Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/23/2006 11:23:47 AM EDT
Astronaut Lets New Spaceship Name Slip
By MIKE SCHNEIDER, AP

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (Aug. 22) - The name of the new vehicle that NASA hopes will take astronauts back to the moon was supposed to be hush-hush until next week.

 
But apparently U.S. astronaut Jeff Williams, floating 220 miles above Earth at the international space station, didn't get the memo.

Williams, through no fault of his own, let it slip Tuesday that the new vehicle's name is Orion.

"We've been calling it the crew exploration vehicle for several years, but today it has a name -- Orion," Williams said, taping a message in advance for the space agency that was transmitted accidentally over space-to-ground radio.

NASA planned to reveal the new name Aug. 31, when the space agency also announces which contractor will build the vehicle. Competing for the award are Lockheed Martin and a team made up of Northrop Grumman and Boeing.

The crew exploration vehicle will replace the space shuttle program after it ends in 2010. Earlier this summer, NASA announced the names of the rockets that will propel the crew exploration vehicle and a cargo vehicle, respectively Ares I and Ares V.

"One of the things we get into at NASA is we run around and call things by technical names and acronyms," project manager Skip Hatfield told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "This allows us to have an identity that we can use."


08/22/06 19:02 EDT

Link Posted: 8/23/2006 11:26:22 AM EDT
[#1]
Sweet!
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 11:52:39 AM EDT
[#2]
Orion's not a bad name. I rather like it.

And it's sure not as bad a name as it could be anymore.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:12:55 PM EDT
[#3]
So what is this thing going to look like?
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:19:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Sweet!  A spacecraft named after an Irishman!!  I love it.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:19:46 PM EDT
[#5]
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:28:43 PM EDT
[#6]



www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/aug/HQ_06299_Orion_announced.html







Michael Braukus/Beth Dickey
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-1979/2087

Kelly Humphries
Johnson Space Center, Houston
281-483-5111


Aug. 22, 2006  
RELEASE: 06-299


NASA Names New Crew Exploration Vehicle Orion

NASA announced Tuesday that its new crew exploration vehicle will be named Orion.

Orion is the vehicle NASA’s Constellation Program is developing to carry a new generation of explorers back to the moon and later to Mars. Orion will succeed the space shuttle as NASA's primary vehicle for human space exploration.

Orion's first flight with astronauts onboard is planned for no later than 2014 to the International Space Station. Its first flight to the moon is planned for no later than 2020.

Orion is named for one of the brightest, most familiar and easily identifiable constellations.

"Many of its stars have been used for navigation and guided explorers to new worlds for centuries," said Orion Project Manager Skip Hatfield. "Our team, and all of NASA - and, I believe, our country - grows more excited with every step forward this program takes. The future for space exploration is coming quickly."

In June, NASA announced the launch vehicles under development by the Constellation Program have been named Ares, a synonym for Mars. The booster that will launch Orion will be called Ares I, and a larger heavy-lift launch vehicle will be known as Ares V.

Orion will be capable of transporting cargo and up to six crew members to and from the International Space Station. It can carry four crewmembers for lunar missions. Later, it can support crew transfers for Mars missions.

Orion borrows its shape from space capsules of the past, but takes advantage of the latest technology in computers, electronics, life support, propulsion and heat protection systems. The capsule's conical shape is the safest and most reliable for re-entering the Earth’s atmosphere, especially at the velocities required for a direct return form the moon.

Orion will be 16.5 feet in diameter and have a mass of about 25 tons. Inside, it will have more than 2.5 times the volume of an Apollo capsule. The spacecraft will return humans to the moon to stay for long periods as a testing ground for the longer journey to Mars.

NASA's Johnson Space Center, Houston, manages the Constellation Program and the agency's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., manages the Exploration Launch Projects' office for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, Washington.

For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit:


http://www.nasa.gov/home





- end -








Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:32:28 PM EDT
[#7]
At least its not the "Rosa Parks" or any other feel good name.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:34:01 PM EDT
[#8]
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:35:49 PM EDT
[#9]
Found this...



www.space.com/news/060720_cev_orion.html








Project Orion to Follow Apollo to the Moon
By Robert Z. Pearlman


posted: 20 July 2006
7:08 p.m. ET


Thirty-seven years ago today, Project Apollo put the first humans on the surface of the Moon. The next time the U.S. launches its astronauts to Earth's natural satellite, they will do so as part of Project Orion, collectSPACE.com has learned.

NASA intends to use the moniker Orion as both the title for its next generation manned craft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), and as the project’s name. This approach is modeled after the 1960's program when Apollo Command Modules launched astronauts under Project Apollo.

Under Project Orion, NASA would launch crews of four astronauts aboard Orion capsules, first to Earth orbit and the International Space Station and then later to the Moon.

Two teams, one led by Lockheed Martin and the other a joint effort by Northrop Grumman and The Boeing Co., are currently competing to build the CEV. NASA is expected to select the winner in September.

In June, NASA announced that its crew launch vehicle, which would lift the CEV into space, would be named Ares 1, with Ares 5 reserved for a larger booster to haul cargo or a future Moon lander.

At the time, NASA's Associate Administrator for Exploration Scott Horowitz said that the reason he wasn't also releasing the name of the CEV at the same time had to do with the legal process related to federal trademarks.

"We have to make sure we aren't infringing on any copyrights or anything," Horowitz said, describing how Ares was selected. "You have to go through that whole process and that just takes time."

At the same June 30th press conference, Constellation program director Jeff Hanley said that the name for the CEV was close to being finalized.

"We are trading three or four names at this point. There is a running, leading candidate that of course, I can't talk about yet because we have to go through a process to have it vetted and approved. Hopefully, I'd like to think that in a month we'd be able to role that out," said Hanley.

NASA spokesperson Dolores Beasley told collectSPACE, a SPACE.com partner, today that NASA did not have a name for the CEV at this time.

Yet a publicly-accessible federal trademark search shows that NASA was granted the use of Orion on July 14, 2006 for use with "command modules" and "crew capsules", as well as crew and cargo launch vehicles.

Sources close to the agency confirmed to collectSPACE that the name Orion was in the final stages of approval.

Earlier documents obtained in January by collectSPACE used the names Antares and Artemis as 'notional' titles for the CEV. Orion will soon officially replace those other names for internal and external use, though when NASA will announce Orion is not yet known.

In addition to its association with Greek mythology, which includes tales of Apollo and Artemis, Orion is also one of the most recognizable constellations in the night sky, that of the embattled hunter. Project Orion was also the title given to a 1960s project to design a nuclear pulse-driven spacecraft.




Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:38:23 PM EDT
[#10]
I thought they were naming it after the Metallica song.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:39:24 PM EDT
[#11]

Quoted:
At least its not the "Rosa Parks" or any other feel good name.


Hahahaha.


Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:42:44 PM EDT
[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So what is this thing going to look like?

updated Apollo. mmk


bzzzt!



but bigger and the first stage has more solid fueled boosters... 5 IIRC
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:44:24 PM EDT
[#13]
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:45:09 PM EDT
[#14]
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:45:20 PM EDT
[#15]
Footfall  
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:45:34 PM EDT
[#16]
Damn, I was hoping for it to be named The Millennium Falcon,

Orion is not bad though,
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:50:39 PM EDT
[#17]

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $


Its not.  Somebody will eventually do it, and it should be us.  The moon is a potential habitat (it will be colonized), it will be used as a military base, and it will be a source of economic wealth.  Recall that when America was discovered, relatively small nations rose to become powerful nations by tapping the new resources.  Space will be no different.  If the United States does not sieze the initiative, the colonization of space can very well be what topples the from being a superpower.  And their are plenty of nations waiting to kick us when we are down.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:50:48 PM EDT
[#18]
O'Ryan.....I love Irish names.

Thank God they didn't name it Uranus.

Reporter:  Sir, how will you get to the moon.

Austronaut:  We're going to climb into Uranus and take it all the way there and back.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:58:47 PM EDT
[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $


Its not.  Somebody will eventually do it, and it should be us.  The moon is a potential habitat (it will be colonized), it will be used as a military base, and it will be a source of economic wealth.  Recall that when America was discovered, relatively small nations rose to become powerful nations by tapping the new resources.  Space will be no different.  If the United States does not sieze the initiative, the colonization of space can very well be what topples the from being a superpower.  And their are plenty of nations waiting to kick us when we are down.


All they need to do is find a reliable source of water… The bone/muscle tissue loss problems have been surmounted to the point where a three month stay is possible.


This is just so much more promising than another space station.  
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:03:51 PM EDT
[#20]

Quoted:
Footfall  


Great book


Not so sure this one will be nukebomb powered though


or equipped with gamma-ray throwing cannons
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:09:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:16:55 PM EDT
[#22]

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $



First the moon, then Jupiter!!
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:34:40 PM EDT
[#23]
"The universe is on Orion's belt!"
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:37:26 PM EDT
[#24]

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $
You don't have to go, then.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:38:46 PM EDT
[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $


Its not.  Somebody will eventually do it, and it should be us.  The moon is a potential habitat (it will be colonized), it will be used as a military base, and it will be a source of economic wealth.  Recall that when America was discovered, relatively small nations rose to become powerful nations by tapping the new resources.  Space will be no different.  If the United States does not sieze the initiative, the colonization of space can very well be what topples the from being a superpower.  And their are plenty of nations waiting to kick us when we are down.


...or as Robert Heinlein said,

"Humanity WILL go back to the Moon. What language will they speak?"
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:43:59 PM EDT
[#26]

Quoted:
"The universe is on Orion's belt!"

Nice reference!

HAHAHA...all your page two are belong to me! make your time!
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:47:30 PM EDT
[#27]

Quoted:

"Humanity WILL go back to the Moon. What language will they speak?"



Spanglish?
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 1:51:39 PM EDT
[#28]
I get most of my info on space from out of print hard sci-fi, so my info may be outdated.

Regardless, the moon is the first step to reaching Mars. Mars is the first step to reaching the asteroid belt, Jupiter, Saturn, etc. and mining them for resources. Not to mention that any major power with a military and industrial/commercial presence in space in the near future will be practically unbeatable; how do you stop someone on the moon from launching nukes or using mass drivers to shell your cities? You can hit practically anywhere on the planet from there. Unless you have your own space program, there's no way you're going to send a military force after them or launch missiles. Right now, I think just about every nation in space depends on the US or Russia to get there. China announced it was beginning its own independent space program and now we're returning to the moon; it's the start of a new space race, and we're so far ahead (assuming the French don't stab us in the back for the umpteenth time and sell the Chinese everything they need) it isn't even funny.

He who controls the stars, controls destiny itself.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:00:07 PM EDT
[#29]
No matter how you look at it mans existance here on earth is limited by resources --long term, short term whatever but the earths resources are finite no matter what. You cannot conserve your way out of a crisis. If we do not move out to other planets and acquire other resources and raw materiels then a number of generations down the road we severly limit or end mans ability to even exist.Going to the moon was a good first step, not going back or continuing to go forward was a mistake. We must devlop a cost effective and reliable way of traveling first inter planetary within our solar system and eventually outside of that. If we dont do it with the means we can get up in the air now we will never make the advances that make it more effecient and cost effective.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:03:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Astronaut Lets New Spaceship Name Slip
By MIKE SCHNEIDER, AP

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (Aug. 22) - The name of the new vehicle that NASA hopes will take astronauts back to the moon was supposed to be hush-hush until next week.


Fixed the sentence so it was in a more truthful tone
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:07:02 PM EDT
[#31]

Quoted:
No matter how you look at it mans existance here on earth is limited by resources --long term, short term whatever but the earths resources are finite no matter what. You cannot conserve your way out of a crisis. If we do not move out to other planets and acquire other resources and raw materiels then a number of generations down the road we severly limit or end mans ability to even exist.Going to the moon was a good first step, not going back or continuing to go forward was a mistake. We must devlop a cost effective and reliable way of traveling first inter planetary within our solar system and eventually outside of that. If we dont do it with the means we can get up in the air now we will never make the advances that make it more effecient and cost effective.


Aren't Jupiter and Saturn loaded with useful materials, including radioactive elements? Heck, their moons are probably relatively rich in resources compared to dustballs like Luna and Mars.

And theoretically we can mine the asteroid belt for metals.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:10:46 PM EDT
[#32]
Orion was also the name for the earth-to-orbital station shuttle in 2001: A Space Odyssey.





The design looks pretty darned good by today's standards.
Needs some surface smoothing, though.  



CJ

Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:20:46 PM EDT
[#33]
Orion?

Link Posted: 8/23/2006 5:05:45 PM EDT
[#34]
They're gonna weld an old battleship on top of a shield and set it all on top of a nuke?


Link Posted: 8/23/2006 5:09:07 PM EDT
[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
So what is this thing going to look like?

updated Apollo. mmk


bzzzt!



but bigger and the first stage has more solid fueled boosters... 5 IIRC


That's one of mine!  There are several configurations being considered at this time.
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 7:51:54 AM EDT
[#36]
Am I the only one here who's disappointed that the newest manned space flight projects,
and the first one to be initiated in the 21st century,  looks like something that Robert Goddard would understand quite well?

Promising new technology space projects were shelved due to technology limitations that,
I think, could have been solved.    The X-33/VentureStar spaceplane, for one,  and the
other project whose X-number I've forgotten, that allowed hover-style landing.   And
the linear aerospike engine,  which I personally think wasn't really shelved but was moved
into the "black projects" world to power something that's actually being used today that
nobody's talking about.

CJ
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:35:58 AM EDT
[#37]
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:50:04 AM EDT
[#38]

Quoted:
Personally, and please don't flame me too much, I think going to the moon is a waste of $


When you think about what it costs to get shit out of earth's gravity and into space compared to what it costs to get one off of the moon it sheds new light on the plan.  The moon has very little gravity compared to earth and almost no atmosphere (to cause friction).  Until we/they get VERY advanced in the old engine dept, any ship that wants to travel past Mars will launch from the moon.  I'm betting that our first manned mission to Mars will probably launch from the moon rather than from earth.  

ETA: hehe, I said shit intead of ship :)
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:50:57 AM EDT
[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:

"Humanity WILL go back to the Moon. What language will they speak?"



Spanglish?



Esperanto
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:55:14 AM EDT
[#40]
What about NASSA?

NASSA

Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:55:16 AM EDT
[#41]

Quoted:
So what is this thing going to look like?


Apollo.
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:57:27 AM EDT
[#42]
Project Orion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Project Orion is the name of a couple space projects:

   * Project Orion was an engineering design study of spacecraft powered by nuclear pulse propulsion


Nuclear pulse propulsion (or External Pulsed Plasma Propulsion, as it is termed in one recent NASA document) is a proposed method of spacecraft propulsion that uses nuclear explosions for thrust. It was first developed as Project Orion by ARPA, after a suggestion by Stanislaw Ulam in 1957. Newer designs using inertial confinement fusion have been the baseline for most post-Orion designs, including the famous Project Daedalus and the less well-known Project Longshot.

Project Orion was the first serious attempt to design a nuclear pulse rocket. The design effort was carried out at General Atomics in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Orion reacted small directional nuclear explosives against a large steel pusher plate attached to the spacecraft with shock absorbers. Efficient directional explosives maximized the momentum transfer, leading to specific impulses in the range of 6,000 seconds (about twelve times that of the SSME). With refinements a theoretical maximum of 100,000 seconds (1 MN·s/kg) might be possible. Thrusts were in the millions of short tonnes, allowing spacecraft larger than 8×106 short tonnes to be built with 1958 materials.

The reference design was to be constructed of steel using submarine-style construction with a crew of more than 200 and a vehicle takeoff weight of several thousand tonnes. This low-tech single-stage reference design would reach Mars and back in four weeks from the Earth's surface (compare to 12 months for NASA's current chemically-powered reference mission). The same craft could visit Saturn's moons in a seven-month mission (compare to chemically-powered missions of about nine years).

A number of engineering problems were found and solved over the course of the project, notably related to crew shielding (good) and pusher-plate lifetime (which was unlimited). The system appeared to be entirely workable when the project was shut down in 1965, the main reason being given that the Partial Test Ban Treaty made it illegal. There were also ethical issues with launching such a vehicle within the Earth's magnetosphere. Calculations showed that the fallout from each takeoff would kill between 1 and 10 people. Enthusiasts want to launch outside the magnetosphere, or use clean fusion explosives, which are technically, but not politically feasible[citation needed].

One useful mission for this near-term technology would be to deflect an asteroid that could collide with the earth. The extremely high performance would permit even a late launch to succeed, and the vehicle could effectively transfer a large amount of kinetic energy to the asteroid by simple impact and in the event of an imminent asteroid impact a few deaths from fallout would probablly not be considered a major drawback. Also, an automated mission would eliminate the most problematic issues of the design: the shock absorbers.

Orion's technology is also one of very few known interstellar space drives that could be constructed with known technology.

Some authorities say that President Kennedy initiated the Apollo program to buy off the technical enthusiasts backing the Orion program[citation needed]. The recent book by George Dyson says that one design proposal presented to Kennedy was a space-going nuclear battleship, which so offended him that he decided to end the program.
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 9:09:07 AM EDT
[#43]

Quoted:
Project Orion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.....

The recent book by George Dyson says that one design proposal presented to Kennedy was a space-going nuclear battleship, which so offended him that he decided to end the program.



Battlestar Galactica was almost real at the time????????
cool
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 9:12:39 AM EDT
[#44]

Quoted:
"The universe galaxy is on Orion's belt!"


Fixed.
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 10:31:37 AM EDT
[#45]
Project Orion is something that we should keep in mind,  and I think that the design of a versatile Orion vehicle should be finalized and plans made for actual production of it.

I'm not saying to actually build it,  but an Orion type craft would be one of those things you
just might want in the event of a truly non-trivial emergency that requires us to put
something big and powerful into space in a hurry.

For example,  say that scientists discovered an asteroid heading for earth and it's a
Dinosaur Killer.    It WILL hit and majorly wreck our days if it's not broken up or diverted,
and we might have a few years or less to build a solution to the problem.   Orion would be
a front runner solution.  

As Orion would mostly be a matter of brute force construction involving lots of heavy
steel,  the shipbuilding industry would be a very good resource for building it, in sections.
And the sections could be built directly on top of their own barges so that all the sections
can be transported to the launch site, which I think should be well off in the Pacific Ocean
or near Antarctica.     The advantage here is that many major shipbuilders all over the
world could fabricate standardized sections of it and ship their contributions out
directly to the assembly site.     And there's no reason why the higher tech assemblies
couldn't be shipped along with them.

If the plans were already well laid out,  I think you'd be surprised at how quickly we could
build and launch an Orion if we really, really had to.

CJ
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 10:42:32 AM EDT
[#46]
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 2:53:13 PM EDT
[#47]
It might even be a good idea to build one and have it ready in case we do need, it, but it would require regularly scheduled upkeep to ensure that it's good to go when it's time to fly it.

But NOBODY is going to allow a spacecraft that's launched by NUCLEAR BOMBS to be launched unless the reason for the launch is CONSIDERABLY more serious than the act of
popping off a very large stash of nuclear bombs!

I think even the Iranians would squawk at that idea!

Only if they were efficient fusion bombs with no residual radioactivity would there be ANY
chance of an Orion being permitted to launch for any reason other than to avert an
impending planetary disaster.


CJ
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 8:51:52 PM EDT
[#48]
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 9:05:26 PM EDT
[#49]
Link Posted: 8/24/2006 9:12:55 PM EDT
[#50]

...Attack ships on fire of the shoulder of Orion.



Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top