Orion

[Don Roley]

Nasa is building a new craft to replace the aging space shuttle.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/mmb/orion_announcement.html

The contract went out to a company on Friday.

Does anyone have some more info to add about the plans and such? It seems a little strange to me to have a system that can go to the international space station and go to the moon. I would think that it would be better to make a shuttle that could ferry parts up to the station and then assemble a mission- specific craft for a moon trip. Without the need to re-enter Earth's atmosphere and such, the moon craft would be better able to devote things to the moon landing.

 

[Kacey]

I don't know if this what you're looking for, but here's what one of Denver's local news stations reported.

It included this statement:

Orion will be the Apollo capsule-like replacement for the 25-year-old space shuttle fleet that is supposed to retire in four years, after completion of the international space station.

which may answer your question about the space station and the moon - although I do agree that special purpose spacecraft may be a better answer at some point.

 

[Don Roley]

One of my friends just pointed out a reason for the dual purpose nature.

It would be great if the space station was advanced enough and traffic was high enough there to get the specialists needed to assemble the lunar mission onto the station. But that is not the case and the idea of making that trip in a craft made by a kit on the ground and put together by people other than technicians and engineers in space sounds pretty scary if you think about it.

And thanks Kacey for the article. I have having a mixed bag of finding things on the internet due to the commoness of the terms "Nasa" and "Orion" being in the same articles.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Its about time we started exploring space again, instead of these IMO adverse risk vs. reward trips into orbit to watch insects mate.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

And is it just me or is NASA overdue for a redesign on that 1960's looking logo of theirs?

 

[Don Roley]

Its about time we started exploring space again, instead of these IMO adverse risk vs. reward trips into orbit to watch insects mate.

Something to challenge us and expand ourselves? I am all for it!!!!

There is something to be said for the boring type of research like you mention. But to be afraid to reach for the sky is a crime IMO.

That is why I am so interested in subjects like this. We can't even go to the moon under what we have now! We have no idea what riddles can be solved if we only have the courage to spread our wings and fly!!!!

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Hey this is a pretty cool thread! I am interested in seeing us explore more of space and really redue the space shuttle into ship that can actually travel farther out into space. (plus return) Let us hope that the new design is more functional and has greater capabilities than the last.

 

[SFC JeffJ]

Just from a purely practical POV, space exploration is very important to our future generations. Regardless of how much we conserve, we will eventually run out of resources here. We need to start exploration for them sooner than later.

Jeff

 

[Cryozombie]

When they reported on it here, they mentioned it potentail use as a craft to carry manned trips to mars... dont know if that was somthing nasa actually stated, or just a reporter flapping his gums tho.
​

 

[Bigshadow]

I am curious about the significance of the shape of the new spacecraft. Why is it that shape was used in the 60s and they are now returning to it? I guess I am curious about how that "bell" shape is preferred over other shapes. Does this mean they are going back to the saturn style rockets?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I am curious about the significance of the shape of the new spacecraft. Why is it that shape was used in the 60s and they are now returning to it? I guess I am curious about how that "bell" shape is preferred over other shapes. Does this mean they are going back to the saturn style rockets?

That really is a good question. Here is the picture for everyone to look at and compare contrast with the current shuttle.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I am curious about the significance of the shape of the new spacecraft. Why is it that shape was used in the 60s and they are now returning to it? I guess I am curious about how that "bell" shape is preferred over other shapes. Does this mean they are going back to the saturn style rockets?

Go with what works is my guess. Why re-invent the wheel? Use the same design concept and develop from that. We quit too soon in the early 70's. Who knows where the technology would have gone if we had continued the moon landing program.

 

[tradrockrat]

NASA learned an important lesson from private space flight - cheaper and reusable is better than expensive and reusable. Much of the next generation craft will be "off the shelf" technology easily built and launched from a tried and true platform.

 

[Don Roley]

I am curious about the significance of the shape of the new spacecraft. Why is it that shape was used in the 60s and they are now returning to it? I guess I am curious about how that "bell" shape is preferred over other shapes. Does this mean they are going back to the saturn style rockets?

I hope that Tradrocket's answer is correct. I think that the ability to reuse a craft and keep the costs down is an important factor. If the costs are low, NASA can send up more missions. And that will help the exploration of space.

As things stand right now, what I read seems to say that whether the Orion will be resuable or not is yet to be determined. More shocking is that it is supposed to come on line in 2014. Yet the current fleet of space shuttle are supposed to be retired four years earlier in 2010.

What the hell are the going to do in the interm?

 

[Bigshadow]

NASA learned an important lesson from private space flight - cheaper and reusable is better than expensive and reusable. Much of the next generation craft will be "off the shelf" technology easily built and launched from a tried and true platform.

Sounds plausible. Does this mean they will be going back to the old rocket style? The shape was well suited for the rockets. I suppose they are going to create a new launching system that is reminiscent of the old saturn rockets.

They have had very good success with the Titan IV rockets. They had been launching satellites with them for quite some time with very few issues AFAIK.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

The NASA website shows the concept for the rocket. The Aries rocket. It has a main engine and 2 boosters that look like the shuttle boosters. The capsule sits on top like the old Apollo design.

 

[Marginal]

As things stand right now, what I read seems to say that whether the Orion will be resuable or not is yet to be determined. More shocking is that it is supposed to come on line in 2014. Yet the current fleet of space shuttle are supposed to be retired four years earlier in 2010.

What the hell are the going to do in the interm?

Probably contract out to Russia.

 

[Don Roley]

Probably contract out to Russia.

That is a stop gap measure they are using now. But I don't know how they can really get much done without something like the shuttle. Even when the shuttles were taken off line after the last disaster, they could have been grabbed if case of an emergency on the space station after a short period of preperation. But if they totally retire the fleet, then what the heck would they do if they needed something done right now on the space station or something like the Hubble? I don't think the Russian crafts now are good for much more than shuttling up to the station.