Spacecraft Orion

[Reaper]

I just watched a show today on the science channel which was about the new spacecraft that is being designed by NASA. The spacecraft, called Orion, is intended to replace the shuttle by the next decade. The show was called Starship Orion.

 

What they talked about here was about the design phase of the spacecraft and how they are progressing so far. They focused a lot on the reentry vehicle as that will be crucial for returning to Earth.

 

I found the show pretty interesting. They talked about data that was collected while testing it in the vacuum chamber, wind tunnel, and even subjecting the material it will be built from to temperatures comparable to that of the surface of the sun (that is how hot reentry gets).

 

Some interesting trivia from the show:

 

-It will land on dry land somewhere in the desert, as opposed to the ocean as the Apollo modules did. They used some sort of thing that allows them to crash vehicles for tests by tethering them to cables and dropping them. It will be cushioned by airbags. They found that their design might be prone to tipping on reentry.

 

-Its L/D ratio (Lift to drag ratio) for their current design is about 0.5 . This is crucial because it determines maneuverability of the spacecraft. It needed to be above 0.4 according to the documentary I was watching. They tested this in a wind tunnel using a scaled down design.

 

-They also talked about ideas for a control panel and compared them to the ones used on Apollo. It will have far less buttons and will do much more given that our computers are far better than the ones on the Apollo module. For comparison, our basic calculators and car radios are more powerful and advanced than the computers on the Apollo spacecraft. Also, the Orion will use a bunch of touch screens and an intuitive OS. Additionally, they can be used to control the spacecraft itself and reentry.

 

-The design is heavily based on the Apollo spacecraft, though it will have a lot more features and carry more people.

 

 

 

Overall, they are making progress on the building of the spacecraft and once completed and tested for human use, it will be used to take humans to the Moon and beyond. I have always been intrigued by progress being made to take humans out of here, and overall I found the show quite interesting.

 

For more information about the spacecraft you can visit the NASA website:

http://search.nasa.gov/search/search?q=Orion+spacecraft&output=xml_no_dtd&sort=dateADALAd1&site=nasa_collection&ie=UTF-8&client=nasa_production&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=nasa_production

 

 

So, what are your thoughts or research on the whole Project Constellation, the plan to replace the space shuttle, and progress being made?

[Klaynos]

I'm not a big fan of manned space flight for science... BUT it does bring in money which is important, tbh I think that the shuttle was a poor design and it's good to see NASA doing something that seems to be far more sensible

[geoguy]

I'm not a big fan of manned space flight for science... BUT it does bring in money which is important, tbh I think that the shuttle was a poor design and it's good to see NASA doing something that seems to be far more sensible

 

I'm not a fan of manned space flight, period. YAWN.

 

In contrast the rovers and probes. Hubble, etc. are A-1 exciting.

 

Space.com always has on going discussions on space topics, including Orion for those interested.

 

http://uplink.space.com/ubbthreads.php?Cat=

 

Re the money: Unfortunately the manned program has been a big toilet sucking in 75% of the funds. Non-manned programs and other science research has been a victim of the Shuttle and I.S.S. sink holes.

 

As a kid I was a space keener (as was every other kid). We knew every Russian and American astronaut...the way kids know their favorite sports heroes. After Apollo 11 interest in manned spaced was up there with watching paint dry. There will be ZERO interest among the public for another moon program. ZERO. It'll die when the cherry-picked soft ball questions are answered for a millionth time. "why did you want to be an astronaut"..."why should we spend money on the Moon when....." Get ready for scripted non-answers and it won't fly with the public.

 

A 5 minute update on Paris Hilton will outdraw ratings for a moon landing.

[Sisyphus]

I really think you're wrong about manned space flight. People WILL get excited about it if it actually happens, but I think the public is just really disillusioned and cynical about it right now. The 1950s and 60s were a really exciting time as big milestones were conquered right after the other, and it all culminated in walking on the moon, for God's sake. It WAS a giant leap for mankind, and probably one of the most optimistic moments in history. Not even the sky was the limit anymore!

 

...and then it stopped. The last 30 years have managed to make spaceflight boring. Before it was ever upward, now it's just shuttles endlessly going into orbit doing unromantic things like fixing communications satellites and agonizingly slowly building the world's most expensive bus station. Whoopee. I think we need that optimism and excitement again, and we DO need to have manned exploration eventually, so we may as well get good at it as soon as we can.

[geoguy]

Na, we don't need manned space exploration. Most folks today probably think the space station flies around the solar system rather than in Low Earth Orbit. Ask folks at work a question like : do you think we should send astronauts back to Mars? (yes an illogical question) and half o them wouldn't know man hasn't yet walked on Mars.

 

Even among astronomers and science geeks there isn't any great thirst for a manned Moon program. there are a few core 'technology' keeners but they are a fringe in the science community.

[Rocket Man]

if nasa or some privateer makes space flight cheap and available to the public there's going to be a huge increase in interest.

how many people who can throw cash around wouldn't go for a comercial stay at an inflatable hotel?

the revenue from that sort of thing would probably go to either a snooty bilionare or funds for further space related tech.

[geoguy]

True. And that's an 'if'. Today you can pay $1200 for a quick ride in a fighter jet. Probably somone has a private submarine to take folk sunder the surface but I doubt it's led to much demand for undersea hotels. Millionaire joy rider can only take a science so far and then practical purposes need to surface (if any).

 

There's also an unknown variable that might come into play. Perhaps in 10 years or 25, etc. There may soon be a taboo on expending energy and damaging the environment for frivolous jaunts for the rich. Many like free enterprise but once the 'average Joe' sees restrictions or some type of energy shortages that impact his daily life, the big yachts will be tied up in dock and private jets grounded.

[CPL.Luke]

unlikely,

 

also there is a pracical purpose to space flight, materials exploration. The earth is slowly running out of raw materials, and pretty soon we will hve to look to asteroids to continue providing all that we need.

[Sisyphus]

Yes, when I say "eventually" we'll need it that's what I had in mind. Eventually it will be quite economical, and well worth practically any investment. It won't be 20 years from now, but it might be 100, and by then we should be good at it.

[Reaper]

Re the money: Unfortunately the manned program has been a big toilet sucking in 75% of the funds. Non-manned programs and other science research has been a victim of the Shuttle and I.S.S. sink holes.

 

 

Not quite. Manned spaceflights into near Earth orbit do much more than just flying around fixing satellites. Often they are funded to do science experiments not otherwise possible on Earth. The ISS is being built with the purpose of establishing a permanent space outpost for human beings to do a bunch of microgravity experiments, among other things. Its not just the government doing the funding; a huge number of corporations also fund the space programs to see if they can create products that can't be done on Earth.

 

-------------------------------------

 

 

Most of the cynicism revolving around manned spaceflight usually comes directly out of the shuttle accidents and discouragement from the costs. Also, the Viking landings, while they did bring in a wealth of information about the Martian surface, proved a big disappointment to extraterrestrial life enthusiasts and to the popular media who expected "little green men".

 

There is much discouragement from the moon landings because the moon landing were mostly done for political reasons, out of fear of that the Soviets were ahead in technology. After 1972, Vietnam, environment, politics, and other things were of bigger concern. There was a press conference in 1975 by NASA that stated that they would go back to the moon, but alas it never happened. From that time onward, there were promises that we would go back, and that we would go to Mars, but costs and accidents and government bureaucracy discouraged any such attempts, and imprinted the cynical view of manned space on the public mind.

 

I would give it some time. Once the public starts to see that real progress is being made toward going back to the moon and beyond, there should be a surge of interest. The same holds for private interests in space, such as space tourism.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

As I said before, there is a lot to do in space other than just resources or materials. Many experiments are done in space that cannot be done on Earth. Also, outer space gives us the ability to create exotic products for sale on Earth.

 

link: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/16jan_sts107.htm

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Eventually, we as a species are going to have to go into space and leave Earth because our world will not last forever. There is a 100% chance that we will be hit by an asteroid that can wipe us out some time in the future, and the sun will make the Earth uninhabitable in 1 billion years or so.

[ydoaPs]

I thought the Orion project was an ancient idea to use thermonuclear explosions as propulsion.

[Reaper]

The Orion project was back in the 60's.

 

 

The current spaceship they are building and designing is called Orion. The launch vehicles that will take it into space are called Ares I.

[fire_mat99]

and then it stopped. The last 30 years have managed to make spaceflight boring. Before it was ever upward, now it's just shuttles endlessly going into orbit doing unromantic things like fixing communications satellites and agonizingly slowly building the world's most expensive bus station. Whoopee. I think we need that optimism and excitement again, and we DO need to have manned exploration eventually, so we may as well get good at it as soon as we can.

 

 

Going to the moon was too risking and astronauts know that doing the apollo program they may not come back.And even today space flight is very risking you may not come back.

 

If they can't go to the moon or do earth orbits in a safe way you can't go to Mars.The technology we have today just is not safe for space flight.May be in 40 or 60 years from now the technology may make it safer but for now it is very risking going up in space.

 

Has for the cost of the space shuttle or any rocket the rocket fuel is cheap or the material the rocket is made of.