in a highly elliptical orbit that was planned to deorbit in 2 rotations.
    Which it did.
    The CM didn't flip upside down or do anything bad on its robotically controlled return flight (which is a pretty impressive feat, unappreciated by the press.)
    And it splashed down with all systems running, with no loss of equipment functionality.
    OH, be negative if you must. Say something like, "for twenty eight bazillion dollars, we should HOPE that it would do all those things right. Nyah, Nyah, Nyah." But really the opinion is hollow.
    Tell me if you would, what really was the underachievement of this mission? If you decide that the underachievement is just economic, that it costs too much for what it did, then come up with something that NASA could do to fund such remarkable missions while keeping the price down to where you would say, “well… dâmn. That's pretty good right there.” Because see … I just believe you're prejudiced against ANYTHING that NASA does. Its a position, like being Democrat, Republican, Conservative or Progressive.


    His take on STS

    "Think about it: NASA had the only landing-strip returnable, reuseable, high capacity space vehicle ever. You're dissing it like it was a white elephant. It got 150 missions accomplished, that white elephant, and only 2 in-flight failures. That, friend, is dâmned impressive."
    "But I understand that your political position is to diss NASA as a wasteful, hated, symbol of government wrongness institution. You lust for the bicycle-pedaling (e-motor enhanced!) generation of hipsters to get out there and show what “real leadership” and “real economy” is like. I get it. But you don't: just like all of us in the 1970s who were just as much “hipsters” of the day, riding our bikes to work, and eating the then-new bean sprout salads at lunch, WE were enthralled with NASA's space-plane vision. We vetted the numbers, we publicly debated them. It seemed so right at the time. Aren't you just a WEE BIT afraid that your utter belief that NASA needs replacing with something entirely new, is going to come to basically the same end, due to the same reasons?"

    Preach it, Brother!

    Orion's return
    http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=27387
    http://www.universetoday.com/117207/orion-off-loaded-for-cross-country-trek-to-florida-home-base/
    http://www.universetoday.com/117100/why-nasas-orion-spacecraft-flew-old-slow-computers-into-orbit/
    http://www.universetoday.com/117197...e-sound-of-delta-iv-heavy-orion-eft-1-launch/
    http://www.universetoday.com/117184...-a-big-rocket-and-pretty-on-paper-spacecraft/

    On newspacers
    http://www.americaspace.com/?p=32540
    http://www.americaspace.com/?p=32552
    http://www.americaspace.com/?p=32560
    http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/editorial/opinion-newspace-needs-nasa-know/
    http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?154717-Orion-capsule-10-billion-for-nothing

    Interstellar travel
    http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?154707-Interstellar-Travel-Possible
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
  10. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    Never underestimate the power of ideology. The thinking in the '50s and '60s was that a Capitalistic country like the United States should not be defeated by a Communist country, and we were handed our asses on a platter with the early successes of the Soviet space program. Landing American citizens first on the Moon would send a message that our country was better than the USSR. That is why we got Gemini and Apollo. If the USSR had then turned its attention to Mars, there would have been another space race. It didn't happen, so for all my lifetime I have heard the talk, "We are going to Mars." I have stopped believing that humans will be landing on that planet.
     
  11. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Don't fret. There is a bigger global push for space than you might imagine. People for some reason just don't notice it.

    NASA got a budget boost
    http://spacenews.com/nasa-receives-18-billion-in-omnibus-spending-bill/

    Despite Russian rubles devaluing, Russia still looks to space
    http://www.russianspaceweb.com/energia5kv.html
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36321.0
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35866.30
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30465.msg1299906#msg1299906

    Starships for the future are being looked at
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/12/interstellar-generation-ship-challenges.html
    And for good reason--Oort encounter http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.3648
    http://www.universetoday.com/116872...stars-spreading-life-throughout-the-universe/
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5022

    China is now assembling a Delta IV heavy class rocket of its own: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8447.msg1302022#msg1302022

    As is India http://indianspacestation.com/resea...mk-iii-rolls-out-to-launch-pad-at-sriharikota

    China is designing its own HLLV http://www.ecns.cn/2014/12-08/145693.shtml

    More on Orion
    http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/testing-nasa-how-space-exploration-will-work-orion-era-n259306
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36320.0
    http://www.universetoday.com/117184...-a-big-rocket-and-pretty-on-paper-spacecraft/
    http://www.americaspace.com/?p=72819 PIX
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36247.0 timeline
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36297.0
    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2658/1
    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2659/1
    http://www.americaspace.com/?p=73038
    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/eft-1-orion-christmas-return-florida/
    Orion cockpit
    http://www.universetoday.com/116895...ll-steer-astronauts-through-the-solar-system/
    http://www.universetoday.com/117005...-explains-nasas-orion-eft-1-flight-in-detail/
    Service module http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34696.0

    Orion party begins
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36216.0

    Good skeptics (who need help and funding) are fighting moon-hoax believers--and talk about advancements beyond 3D printing you have heard so much about:
    http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthr...or-Apollo-hoax-theories&p=2260083#post2260083

    But if we listen to the naysayers, this will be all that we have left.
    http://www.abandonedinplace.com/

    The choice is yours...
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
  12. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    I think humans should establish a colony on the Moon. There, humans can gain experience and knowledge. If there is an issue, Earth is not far away. The longest that humans have lived in space is fourteen months. Going to Mars will take at most seven months, with another two years living on the surface until the next launch window appears. This is 31 months, seventeen months longer than any human has been in space.

    One of the issues that colonists had gained experience and knowledge about is the effect of cosmic ray radiation on the human body and develop methods of protecting humans. Apollo astronauts were exposed to cosmic radiation; however, they were protected to a degree by the Earth's magnetic field. There is no such protection at Mars.

    The biggest reason I have read why the Moon is being put to the sideline is because we have been there before. That is a very stupid reason.
     
  13. Metryq

    Metryq Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    By cherry-picking these failed and successful missions, I hope you're not suggesting that NASA is flawless? I'm very grateful that NASA did not dissolve completely after the Moon landings. But I am also happy to see so many private aerospace companies stepping into the arena. A diversity of approaches is beneficial. It would be a waste if everyone did things the same way NASA does—which is not a swipe at NASA, just at unnecessary redundancy.

    Yet I expect mistakes when people are pushing the limits, doing things in new—and hopefully better—ways. It is much easier to be flawless when doing what has been done before.
     
  14. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    One of the major issues with NASA has been its management, according to investigations for each of the shuttles lost. I am concerned that the Orion capsule is not getting more flight time. There is one unmanned flight, in 2018, before a manned flight in circa 2021. I have read that there isn't a destination for this thing yet. The next flight, and the last to be announced so far, will be in 2023.

    I have read at Wikipedia that Moon colonization would have cost $150 billion. So, the colonization was cancelled. Instead, one proposal is for a flight around the Moon as the first mission. Gee, that's swell. NASA did that with Apollo 8 back in '68.

    For the second manned flight, it is proposed that an asteroid will be captured, brought to lunar orbit, and the Orion capsule will travel to it. I have a stupid idea - why not wait for an asteroid to pass between the Moon and the Earth, then send the Orion capsule up to explore this body. It has less components - the simpler a plan, the more likely it won't fail.

    (I am aware of the Russian, Chinese, and Indian plans. I believe the biggest threat to space exploration is not the lack of public or political will, it is the coming climate apocalypse. In the decades to come, countries will have to protect themselves from the ravages of nature and from the greed of men for resources. The price tag for the Moon colonization is the same price tag for the rehabilitation of the California levee system in the '90s. It's probably much more now.)
     
  15. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Orion's re-entry
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtWzuZ6WZ8E

    There are plenty of destinations for Orion. The bashers just want to raid its budget.

    As for the cost, compare that number with the 1.5 trillion life-cycle cost for F-35.
    If you want something on the chopping block--there's your target.

    Interesting
    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2658/1

    Too fast. You have to bring both the asteroid and the craft to a compatible relative velocity.
    They know what they are doing.

    India just did its own capsule test by the looks of it:
    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosynchronous_Satellite_Launch_Vehicle_Mk_III

    From the ground up, you might say
    http://wikiinpics.com/history/141-transportation-of-the-apple-satellite-in-india.html
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2014
  16. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    I would like for human exploration of space. The reality is that the costs for space exploration have increased, which means unless there is international cooperation humans will be confined to low and medium earth orbit. (Personally, I liked the portrait of space exploration in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Humans build stations in L positions and on the Moon. We established a major infrastructure on the Moon, then we send expeditions to the other planetary systems.)

    I am in favor of cancelling the F-35 program. I have read about it. Any plane that requires 60 hours of maintenance for every hour of flight time is a failure. Any plane that can't fly in bad weather is a failure. I like the description of it as an obese beast.

    I don't know if the space shuttle lead to a dead end or if it will be resurrected in the future. For now, capsules are the cheapest, most proven spacecraft design. The Chinese, the Russians, the Americans, and, now, the Indians have space capsules in production and/or development.
     
  17. YellowSubmarine

    YellowSubmarine Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Personally, I find the price list getting less and less out of reach.
     
  18. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  19. Lakenheath 72

    Lakenheath 72 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    I hope that a reader would notice that I said that humans would be confined to what we have been doing since Apollo, that is being in low and medium Earth orbit. The costs for exploration beyond this range have increased.

    There is a diagram at Wikipedia that shows where the ISS is located. This is the furthest that humans have traveled and stayed in the past 42 years.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium...le:Comparison_satellite_navigation_orbits.svg

    The rockets, which the link is for, are launching payloads into LEO and geostationary orbit. This is the unmanned aspect of space exploration and exploitation.
     
  20. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Critics of the Orion and SLS programs argue that all this could be done for far less cost commercially...The fact is, the Orion program is far more commercial in its structure and operation that the shuttle program was, and NASA acknowledges this.

    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2665/1

    Some other thoughts on space
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36297.msg1307530#msg1307530
    The best technology for planning a Mars mission today is plain old exploding chemicals and really big rockets.



    For book lovers
    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2664/1

    India moves forward http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2667/1

    Russia stays the course http://www.russianspaceweb.com/superheavy.html
    http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara5_scenario.html
    VIDEO http://spaceflightnow.com/2014/12/23/photos-and-video-angara-5s-thunderous-liftoff/

    A solid foundation http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/qm-1-date-sls-joy-solid-solution/

    In other news--getting to Mars may just have gotten easier
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...s-safely-anytime-and-on-the-cheap/?print=true
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2014