NASA astronauts to fly Orion spacecraft into deep space

[Robbo]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9217027/NASA_astronauts_to_fly_Orion_spacecraft_into_deep_space

NASA on Tuesday announced a plan to build a spacecraft that will fly astronauts into deep space, taking them as far as near asteroids and even Mars.

The new spacecraft, called the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, will be based on an earlier concept for the Orion vehicle, a spacecraft originally intended to ferry astronauts to the moon, the space agency announced during a press conference. The new spacecraft, which will be built by Lockheed Martin, will be designed to carry four astronauts on 21-day missions.

While I'm hoping that this programme goes ahead it sounds a bit to ambitious not to be eventually canceled. At least they're using the remains constellation programme for something good though.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

****ers need to invest in better travel tech first.

 

[unozero]

we need ION engines...also to any with a Netflix subscription there is a really good Documentary for on demand I think think it's called "How we get to Mars" or something along those lines...really worth watching.

 

[StarBob]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9217027/NASA_astronauts_to_fly_Orion_spacecraft_into_deep_space

Orion was heavily invested and went through initial testing. The original designed is based off the tried and true Apollo design that was essentially our only manned deep spacecraft. This is a design similar to that, but we currently don't have a heavy lift rocket available to use it. The goal is to get both this and a heavy lift available by 2016. I'm hoping we focus on getting privatized space travel up and running. The initial investment into it (initial funding for research and light launches for three organizations) was roughly that for a single space shuttle launch. I figure that means more low earth and geosync launches and more research without much government investment.

While I'm hoping that this programme goes ahead it sounds a bit to ambitious not to be eventually canceled. At least they're using the remains constellation programme for something good though.

****ers need to invest in better travel tech first.

What do you mean?

we need ION engines...also to any with a Netflix subscription there is a really good Documentary for on demand I think think it's called "How we get to Mars" or something along those lines...really worth watching.

Ion technology needs to be improved quite a bit to make it useful for these types of heavy missions... and it has nothing to do with the issues facing this new spacecraft in the next five years. They need to get the thing in space first. Current ion drives are extremely low thrust, and their effect on this big ass thing would probably be minimal. The in-development ion-type drives are producing a lot more thrust but... they're in development.

I'm really kind of happy to see the space shuttle go though. The purpose was to provide cheap reusable space travel, but it ended up getting bloated and having shifting requirements that blew the budget out of the water. It's even worse now that it's been outdated for decades and still costs a half a billion dollars a launch. Let companies make money being space a space ferry and have NASA break new ground. However, I'd hate to be part of the first company to lose a life in a mission.

 

[15357]

We need frakking jump drives.

That said, I'm rather happy they haven't forgotten about space.

 

[Jerry_111]

Solar sails?

 

[YROC]

taking them as far as near asteroids and even Mars.

will be designed to carry four astronauts on 21-day missions.

And how long does it take to get to Mars?

 

[Dr.Demento]

We need frakking jump drives.

^This

What's taking so damn long to develop sub-space warp technology? We do have the best minds in the field right?

 

[StarBob]

And how long does it take to get to Mars?

A little over 7 months with current technology...

Of course news sites pick and choose facts from information and press releases. Of course configuring a spacecraft for longer duration flights is more a matter of having enough food and the ability to supply oxygen and scrub CO2. Water is generally recycled at really high efficiencies. Still... the ship to Mars would probably be a heavily modified and augmented version if they're going to spend like 8 months cruising along awake doing stuff.

As for solar sails, they're fairly effective but you the complicated maneuvers you have to do to get moving the right way would make the mission even longer. Effective for probes and such though to get things moving with essentially no energy expenditure.

^This

What's taking so damn long to develop sub-space warp technology? We do have the best minds in the field right?

The lack of ridiculous amounts of energy I'd assume.

 

[Dr.Demento]

The lack of ridiculous amounts of energy I'd assume.

I've heard somewhere that it would take enough energy to power 3 cities the size of NewYork for space-folding drives. I'd wager too that we just don't have the resources for that much energy to power 1 spacecraft and those whose powers may be reckon that much energy is better spent here on Earth for now.

 

[Raziaar]

Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle.

What a cool sounding name of a spacecraft to die on.

:|

 

[StarBob]

I've heard somewhere that it would take enough energy to power 3 cities the size of NewYork for space-folding drives. I'd wager too that we just don't have the resources for that much energy to power 1 spacecraft and those whose powers may be reckon that much energy is better spent here on Earth for now.

I figure that sort of space travel won't be until well after we essentially eliminate domestic energy needs with some super technology like fusion.

Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle.

What a cool sounding name of a spacecraft to die on.

:|

Better than Space Shuttle. Makes it sound like you died in a large van on the way to the airport.

 

[ríomhaire]

Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle.

What a cool sounding name of a spacecraft to die on.

:|

Can we call it an MCV?

 

[Vegeta897]

'Shuttle' makes me think of space, not vans.

Putting 'multi-purpose' in the name of things is so nondescriptive. Can't you come up with a name that represents all or most of the purposes?

It's like describing your green and blue shirt as a 'multi-colored shirt'

What color is your shirt?

Oh, it's multi-color.

Uh.. what are the colors?

 

[Escaep]

They should have been planning this years ago in order to avoid the several year gap between the end of the Space Shuttle program (which is July 8) and the start of the new program. Now there will be a huge gap where thousands of people who live in my area will be laid off and unemployed. Guess we just need to kiss Russia's ass so they will ferry us up to the space station.

 

[Remus]

Guess we just need to kiss Russia's ass so they will ferry us up to the space station.

You do know NASA has contracted private companies to provide a reusable ship to take crew and cargo to the space station, right?

 

[Bad^Hat]

'Shuttle' makes me think of space, not vans.

Putting 'multi-purpose' in the name of things is so nondescriptive. Can't you come up with a name that represents all or most of the purposes?

I call it the NASA Fly-And-Land 5000.

 

[StarBob]

'Shuttle' makes me think of space, not vans.

Putting 'multi-purpose' in the name of things is so nondescriptive. Can't you come up with a name that represents all or most of the purposes?

It's like describing your green and blue shirt as a 'multi-colored shirt'

What color is your shirt?

Oh, it's multi-color.

Uh.. what are the colors?

Shuttle makes you think of space because the space SHUTTLE has been around since before you were born and thus it's merely a modern word association. The whole reason the word Shuttle was to simplify the name (it was originally Integrated Launch and Re-entry Vehicle (ILRV)) and describe it's primary purpose... shuttling nerd back and forth between the ground and low earth orbit over and over again until it blows up or they find something new.

You do know NASA has contracted private companies to provide a reusable ship to take crew and cargo to the space station, right?

No one reads my posts anymore.

 

[Escaep]

You do know NASA has contracted private companies to provide a reusable ship to take crew and cargo to the space station, right?

Still, for the next few years unless something changes the only way for American astronauts to get the space station is via the Soyuz rockets (as it stands now.)

 

[Krynn72]

'Shuttle' makes me think of space, not vans.

Putting 'multi-purpose' in the name of things is so nondescriptive. Can't you come up with a name that represents all or most of the purposes?

It's like describing your green and blue shirt as a 'multi-colored shirt'

What color is your shirt?

Oh, it's multi-color.

Uh.. what are the colors?

The colors are whatever you need them to be. Multi-purpose bitch.

 

[No Limit]

Please tell me they aren't wasting serious effort and money on this.

 

[StarBob]

Please tell me they aren't wasting serious effort and money on this.

Space travel? Well... that's kind of all that NASA really does... so probably ... yeah

 

[Remus]

Space travel? Well... that's kind of all that NASA really does... so probably ... yeah

From other NASA related threads I remember his point of view was that NASA should just focus on research/science, like: the Hubble telescope, all the probes that explored the solar system, robots sent to Mars etc. Also he thinks that manned missions into the solar system are a waste of time and resources (with which I completely disagree).

 

[Sheepo]

Still, for the next few years unless something changes the only way for American astronauts to get the space station is via the Soyuz rockets (as it stands now.)

Which is terrible because Russia is like our enemy and stuff. Those guys are the worst. Let's pay a shitload of money so we can say we didn't ride in their stupid rocket. Then we can egg their house and not invite them to our birthday party.

 

[Warped]

the next shuttles should have everything infused into them. nuclear, Ion drives, solar sails, and everything we have, that way they could all be running at full blast and get them there in half the time and it'd be safer with back up drives.

 

[MuToiD_MaN]

They better be prepared with conversation starters for if they meet the Sun.

 

[unozero]

Please tell me they aren't wasting serious effort and money on this.

what are you implying?
Are you one of those guys that thinks space travel is irrelevant??
I hope your joking I thought someone of your caliber would understand just how important NASA and ESA really is.


btw we need more threads like this

 

[Warped]

www.space.com

use it

 

[Raziaar]

use it


We all know there's bound to be quite a bit of tragedy in our quest to venture further into deep space. Hopefully that doesn't halt progress. They know the risks, and it's pretty much inevitable that disasters will strike, but we must press onward... FOR SCIENCE! FOR HUMANITY! FOR... ahh I got nothing.

 

[StarBob]

From other NASA related threads I remember his point of view was that NASA should just focus on research/science, like: the Hubble telescope, all the probes that explored the solar system, robots sent to Mars etc. Also he thinks that manned missions into the solar system are a waste of time and resources (with which I completely disagree).

Oh I agree with No Limit then... human exploration is certainly fun to watch and an achievement... but it's like achievements in video games. you can talk about them but they don't mean a lot. For the same cost that it takes do send a manned mission to mars you can probably send like 10 probes or more. Plus if one is lost it's not a national tragedy. Manned missions serve to get attention and good publicity... until they go wrong. Still, I think low earth orbit is a necessity for humanity just because it's relatively simple compared to deep space missions and a lot of great scientific and technological discoveries have been made there, but I also think it should be handled by private companies for a lot less. Human space exploration to deep space should be done well after technology is proven by unmanned and cheap enough to not be a burden on the already floundering NASA budget.

 

[unozero]

Starbob and No Limit must die

 

[15357]

Or tied up and made to watch videos of every human acheivement in space, including the lunar landing, over and over again.

 

[StarBob]

Or tied up and made to watch videos of every human acheivement in space, including the lunar landing, over and over again.

I've already seen all of the handful of them... first man in space, first orbit, first space walk (all very soviet), first lunar orbit, and first lunar landing. All very exciting for the 60s, all a product of the cold war. However the scientific relevance pails in comparison to what achievements of only a handful of the various unmanned missions NASA has achieved on an ever decreasing budget. I mean when you consider the currently functioning space telescopes like Hubble, Chandra, the recently deceased WISE and the future super telescope - the James Web Space Telescope and their groundbreaking contributions that pretty much rewrote the way we understand the universe as a whole, those manned missions seem sort of weak. Or how the Viking, Spirit, Opportunity,MRO and the future Curiousity spacecraft/rovers have turned Mars from being a cold dry rusty rock to what may be a future archaeological dig site for ancient water-born microbial life (or more). Or how the crazy amout of deep space and planetary probes like the Voyagers, Pioneer, New Horizons, Cassini and Messenger (that just started orbiting Mercury) have made our solar system a little more than the handful of ground based telescopes could gather. Or the SDO, SOHO, and STEREO spacecraft that have made it possible for us to actually know when solar flares are coming our way in time to save our sattelites and power grid.

Maybe take into account that an unmanned probe traveling to our moon managed to discover that there is WATER there... where six manned missions failed came up short. Oh and mapped the entire thing down to I believe 100 meters per pixel.

And of course all of that barely scratches the surface of unmanned space technology. But yeah those manned missions get all the glory. People admire exploration more when risk is involved. I'm sure if it was viable for Spain (was it Spain?) to fund an unmanned Probe to attempt to find a sea route to India, Columbus would just be some douchebag who liked boats. Regardless... manned deep space missions are romanticised and a matter of pride. The human mind is a great thing to have critically thinking on the fly in an exploratory environment and all, but the issues with safety and the logistics of getting humans in to deep space is daunting and - as I've said before - horribly inefficient use of NASA's limited funds.

edit: Also, I think if you're going to watch the achievements of manned space flight, you should watch the failures... like Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia, and the slew of Soviet failures.... like this fun little thing... http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2011/05/02/134597833/cosmonaut-crashed-into-earth-crying-in-rage

 

[No Limit]

Remus is pretty much exactly right on my position on this.

If you disagree cool, but by all means explain to me what the point of sending men in to space then right back to earth is. What scientific value is gained from that and what practical purpose will it serve?

Hubble, one of the greatest Nasa projects ever, cost a tiny fraction of what it would cost to send someone to the moon, let alone Mars. And it's not like NASA is rolling around in cash.

 

[15357]

Yeah, I know what you guys mean. And to some point I agree.


But there is something about the idea of humanity spreading across the galaxy like a swarm of locusts, one manned mission at a time, very appealing, and I want that dream accomplished when I'm still alive.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

What do you mean?

Money better spent right now would be in building/improving technology instead of pointless missions to do ****all. Imagine where we would be if instead of all those missions since landing on the moon was invested in technological development instead of going into orbit a trillion times. Moral boost my ass. ****ers will cream their pants when we unveil FTL travel.

 

[No Limit]

If NASA had more money I'd be all for it. But unfortunately they don't.

 

[Wanted Bob]

I wouldn't hold your breath Numbers.

I've always thought manned missions were really cool, but Starbob and No Limit are right that they provide far less scientific data. Perhaps when they have the means of faster and more efficient space travel it will be worth it, but for now unmanned missions seem to be the way to go.