Space and Science BS Thread

Some of them do, they're linked from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Dragon#List_of_missions

I am too. The shuttle was good, and we learned a ton through that program, but it never fulfilled the dream. This is where we wanted to be in the 80s, and its finally happening.

 

I was talking about the promise, not the reality it became.

John Young stated in his autobiography he felt the Shuttle never made it beyond the experimental stage.

 

Wish I worked in the field...I’ve been an avid observer of US space activities since 1970.

 

SpaceX is the most reusable, Boeing is using Russian engines and charging NASA more than a Soyuz, although their capsule is partially reusable.
SLS is going to take leftover Shuttle engines (that have Billions of $$ of development to make them reusable), and throw them away.

 

Only a slight exaggeration...

Yes, there was cost to redesign/modify the engines to be reusable - but, the primary purpose of the redesign was to get additional power out of the engines. And, the engines on the first 4 flights of SLS (16 engines) have all flown before on shuttle missions.

But yes, someone decided to splash them instead of re-use them.

 

I can't wait till Boeing lands a rocket on a ship.

And catches the fairings.

And then does two at a time.

For the same amount of money.


I feel like I'm going to be waiting a while, Boeing is a mess right now.

 

It's a classic scope creep problem. They kept adding capabilities that shot the complexity and the cost thought the roof.

And then there's the whole aspect of spreading out productiion to please congressional districts.

I'm sort of amazed it went as well as it did.

 

Agreed but the system was inherently unsafe and with the loss of 2/5 of the vehicles; indelible tragedies amongst the triumphs.

Were you able to catch the ISS with the Shuttle attached through a scope or binoculars? It was spectacular and brilliant from the ground.

You hit the nail on the head with the underlying problem of the government system. Private companies don’t have to answer to constituents and they don’t have to cowtail to keep their jobs.

 

I think the initial concept was workable and could have been safe, but the result of all the extra features and the government stuff is what did it in. For example, if I remember right, the orings on the boosters that doomed Challenger wouldn't have been there if the boosters hadn't needed to be shipped via railcar due to political reasons.

I did not ever get to see that, or at least not that I'm aware of. I've watched lots of satellites go overheard at night though.

 

Unfortunately, you live on the other side of the country. I do and we are always looking for people. Keep on observing. Seems you can't even blink these days.

 

Crew Dragon is only sorta kinda reusable. Last I read they would only be usable once for crew due to the incredibly corrosive sea landings. The capsule can be reused for resupply missions though.

 

Quick research says the shuttles had a failure rate of 1.5% while putting 3.5 million pounds into orbit. SpaceX Falcon 9 is at 2.5% failure and I can't find a total weight to date.

 

Hmm interesting find on TW, I didn't know this thread existed.

I've always enjoyed the history of space travel. I do think though that Elon is saying one thing while doing another. Yeah his system is going to be amazing for resupply and building things in the local earth moon area, but I think that's as far as humans will ever go with chemical or ion/electric propulsion. If we ever go to Mars with people, and I doubt we will until we see a man rated nuclear/future tech engine ready to fly and approved by the world order, whatever goes there will likely look like the ISS more than a capsule. I doubt that level of size can be done on any budget. I just don't see the political will for a likely trillion dollar project even with well directed private partnerships. Elon can post Mars pics all day, but his real goal is to do what some of you are saying, fulfill the goals of the SST project without the SST problems. All for a handsome profit.

I'm not even sold on the Moon launches. I think China will go for the bragging rights, and maybe we see a small basic revamp of an Apollo like program out of the existing NASA projects to go there 4-6 times, but that'll be it. There just isn't the drive to sustain a moon base or orbital station, or at least I don't see it apart from words. Unless someone takes a huge gamble on trying to catch an asteroid or two for harvesting, and that's a completely unproven idea, I just don't see the drive to sustain it. Especially since the ISS is basically a dead project now just waiting for the final cut at some point IMHO, anything bigger isn't likely.

 

I see a future in smaller (with more usable space) stations like the Bigelow ones. Crazy that a single BA330 has 1/3rds of the volume of the ISS.

I also see a future in way cheaper launches. Amazing that the Falcon 9/H is about 1/4 the cost or less of comparable launchers with similar payloads. With New Glenn and Spaceship, it'll be even better.

 

That’s an interesting perspective. Can’t argue it was a kick ass system but the costs far exceeded the original projections.

Also, when you speak of the Shuttle’s 1.5% failure rate, this included 73% of the in flight fatalities (14 out of 19 per https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents)

 

Another Starlink launch Tuesday around noon Eastern Time zone

 

Sorry to come in on a down note lol. I'd love to be an optimist.

That's what you get with zero escape capability once the orbiter was off the pad. The Challanger astronauts died from impact with the sea and not from the explosion like most people think. An ejection system would have likely saved some of them though by that point it would of been too expensive to add that capability to the shuttles.

 

I always thought the crew compartment could/should have been designed to separate from the main body/fuel tank/boosters. I think it could rather easily - the compartment is sealed (air-tight), so a break-away system would not have needed anything additional to contain the astronauts.

But, that vehicle was designed for cost above anything else - so you get what you get.

 

Yes. They found several of the astronauts started to initiate emergency procedures....

Don’t get me wrong, I was a huge proponent but am a pragmatist at heart...

 

Yeah, when they had problems it didn’t end well.