Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 117

Thread: Orion Crew Module

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006

    Orion Crew Module

    Fraser's article yesterday kind of slapped me in the face a bit. I've seen snippets here and there about Orion, but never really seen how far it has come.

    So; I decided to start a thread dedicated to this. I couldn't find an appropriate thread to add on to. Most are either too narrowly targeted or have turned into a debate about whether or not it is a good idea. I hope we are past the latter discussions. Like it or not, here it comes.

    Here's a few snippets from the past to show the progress.
    UT Aug 2006: New Crew Exploration Vehicle Named Orion
    CQ Aug 2008: Orion Parachute Test, or, Oops - Never Mind
    UT May 2010: First Orion Capsule forming rapidly
    UT Feb 2011:NASAs First Orion Capsule Ships for Crucial Deep Space Tests
    UT March 2012: Orion Crew Capsule Targeted for 2014 Leap to High Orbit
    UT Jul 2012: 1st Space-bound Orion Crew Capsule Unveiled at Kennedy
    UT Apr 2013: Orion Capsule Accelerating to 2014 Launch and Eventual Asteroid Exploration
    UT Jul 2013Orion takes shape for 2014 Test Flight
    UT Yesterday: Engineers Start Stacking Operations for Maiden Launch of NASA’s Orion Deep Space Test

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    It is basically the same as Apollo. Just little big bigger. And it's been assembled in the same storehouse as Apollo. I sow that crane before. I think that crane is the same they used to move Apollo capsule. Whole program is essencialy Apollo program for second time. I think we could call Orion - Apollo v2. But it's good to have something. And it rellies on parachutes. There is nothing better than parachutes. Yeah, good old times....
    Last edited by Ivan Bilic; 2014-Jun-11 at 03:38 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    It is basically the same as Apollo. Just little big bigger.
    I can say basically the same thing for a Model-T and a Ford Explorer.

    There's a point where physics dictate design and new technology is incorporated for efficiency. The guts are completely different.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    . The guts are completely different.
    I think we can say that Orion is complete succesor of Apollo. Not only in appearance but in everything else. While Apollo name was stitched to program which was aimed at Moon landing, the Apollo spaceship was a product with capabilities beyond that. In slightly different configuration it would have be able to go to near asteroid as Orion is suppose to do. Deep space program was cancelled after Apollo but was continued with Constellation. Constellation program was cancelled too but brought us new Orion spaceship. So, Orion goes forward where Apollo stoped. And it is the same cncept: crew capsule, service module, possible lander, and all that launched on heavy lift platform. I conclude Orion = Apollo v2.
    (feel free to edify)
    Last edited by Ivan Bilic; 2014-Jun-11 at 04:42 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,138
    Just because Orion is a capsule does not mean that its just a bigger Apollo; most of the changes will be under the skin and as for the fact it relies on parachutes well Congress didn't see fit to give NASA a pot of money to experiment with new landing systems so they focused on building a craft that could carry out BEO missions. They appear to be making significant strides in that regard and while I might question the long term choice of launchers for it I'm pleased to see Orion making progress.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    I think we can say that Orion is complete succesor of Apollo. Not only in appearance but in everything else. While Apollo name was stitched to program which was aimed at Moon landing, the Apollo spaceship was a product with capabilities beyond that. In slightly different configuration it would have be able to go to near asteroid as Orion is suppose to do. Deep space program was cancelled after Apollo but was continued with Constellation. Constellation program was cancelled too but brought us new Orion spaceship. So, Orion goes forward where Apollo stoped. And it is the same cncept: crew capsule, service module, possible lander, and all that launched on heavy lift platform. I conclude Orion = Apollo v2.
    (feel free to edify)
    How about you back up your view? Show us the components carried over from Apollo or any hardware that hasn't been designed from scratch taking advantage of modern materials, avionics and power systems. Or indeed explain this 'slightly different configuration. that could have mounted a NEO mission?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    I think we can say that Orion is complete succesor of Apollo. Not only in appearance but in everything else.
    That part of the statement is a rather arrogant thing to say after having someone point out some of the differences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    While Apollo name was stitched to program which was aimed at Moon landing, the Apollo spaceship was a product with capabilities beyond that. In slightly different configuration it would have be able to go to near asteroid as Orion is suppose to do. Deep space program was cancelled after Apollo but was continued with Constellation. Constellation program was cancelled too but brought us new Orion spaceship. So, Orion goes forward where Apollo stoped. And it is the same cncept: crew capsule, service module, possible lander, and all that launched on heavy lift platform. I conclude Orion = Apollo v2.
    (feel free to edify)
    With that logic, almost any capsule bound for BEO would be Apollo v2. That renders the comparison meaningless.

    Here's an article that explains differences. It was written back in the Constellation days, but the capabilities are the same. Only the approved missions and boosters are different.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrison
    I'm pleased to see Orion making progress.
    I'm pleased too. Only, if you ask me i would have done it before....

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    I'm pleased too. Only, if you ask me i would have done it before....
    Easy to say hard to do since the difficult part is persuading the politicians to stump up the cash.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
    Easy to say hard to do since the difficult part is persuading the politicians to stump up the cash.
    It was not always like that. JFK was giving money. Plenty. Reagan was giving money too. If John Wayne did a president candidacy, i bet he would gave money too. Now it all went wrong when Bushes climbed on to power. However, junior gave money for Constellation. Now, who is going to give money for Orion? Nobody. Oh, him.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Can we please stop with this arguing about the merits of what it is, or what the comparision is to Apollo?

    I stated my feelings when I started this thread... "like it or not, here it comes". Even I got caught up in the sidetrack.

    I want this to be an accumulation of the updates on Orion. Not a debate about it.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    560
    In the past, I haven't been a huge fan of the Orion Capsule, but since we have spent a lot of time and money on it, we need to use it. My dislike for it was mostly due to it's cost and it's function. I just figured that SpaceX was already developing a nice capsule at a lower cost, so why not use that for short missions to LEO or the Moon. Heck, I think SpaceX is setting up the Dragon for all types of missions, including Mars. Any capsule would be too small on it's own for longer missions beyond the Moon. Some kind of habitation module would have to be part of a long duration mission. After seeing the Apollo capsule at KSC, I was absolutely amazed that three people could live in such a small space, for even a few days.

    That being said, the Orion looks very nice and I hope that we get good use out of it.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    so, ETF-1 is going to happend late this year, little before new year. As i understood, it would be only flight on Delta-4 rocket. After that there would be no flights until 2017, and they say that year Orion will flight on it's own SLS rocket. So, it makes 3 years to build SLS.

    http://www.collectspace.com/news/new...nch-delay.html

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Trantor View Post
    I just figured that SpaceX was already developing a nice capsule at a lower cost...
    Don't forget that this all started long before SpaceX manned capsule was even a dream. Even now, the BEO and manned capabilities are still questionable (for any current designed, private or NASA).

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    As i understood, it would be only flight on Delta-4 rocket. After that there would be no flights until 2017, and they say that year Orion will flight on it's own SLS rocket. So, it makes 3 years to build SLS.
    Orion was long before SLS was even dreamt of. At the time it was Ares.
    Orion continued while SLS replaced Ares. It delayed the booster but not the capsule system itself.

    Delta-4 is not human rated, so a manned mission will have to wait. (no, I don't want to get into the discussion of man-rating any boosters, that's been well discussed in other threads.).

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    560
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    Don't forget that this all started long before SpaceX manned capsule was even a dream. Even now, the BEO and manned capabilities are still questionable (for any current designed, private or NASA).
    Yeah, I knew that. The Ares program was cancelled, except for the Orion capsule. I remember reading at the time, that so much time and money was already spent on it and Orion was far enough along, that cancelling it made no sense. Too bad that the Nerva program wasn't kept alive for the same reasons.

    If the Dragon's landing system proves itself, I wonder if it's possible to develop a version of Orion that can land with rocket power? Such a craft may be able to land on the Moon or Mars and stay there for future use as a building block for a base.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Trantor View Post
    If the Dragon's landing system proves itself, I wonder if it's possible to develop a version of Orion that can land with rocket power? Such a craft may be able to land on the Moon or Mars and stay there for future use as a building block for a base.
    Not easily.
    Orion is twice as heavy and the shell would have to be drastically reconfigured to add the ports and allow for fuel.
    Besides, Orion is designed specifically for deep space. I'm not sure how well Dragon would hold up in such a mission. It's built more as a taxi.
    I know there are concepts for Dragon moon/mars landers for habitats, but I don't know how much would be needed before they are capable of that.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    560
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    Not easily.
    Orion is twice as heavy and the shell would have to be drastically reconfigured to add the ports and allow for fuel.
    Besides, Orion is designed specifically for deep space. I'm not sure how well Dragon would hold up in such a mission. It's built more as a taxi.
    I know there are concepts for Dragon moon/mars landers for habitats, but I don't know how much would be needed before they are capable of that.
    Thanks. In the future, it would be interesting to update the current version of Orion, with a bigger version that could land using rocket power; perhaps using the same diameter heat shield. A stretched version perhaps.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Bilic View Post
    It was not always like that. JFK was giving money. Plenty. Reagan was giving money too. If John Wayne did a president candidacy, i bet he would gave money too. Now it all went wrong when Bushes climbed on to power. However, junior gave money for Constellation. Now, who is going to give money for Orion? Nobody. Oh, him.
    Ivan Bilic,

    We have an exception to our no politics rule for politics as it relates to space exploration. But your post seems to be pushing the limit, both for politics and for relevance to this thread. Please be a little more careful.

    thanks,
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    Here's an interesting article on landing and recover.

    http://www.planetary.org/blogs/jason...rion-home.html

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,443
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    Thanks, just saw this thread and was about to insert it here.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    There is also an article on CNN today.

    I'm not sure what is new... I know they were going to move it to KSC. This might be the story triggered by it's arrival. They really didn't point it out.
    This one is the real capsule for the unmanned delta launch to 3600 miles for a 20000mph reentry.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Zadar, Croatia
    Posts
    154
    I was searching about Orion's computers. I've found this old article from 2010 describing Orion's computers 500 times stronger then those of Space Shuttle. Does someone have any links to some new articles related on Orion's onboard computers? It's hard to find news about this.
    102:45:57 Duke: We copy you down, Eagle.
    102:45:58 Armstrong (onboard): Engine arm is off. (Pause) (Now on voice-activated comm) Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.
    Simbad-astronomical database

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,506
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    A 35000ft parachute certainly is a huge one! *rimshot*

    Seriously though, I like how they tested the system for failure and it still performed well. Seems like this one system is ready for flight!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,303
    I do think it's a shame they learned nothing from the lessons learned by the Soyuz capsules, the Apollo D-2 and the Shenzhou capsule, though I would imagine that was as much a political decision as anything.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,506
    What lessons do you refer to, the split design or landing on land?

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,303
    The split design, having less to heat shield meant some very significant mass savings.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    From Fraser..
    Assembly Complete for NASA’s First Orion Crew Module Blasting off Dec. 2014
    The black Orion crew module (CM) sits stacked atop the white service module (SM) in the O & C high bay photos, shown above and below.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    14,444
    I'm sure it's here somewhere, but what rocket are they using?
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    N.E.Ohio
    Posts
    22,006
    Delta IV heavy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •