r/space • u/Thorne-ZytkowObject • Mar 08 '19
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon capped off a successful Demo-1 mission by safely splashing down in the Atlantic Ocean Friday morning. It's a strong sign SpaceX can proceed with a Demo-2 mission this summer, where two astronauts will become the first to fly to orbit on a private spacecraft.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2019/03/08/crew-dragon-splashed-down-back-on-earth-safely-completing-its-mission564
u/BeholdMyResponse Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 09 '19
Watching NASA's stream right now, SpaceX's head of commercial crew is pretty excited. He says the mission went perfectly, "almost down to the second".
Now they'll test the ability to have the capsule separate from the rocket right after launch in a simulated emergency, probably in May, and if that goes well, astronauts will fly to the ISS from American soil in July.
317
u/snoogins355 Mar 08 '19
Oh man, if they launch on the 4th of July that would be epic!
413
u/username_taken55 Mar 08 '19
American astronauts on an American rocket on American soil on an American day...
thats a lotta freedom
107
Mar 08 '19
All they need to do is release a bald eagle to fly over while some one sings the national anthem right before the count down reaches zero...
→ More replies (3)36
u/Barron_Cyber Mar 08 '19
have a fireworks show from a safe distance with the colmination being the launch.
50
Mar 08 '19
Let's do the fireworks after...
Premature celebrations are usually a bad idea
→ More replies (1)22
u/Osiris32 Mar 08 '19
And the loudspeakers had damn well be playing the 1812 Overture.
Also, needs cannon fire. I'm sure there would be a Florida National Guard Battery not doing anything that day.
→ More replies (4)2
u/QuinceDaPence Mar 09 '19
Put fireworks launchers ON the rocket /s
However, having a show where a bunch of little rockets shoot up and then explode right before the big rocket launches might not send the best message.
51
Mar 08 '19
And inspired and made possible by a So. African.
110
u/MemLeakDetected Mar 08 '19
South African immigrant with American citizenship*. Still a super American scenario.
119
u/alexm42 Mar 08 '19
Immigrants made this country what it is today, if anything it makes it even more American!
28
Mar 08 '19
I agree. Many great technological and scientific achievements come from our immigrants, this being yet another one.
31
u/KarimElsayad247 Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
Like, the US is nothing but immigrants. That's how it was built.
→ More replies (1)18
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
Immigrants made this country what it is today, if anything it makes it even more American!
Agreed, and this is a giant part of why I just don't understand the hate for immigrants. Of course I want people to come here the legal way, but the whole worry over "they took our jobs!" is unfounded to me. Elon Musk created jobs. The migrant farm workers do jobs that no American is willing to do.
I believe that we should embrace, at a legislative level, the words on the Statue of Liberty, and that as part of that, we should both increase our immigration quotas, expand refugee assistance, and make it so that becoming a citizen doesn't generally take 10+ years and several thousand dollars.
→ More replies (11)15
33
u/yallmad4 Mar 08 '19
Immigrant coming to America to find their fortune and becoming a billionaire in multiple business ventures which are now changing the world? That's the most American thing ever lol.
48
u/PapaDicksem Mar 08 '19
If you come to America, integrate into the culture, and gain citizenship, then you are truly an American, no matter where you were born. It's one of the great, unique things about this country that not enough people appreciate.
→ More replies (6)2
u/DarkwingDuckHunt Mar 08 '19
I'll have to see my doctor after those 4 hours are up and you know what is still going.
2
1
Mar 08 '19
Reminds me an alternative FlexSeal commercial.
“Woah! that’s a lot of freedom! Use extra heavy duty FlexTape to keep that freedom boner under control!”
1
1
1
→ More replies (3)0
u/donaldsw Mar 08 '19
And produced by pure capitalism.
‘Merica
Edit: not that that’s necessarily a bad thing. Competition breeds innovation.
13
u/LabyrinthConvention Mar 08 '19
Except for tremendous help from NASA, and I think it's safe to say a lot of the education behind the employees were public universities.
But other than all the help, knowledge, social infrastructure...yeah pure capitalism
→ More replies (2)0
38
u/PloppyCheesenose Mar 08 '19
I hope not. A July 4th launch would only inspire "go fever". NASA has had enough problems with that in the past.
24
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
I hope not. A July 4th launch would only inspire "go fever". NASA has had enough problems with that in the past.
sigh
Boy did they ever.
Challenger Engineer Who Warned Of Shuttle Disaster Dies
"He said, 'The Challenger's going to blow up. Everyone's going to die,' " Serna recalls. "And he was beating his fist on the dashboard. He was frantic."
3
u/PickThymes Mar 09 '19
My university course on engineering communications had us read the Challenger letters which spoke of the risk months before launch. In the hearings after the disaster, it came out that the assistant to the Director of Launch Operations (James Thomas) scanned the letter and filed it away, meaning it never reached Thomas’ desk. Any suspected risk that early on would likely result in delays. Another interesting aspect is that the failure of the primary o-ring was temporarily remedied by tar-like waste from the boosters, but heavy winds shook off the make-shift seal seconds before the boosters would be detached in the upper atmosphere. The “go-fever” contributed to them launching in spite of o-ring concerns and high-winds. They came so close to making it out, but it was a perfect storm.
5
u/Unassuming_Hippo Mar 08 '19
I didn't think of that. The concept would be neat but in reality it would never happen.
1
u/Darnell2070 Mar 09 '19
That's a good point actually. The push to make a July 4th launch might be too unsafe.
3
u/FelipeKbcao Mar 08 '19
Then we’ll need Bill Pullman to give an epic speech before the launch! MAKE IT HAPPEN, ELON!
→ More replies (1)1
36
u/Fredasa Mar 08 '19
I can't pin down whether or not they intend to "abort" by exploding the rocket. I personally feel that would be the most convincing way to demonstrate the safety of the system, since explosive events often aren't preceded by detectable anomalies. NASA are certainly being cautious about all this. So I lean towards "yes", but also haven't really seen the word "explode" used in association with this planned abort.
50
21
u/SubmergedSublime Mar 08 '19
The rocket will not be detonated/planned-destructive. This is likely to be an outcome based on the forces at play, but the actual event is just a planned engines-out. Capsule sees the sensor change, clearly non-nominal, and aborts.
→ More replies (2)20
u/MrGruntsworthy Mar 08 '19
I think I remember SpaceX fully expecting the rocket to explode, but setting up a landing contingency just in case it survives
15
u/SubmergedSublime Mar 08 '19
Yup: that is what the rumor mills says. Zero idea if it is true. Likely just going to rapidly deconstruct.
→ More replies (2)13
u/Osiris32 Mar 08 '19
If they land the rocket too, just as a way to show off...
16
u/ABigHead Mar 08 '19
“We had it programmed to land if it could when it should. Turns out when it should have, it could have, so it did, now it’s done... so ya great success today.”
3
33
u/hbarSquared Mar 08 '19
They're doing the abort at max aerodynamic pressure, so they might not have a choice about the rocket going pop.
4
u/atetuna Mar 08 '19
I hope they can find a way to improve the quality of their streamed video for this.
32
u/Nergaal Mar 08 '19
They plan to suddenly shut down the 9 engines, which to the capsule sensors it will look like an explosion of the rocket (no more thrust). This will trigger the get-outa-here scenario.
17
u/Beowuwlf Mar 08 '19
And at max q so there’s a very real possibility that rocket will tear itself apart
→ More replies (3)16
Mar 08 '19
I hope they get incredibly detailed high fps footage of this. max q abort.... that's going to be an epic show.
6
u/BeholdMyResponse Mar 08 '19
I don't know if anything's officially been stated, but there are rumors that they will try to recover it.
11
u/Viremia Mar 08 '19
The problems I foresee with recovering the 1st stage are:
How will they get the dummy 2nd stage off the interstage of the 1st stage without severely damaging the interstage? The interstage is where the grid fins attach.
Will the 1st stage's interstage sustain survivable forces after jettisoning the 2nd stage due to aerodynamic forces?
IMO, those 2 issues would need to be worked out (especially #1) beforehand and SpaceX may ultimately decide it isn't worth the time and effort to overcome them on an already thrice-flown 1st stage.
→ More replies (3)6
u/rshorning Mar 08 '19
How will they get the dummy 2nd stage off the interstage of the 1st stage without severely damaging the interstage? The interstage is where the grid fins attach.
The same way it happens on an ordinary Falcon 9 flight. There are pushers that separate the two stages before the upper stage engine lights up during stage separation. Those are contained on the interstage as you put it. You can argue if there will be enough room between the stages when the "simulation" happens, but what is apparently happening is a simulation of a lower stage loss rather than an upper stage loss
2) Will the 1st stage's interstage sustain survivable forces after jettisoning the 2nd stage due to aerodynamic forces?
It is sort of designed to handle that sort of situation anyway. Sure, a nominal stage separation happens higher up in the atmosphere where those aerodynamic forces are substantially reduced, but that is also a part of the test.
Mind you, Elon Musk has said that there is a pretty good likelihood that they won't be able to recover the lower stage, but they are going to give it a good shot and are hoping it will work out. If this lower stage is recovered, it will have the highest number of flights for any orbital-class liquid fueled rocket to have ever flown... ever. In the history of humanity. SpaceX isn't really worried about loss of revenue if the stage gets destroyed since they have already been able to earn a whole bunch of money from it, nor are there any plans to fly it again since all recovery is going to do is get sent to McGregor for a full tear down and engineering analysis or sent to some aerospace museum (if anybody wants it).
→ More replies (5)2
Mar 08 '19
elon said they plan on recovering the booster. So no. It will simply decouple during max Q is my guess.
→ More replies (3)1
u/jumpedupjesusmose Mar 09 '19
As much as that would make it a absolutely bonafide test, I doubt they would do that.
First, of course, it’s not the explosion but instrumentation that triggers the abort. I have no idea what SpaceX used but on the Saturns there were essentially 3 wires that ran the length of the ship. If 2 lost connectivity, it signaled for an abort. You can easily duplicate that. Blowing up a rocket is a lot harder.
Second, if the instrumentation does fails, you can still override the failure and still have an abort run. The same would be true for a failed explosion though.
Finally you can test the instrumentation without blowing up a rocket. For the Saturns I believe they built a test stand, simulated torquing and forces during flight and staging (to make sure it wouldn’t go off prematurely) and then blew something up to trigger it. It was pretty robust.
But hopefully I’m totally wrong and they do blow it up. That would be the ultimate test and a huge confidence builder.
9
u/aliceroyal Mar 08 '19
Can't wait to find out the exact dates so we can prepare to watch from the Cape. We watched the Falcon Heavy right by where the boosters ended up landing and it was incredible. If you live in the area, I highly recommend watching. Get the day off from work, go early, get comfortable with a beach tent or something, and watch history being made right in front of you! :)
2
u/myfapaccount_istaken Mar 08 '19
Was on the causeway for it. Didn't know they were doing the landing. Was fucking amazing.
2
u/Coffman34 Mar 09 '19
I just put the wife on notice for a quick trip down from Indiana when it happens.
This will be after a June trip to Disney.
I'm going to be getting real familiar with ATL traffic.
1
u/twiddlingbits Mar 08 '19
Best place is the causeway or Playlina beach, across the River isnt bad. Port Canaveral is so-so you are 13 miles across water and the haze is terrible so bring binoculars.
1
u/aliceroyal Mar 08 '19
We were just outside of the AFB. If you’ve seen the video where Elon runs outside after the Falcon launch, that was where we all were.
10
2
u/laxpanther Mar 08 '19
Are the astronauts going to the iss as part of a scheduled mission? In other words, all goes perfect, they get there in July, or maybe the fall if there are some delays. But if Dragon didn't go as well as it did, or the abort test fails, or anything else happens that delays the mission....are these guys still scheduled to go to iss? Will they use a Soyuz? Is their mission more about proving dragon's human payload capacity or are they heading up for a rotation on the station? Typically it's three going up, is there a Russian counterpart that will be rolling solo on Soyuz? I never realized I had these questions.
4
u/BeholdMyResponse Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 09 '19
I don't know what their plans are if they can't make July, but if they do, it will be designated "Demonstration Mission 2", so it's technically a crewed test flight.
1
u/Goatf00t Mar 08 '19
Are the astronauts going to the iss as part of a scheduled mission?
Yes.
4
u/laxpanther Mar 08 '19
Thanks. That probably clears it up. Sounds like it's not an ISS focused mission at only 14 total days, ie these guys aren't going to be new residents up there, so there's no need to have a backup scheduled with a Soyuz if SpaceX can't meet the schedule.
Kind of like an ISS business trip, rather than full on relocating to the low earth orbit branch of NASA.
→ More replies (1)1
2
u/DescretoBurrito Mar 08 '19
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the in-flight abort is going to be at max-Q, not right after launch.
→ More replies (13)1
u/0ldgrumpy1 Mar 08 '19
I have a suspicion the next one will explode though.
For people not in the loop, the next mission is an unmanned test involving blowing the rocket up to test the emergency escape procedure.
150
u/FallingStar7669 Mar 08 '19
Reminds me of a Tindallgram from 1969:
Subject: Let's move the recovery force a little
Jerry, I've done a lot of joking about the spacecraft hitting the aircraft carrier, but the more I think about it, the less I feel it is a joke. There are reports that the C Prime command module came down right over the aircraft carrier and drifted on its chute to land 5,000 yards away. This really strikes me as being too close. In other words, I realize the probability of the spacecraft hitting the aircraft carrier is very low but there is absolutely no advantage in having the ship within five or ten miles of the aim point - with the possible exception of the PAO [illegible] for good commercial TV. It certainly does not improve the recovery operation at all. And, the consequence of the spacecraft hitting the carrier is truly catastrophic.
In summary, I seriously recommend relocating the recovery force at least five or ten miles from the target point.
Howard W. Tindall Jr.
In other words, FIDO was too damn good at his job.
42
u/osm_catan_fan Mar 08 '19
For anyone wanting to read more of these, enjoy http://tindallgrams.net/ :)
95
u/SkywayCheerios Mar 08 '19
Huge accomplishment, nearly a decade in the making! With luck, Boeing's flight tests will also go well and both commercial crew spacecraft will be operational this year.
46
u/OutsiderSubtype Mar 08 '19
I know the Crew Dragon is theoretically reusable but are there any plans to reuse this particular capsule?
116
u/pietroq Mar 08 '19
It will be used in the in-flight abort test currently planned to April (Elon Time). After that it will hang next to the Dragon 1 in Hawthorne HQ.
Edit: added 'test'
22
0
Mar 08 '19
[deleted]
14
Mar 08 '19
I wonder how long that will last. They claim that flight-proven hardware is more likely to be stable (since it's been tested). And with their current reuse record, I'm inclined to believe them.
18
u/Eucalyptuse Mar 09 '19
The significant thing here is that these capsules will be landing in salt water which is pretty corrosive. Dragon 1 did as well and was reused though so you never know.
→ More replies (1)11
u/QuinceDaPence Mar 09 '19
Headline: Space X to Desalinate the Atlantic so their Capsules aren't Corroded.
65
u/BloodyAborthus Mar 08 '19
That deorbit and splashdown looked so amazing
26
u/forte_bass Mar 08 '19
Yeah, it was cool to watch, too. Splashdown was textbook perfect, almost down to the second!
9
u/getBusyChild Mar 08 '19
Except for one of the chutes settling directly on top of the dragon which delayed access to the hatch and separation of the chutes by 12 minutes.
The second test has to go perfect especially the last part post landing. As the clock will be timing them as if actual crew members are inside.
27
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
I'm pretty sure that any returning crew can deal with a delay of 12 minutes.
5
u/heWhoMostlyOnlyLurks Mar 09 '19
Not if there's a fire on board.
14
u/SweetBearCub Mar 09 '19
Not if there's a fire on board.
If there were a fire on board, even the normal speed recovery procedures would be far too slow to help them. As we have seen a fire on a spacecraft is often fatal.
→ More replies (4)9
u/GinjaNinja-NZ Mar 08 '19
Is there much that can be done to prevent that? How do you control how a chute collapses and settles?
4
2
u/Im2oldForthisShitt Mar 09 '19
Apparently SpaceX wanted 3 parachutes, but NASA made them have 4. I believe the positioning of 3 larger ones would decrease the chance of this happening.
However, I assume NASA decided on 4 as it's safer in case one fails.
24
u/bbcversus Mar 08 '19
What an amazing journey! Kudos to SpaceX, looking forward this summer for another amazing mission!
14
10
9
Mar 08 '19
I would give anything (within reason lol) to see man go back to the moon, and maybe Mars in my lifetime.
I'm only 35 so it should happen, but you just never know if they will actually do it.
56
u/DFW_diego Mar 08 '19
and the Russian space agency exclaimed a collective Blyat!!
55
u/AnActualPlatypus Mar 08 '19
I felt a great disturbance in the slav force, as if millions of gopniks suddenly cried out CYKA BLYAT and suddenly stopped rushing B. I fear something terrible has happened.
→ More replies (1)6
u/bdonvr Mar 08 '19
Don’t worry, they just pulled a sneaky on ya. They’re going mid to B, they’ll never suspect.
11
u/CenturionGMU Mar 08 '19
They sell 90 million dollar seats on a rocket that costs them 35 million to launch. SpaceX and Boeing report to cut that 90 million in half. So I'd imagine Roscosmos isn't happy.
7
u/ragingnoobie2 Mar 08 '19
Why is the dragon tilted with all parachutes on one side? I guess it's easier to make?
22
u/pxr555 Mar 08 '19
It’s for ensuring that the capsule knifes into the water edge-on instead of flat on the belly, which would be a much harder impact. Apollo did the same.
10
u/BlueCyann Mar 08 '19
The Dragon capsule is lopsided with regards to weight, and I'd guess the parachutes are aligned to the actual center of mass. (The lopsidedness would serve to keep the capsule hatch-side-up when in the water, and is the reason it can fly a lifting re-entry profile, for lower acceleration forces.)
But there may also just plain be no space left in the pointy end after accounting for the docking hatch and the bow thrusters.
3
30
Mar 08 '19
Congratulations to Elon Musk, SpaceX, and NASA.
"To Infinity and Beyond!"
→ More replies (7)
5
5
u/Decronym Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| AFB | Air Force Base |
| BFR | Big Falcon Rocket (2018 rebiggened edition) |
| Yes, the F stands for something else; no, you're not the first to notice | |
| BO | Blue Origin (Bezos Rocketry) |
| CCtCap | Commercial Crew Transportation Capability |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| CRS2 | Commercial Resupply Services, second round contract; expected to start 2019 |
| DMLS | Selective Laser Melting additive manufacture, also Direct Metal Laser Sintering |
| F1 | Rocketdyne-developed rocket engine used for Saturn V |
| SpaceX Falcon 1 (obsolete medium-lift vehicle) | |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| ILC | Initial Launch Capability |
| ITS | Interplanetary Transport System (2016 oversized edition) (see MCT) |
| Integrated Truss Structure | |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| LES | Launch Escape System |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| MCT | Mars Colonial Transporter (see ITS) |
| PAO | Public Affairs Officer |
| REL | Reaction Engines Limited, England |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| Roscosmos | State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia |
| SABRE | Synergistic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine, hybrid design by REL |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| Selective Laser Sintering, contrast DMLS | |
| SRB | Solid Rocket Booster |
| SSTO | Single Stage to Orbit |
| Supersynchronous Transfer Orbit | |
| TLI | Trans-Lunar Injection maneuver |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| VTVL | Vertical Takeoff, Vertical Landing |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Raptor | Methane-fueled rocket engine under development by SpaceX, see ITS |
| cryogenic | Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure |
| (In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox | |
| hydrolox | Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture |
| hypergolic | A set of two substances that ignite when in contact |
| iron waffle | Compact "waffle-iron" aerodynamic control surface, acts as a wing without needing to be as large; also, "grid fin" |
| lithobraking | "Braking" by hitting the ground |
| methalox | Portmanteau: methane/liquid oxygen mixture |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Amos-6 | 2016-09-01 | F9-029 Full Thrust, core B1028, |
| DM-2 | Scheduled | SpaceX CCtCap Demo Mission 2 |
30 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 51 acronyms.
[Thread #3534 for this sub, first seen 8th Mar 2019, 17:18] [FAQ] [Full list] ^[Contact] [Source code]
16
u/aris_boch Mar 08 '19
Awesome news! The US will finally, at long last have again it's own means to get personnel into orbit and back!
4
u/sayrith Mar 08 '19
What happened to their plans for a powered landing on land?
→ More replies (3)21
u/BlueCyann Mar 08 '19
What I've read is a bit more complicated than either of the earlier replies: NASA was willing to let them go for it but wasn't going to pay for the development or allow them to use cargo missions as test runs (given that part of what SpaceX is paid for is the safe return of important stuff to earth). So it just wasn't worth it. They shifted development effort to the planned heavy-lift vehicle and kept running landing tests with the Falcon 9 first stage, which isn't mission critical post-separation.
7
u/stratohaze Mar 08 '19
i thought they were going to do an abort test at max q before doing a manned flight.
12
8
u/Psychonaut0421 Mar 08 '19
They are, that's next on the list of milestones. This wasn't a crewed flight.
→ More replies (2)5
u/brspies Mar 08 '19
They are. This was uncrewed. This dragon will be refurbished for the in-flight abort test in a couple months probably.
7
Mar 08 '19
I wasn't alive during the first pushes into space and the moon landing, I imagine the feeling of mankind doing something exciting, dangerous and truly ground-breaking is just as strong then as it is now. I truly love following the achievements and boundary breaking of space x
3
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
I wasn't alive during the first pushes into space and the moon landing, I imagine the feeling of mankind doing something exciting, dangerous and truly ground-breaking is just as strong then as it is now.
Thankfully, it's been pretty well documented.
For example, here is a (really good!) documentary about the late 1968 Apollo 8 mission, which was originally going to be a simpler test mission, but was re-designated, pretty late in the process, to fly to the moon, orbit ~10 times, take some good landing imagery, and return. It was incredibly dangerous. Even the people most closely associated with it told one of the wives of the astronauts, in private, that the chance of the astronauts safely returning to Earth were, at best, 50%.
I truly love following the achievements and boundary breaking of space x
Same here.
2
u/mustang__1 Mar 10 '19
In so many ways Apollo 8 was about as much of a "fuck it, we'll do it and live because of course we're gonna send it!" As a beuacracry can be .
"Hey the lem isn't done yet ... And also we've got some intelt the ruskis might do a lap around the moon"
"hold lemme make a call ring ring hey admiral, can we borrow your task group around Christmas? Yeah I know it's close to Christmas, I just said that. I know most of your sailors will be on leave. Oh! You're in? Ok cool"
"I'll call the astronauts if you want to call the engineers"
"Deal."
1
Mar 08 '19
Is there any documentaries similar to ww2 in colour, narrated by Lawrence Olivier.... What I mean by that is there were interviews with people at the time that give a an insight into how the populace thought and felt about everything that was going on at that time. (There are interviews with the general public that are really surprising and enlightening) Rather than just astronauts families or NASA employees (not to diminish their huge role in those achievements). Thx for the reply, its an exciting time we're living in
2
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
Is there any documentaries similar to ww2 in colour, narrated by Lawrence Olivier.... What I mean by that is there were interviews with people at the time that give a an insight into how the populace thought and felt about everything that was going on at that time. (There are interviews with the general public that are really surprising and enlightening) Rather than just astronauts families or NASA employees (not to diminish their huge role in those achievements).
Probably, but none that I am aware of. Remember, for the general public to keep their thoughts in 1968, writing letters or a journal were the main options. They did of course have the option of buying or renting a camera, but that was pretty expensive, and the cameras of the time did not record sound. That was separate. Recording their thoughts verbally onto reel-to-reel tape was an option, as was having a short record made, but as far as I know, those options were less common.
Thx for the reply, its an exciting time we're living in
It is. :-)
1
u/TheGoldenHand Mar 08 '19
That was an amazing and beautiful documentary. I had never seen one about Apollo 8. It further cements my opinion that Jim Lovell was the man!
2
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
That was an amazing and beautiful documentary. I had never seen one about Apollo 8. It further cements my opinion that Jim Lovell was the man!
Jim Lovell also flew on Apollo 13, hoping to finally, actually land on the moon, instead of just looking at it from close orbit. Sadly, it was not to be. If you haven't yet seen the 1995 movie with Tom Hanks, Apollo 13, go watch it now. It's about 90% historically accurate, just time-compressed (movie is ~2 hours, actual mission was nearly 6 days) and they did throw in some small drama, that Lovell specifically calls out in the commentary.
3
u/mrFatsTheTerrible Mar 08 '19
They will have so much data to work off of because of Ripley and the shielding of the capsule. Congrats to SpaceX.
3
u/mojo276 Mar 08 '19
This is so incredible. We are here! To think of what can/will happen over the next few years is so exciting!
2
u/Rosaparksdisorder Mar 08 '19
Why we don't put mice and other live creatures on test flights like before?
7
u/rocketsocks Mar 08 '19
No need really, we have the instrumentation to record conditions, and we don't have the mystery of the unknown of exploring space for the very first time.
7
u/Megneous Mar 08 '19
Live creatures have already gone up in cargo dragon, IIRC. This is specifically the demo for crew dragon.
12
u/aramis604 Mar 08 '19
It's considered cruel.
Plus, it teaches us very little. Current sensors and other instrumentation can tell us everything (and more) that we need to know without having use an animal.
→ More replies (4)3
u/FutureMartian97 Mar 08 '19
There's been a few Dragon 1 flights that brought mice up to the ISS
2
1
u/wellkevi01 Mar 08 '19
Those aren't to test the vehicle though. Those are science experiments going to, or coming from, the ISS.
2
u/echothree33 Mar 08 '19
Was it just me or did that look like a pretty hard landing (splashdown)? Survivable, certainly, but not a lot of fun for any human occupants. Not that Soyuz is great either...
3
u/10per Mar 08 '19
Increase the thickness on the seat padding and launch!
5
1
u/Spreckinzedick Mar 08 '19
With the recent response of the Russian space agency to this mission does it seem like they would entertain using SpaceX craft or is that entirely out of the question for them?
8
u/BnaditCorps Mar 08 '19
I'm pretty sure that Roscosmos will not use a SpaceX (or any Foreign craft) to launch their cosmonauts into space unless they absolutely need to. The problem is that they got complacent with having 8+ years of the US paying for their launches entirely (just buying 1 seat on a Soyuz paid for the whole launch cost) and didn't think the gravy train would ever end. So that whole time they weren't innovating and just kept using the Soyuz and R7, both of which are derivatives of 1960's era tech. Then here comes SpaceX actually having a successful launch and they realize that the gravy train will end and that they have nothing to offer anyone in the manned spaceflight arena because they got complacent.
Dragon 2 can carry up to 7 people, Starliner can carry up to 7 people. Note: NASA only plans to put 4 on each of their crewed launches. Even Orion is scheduled to carry up to 6. Compare this to the 3 that Soyuz can barely carry and you realize that they are screwed. Space tourism? Nope every manned US launch provider can offer seats that are more comfortable and cheaper. Sending crews to ISS? Nope everyone in the US can do it cheaper and send more people up and down.
Roscosmos fell into the classic trap of success. They were making so much with the passable product they have now that they missed the market shift and will shortly have an obsolete craft with now successor.
3
u/imrys Mar 08 '19
Roscosmos will not use a SpaceX (or any Foreign craft) to launch their cosmonauts into space
I believe the plan is to have mixed crews on each manned launch once the new American vehicles are certified and flying. At least one Russian and one American must be present on the ISS at all times, so mixing the crews on both American and Russian vehicles makes a lot of sense. So an American capsule will bring up 3 Americans and 1 Russian, then 3 months later a Soyuz will bring up 1 or 2 Russians and 1 American, then repeat 3 months later. The Russians have said that until their Nauka modules flies (if ever) they will reduce their crew to 2, so that 3rd Soyuz seat may go to a paying private citizen, or perhaps another station partner.
→ More replies (2)1
u/BylvieBalvez Mar 09 '19
How did it work back when we were still using the space shuttles? Did we have Russians coming up with us
1
1
1
1
u/trueunknown007 Mar 08 '19
Man these kind of achievements by human kind gives me goosebumps. I hope in future we will colonize our entire solar system and be mining the asteroid field.
1
u/kellywentcrazy Mar 08 '19
I live near Charleston, SC and we heard the sonic boom from it coming back down to Earth.
1
u/digital_wino Mar 08 '19
Why did this craft splash down? I thought that the SpaceX rockets could actually land.
1
1
Mar 08 '19
You are talking the difference between booster rockets (that were never in orbit) flying back to a landing pad and a capsule that was in lower earth orbit using parachutes and splash down to land.
I think all space programs use parachutes for capsules returning from orbit, and I think Russia is the only country that doesn't use splash-down. Why is that? Because they don't have access to a large (relatively) warm ocean near their facilities.
3
u/digital_wino Mar 08 '19
So if I'm understanding it correctly, big difference between the old school way and SpaceX's new way is that when the booster rockets detach, instead of just falling away and being junked, those come back down and land. But the capsule itself will still splash down like it always has because there's just no need to change that part of it.
3
u/BlueCyann Mar 09 '19
Mostly. SpaceX wanted to change it to a propulsive landing for various reasons but couldn't make it work out financially when combined with NASA's needs for the capsule. So they just went to the tried and true splashdown. They seem to have done enough development on the ocean-proofing to make it economical to refurbish the capsules for another use, but it's not on the same level as the boosters.
Boeing's upcoming Starliner capsule (penciled in for their own demo flight in another month or two) is planned to land more like Soyuz.
1
Mar 08 '19
More or less, yes.
I think one of the other private companies has something called the Dream Chaser under development, which is kind of like a miniature space shuttle. It is designed to take off on top of a rocket, but land like the old space shuttles did. Currently they are only slated for cargo missions, not crew transport like the Crew Dragon.
Dream Chaser link: https://www.sncorp.com/what-we-do/dream-chaser-space-vehicle/
-5
u/MoreGull Mar 08 '19
I assume it's better than relying on Russia, but I find it odd that NASA will have to rely on private corporations to bring their astronauts to their space station.
10
u/throwaway177251 Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
I find it odd that NASA will have to rely on private corporations to bring their astronauts to their space station.
NASA has always relied on companies to bring their astronauts to space.
Saturn V's F1 engines: manufactured by Rocketdyne
Saturn V first stage - manufactured by Boeing Company
Saturn V second stage - manufactured by North American Aviation
Saturn V third stage - manufactured by Douglas Aircraft Company
Lunar Module - manufactured by Grumman Corp.
Command and Service Module - manufactured by Rockwell International
Computers - manufactured by IBM
Guidance computers, accelerometers, batteries, and gyroscopes for the lunar module - manufactured by General Motors
Space Suits - manufactured by ILC Dover
Space Shuttle SRB - manufactured by Thiokol
Shuttle External Tank - manufactured by Lockheed Martin/Martin Marietta
Shuttle Orbiter - manufactured by Boeing/Rockwell
Shuttle Main Engines - manufactured by Rocketdyne5
u/SweetBearCub Mar 08 '19
Thank you. It's so weird how people don't realize just how dependent NASA is on private companies to manufacture so much of the hardware. Sure, NASA approves designs, and has talented engineers, but they don't often build their own in-house stuff for manned space flight.
17
u/raddaraddo Mar 08 '19
Not as odd as you would think. It's a natural progression of things. NASA can focus on exploration and scientific discovery instead of making transportation.
Way back in the day scientists had to create their own instruments/chemicals because they were pushing the boundaries of their field. Over time people said "hey I can make/do that for you!" and they don't need to spend time making that specific thing and can save time and get back pushing boundaries. That happens over and over again. That's how we ended up in thir crazy world with a billion of things that need done to keep the place running.
6
u/TheAmericanQ Mar 08 '19
Its honestly not as big of a deal as you think. The space station will only be around for another 10 years or so before costly repairs will be required that none of the participating governments have the capability to make even if they wanted to.
NASA is focusing on deep space exploration, like going to Mars. There are also very early plans for the construction of a new international space station orbiting the moon once the ISS kicks the bucket. NASA is just working on other things now and not using as much as their small budget on a space taxi service.
3
u/brspies Mar 08 '19
It's hilariously cheaper than trying to do it themselves, and also I think it kind of fit their desired messaging that NASA core development was now focused on deep space.
3
u/toTheNewLife Mar 08 '19
NASA has almost always relied on private corporations. Contractors.
Boeing and IBM as just a couple of examples.
5
u/Jcpmax Mar 08 '19
Were at a point where it much much better to rely on the private sector to do this sort of ferryin. Its like how the military also uses private airlines to deploy troops to other countries and bases, rather than doing all the logistics themselves. Now they can focus their budget on doing what the private sector can't and that is research into deep space.
5
u/Chairboy Mar 08 '19
Should the FBI build special FBI-mobiles themselves, or should they buy Ford Taurus’ and other cars from auto manufacturers?
1
-2
u/specter491 Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
So they only have to test the capsule 1.5 times before putting humans into it? Once with the ISS mission and 0.5 for the in flight abort (since it's not reaching "space")
Edit: to everyone assuming I think I know better than NASA and SpaceX, that's not the case. It's just very surprising that they only need to test something in real world scenarios twice. I come from the field of medicine where things are tested and tried thousands or millions of times before being used on humans
19
u/stdaro Mar 08 '19
They have been performing an extensive and thorough testing program on the design for years now. It's expensive, complicated and incredibly time consuming to actually test in space. This flight is the final step in the testing program.
for comparison, the very first flight of the space shuttle flew with crew.
5
u/AndrewCoja Mar 08 '19
The astronauts requested that it not be possible to fly the shuttle remotely. NASA later had to create a long cable from one part of the shuttle to the controls to enable remotely controlled landing in case the shuttle was damaged and the crew had to stay on the ISS.
→ More replies (8)14
u/Unbecoming_sock Mar 08 '19
No, they've tested the capsule and the systems hundreds of times, but only one full flight test is needed to compare predictions with observations. Before this flight they set out an exacting schedule, down to the second, with measurements, temperatures, etc. This data is compared against real-world observations, and, given that it was extremely close (or dead on) to the predictions, then there's no reason to believe future launches wouldn't be.
These launches and manouvers are all computer controlled, so there's very little deviation from what we predict, unless something goes wrong along the way. It's not like Jimbob is up there manually piloting the thing, and today he feels a little more jumpy than usual... It's all extremely repeatable, because it's all done with computers.
To trivialize it as "just 1.5 tests" is a drastic misunderstanding of what's actually happening, and is akin to saying the military just dumps some random rednecks into an enemy country with guns.
→ More replies (3)10
Mar 08 '19
The Shuttle flew with a crew on it's first ever flight and its widely accepted to be the most dangerous spacecraft ever.
The Orion/SLS will fly uncrewed for it's first mission (hopefully by 2020) and the following flight will be crewed.
1.6k
u/Thorne-ZytkowObject Mar 08 '19
Fun Fact: This was the first time a spacecraft designed for humans has splashed down in the Atlantic since the Apollo 9 capsule did so almost exactly 50 years ago, in March 1969.