User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/20/2018 7:19:01 PM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2018 7:24:03 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It was built as a prototype crew Dragon including windows and the same floor rails for cargo or seats. Actual reentry scars smudged my gloves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2018 8:40:51 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The slidewire baskets for the shuttle pad escape systems seem like an E ticket ride as well.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGMWdtQYkbc
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2018 8:42:59 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Drilling rigs all have what are referred to as 'Geronimo Lines' for the derrick hand to get out of the derrick in the event of a blow out. When I was a kid, riding it down was a right-of-passage for new rig hands...now you'd probably get run off for riding one if it wasn't a true emergency. They're an iffy proposition... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWF6n5BbZaE |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2018 11:35:02 PM EDT
[#5]
spacex should do boarding groups.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2018 7:13:31 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2018 10:34:30 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks to all who are keeping this thread posted and updated. Very good stuff.  Incorrect: Every U.S. astronaut since the crew of Gemini 4 has worn the flag on the left shoulder of his or her space suit, with the exception of the crew of Apollo 1, whose flags were worn on the right shoulder. In this case, the canton was on the left. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_States https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/53338/5424CA6C-E586-47F8-90B7-D3C0FB0CA2AC-646124.JPG Cut and paste of a cut and paste (can't currently access the .mil site for some reason): The FAQ on the Army Institute of Heraldry website says the following about this issue: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2018 6:25:46 PM EDT
[#8]
more pictures of the crew access arm attached to the tower.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/08/20/spacexs-astronaut-walkway-installed-on-florida-launch-pad/ more at link but here's 2. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2018 12:25:59 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
more pictures of the crew access arm attached to the tower. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/08/20/spacexs-astronaut-walkway-installed-on-florida-launch-pad/ more at link but here's 2. https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/39a_caa_3.jpg https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/f9_caa_4.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2018 1:48:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
more pictures of the crew access arm attached to the tower. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/08/20/spacexs-astronaut-walkway-installed-on-florida-launch-pad/ more at link but here's 2. https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/39a_caa_3.jpg https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/f9_caa_4.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2018 9:36:24 PM EDT
[#11]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2018 3:17:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The arm looks too fancy on the side of the tower. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
more pictures of the crew access arm attached to the tower. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/08/20/spacexs-astronaut-walkway-installed-on-florida-launch-pad/ more at link but here's 2. https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/39a_caa_3.jpg https://mk0spaceflightnoa02a.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/f9_caa_4.jpg Doesn't exactly match the "1960's strictly utilitarian" ethos of the rest of the pad. [Still looks cool, though  ]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2018 4:35:04 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. Doesn't exactly match the "1960's strictly utilitarian" ethos of the rest of the pad. [Still looks cool, though ]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2018 8:56:54 AM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2018 9:25:25 AM EDT
[#15]
Awesome.
Here's hoping Demo-1 can happen in 2018. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2018 9:53:26 AM EDT
[#16]
 Commercial Crew: The Flight Tests |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/8/2018 8:35:42 PM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2018 11:58:41 AM EDT
[#18]
 Commercial Crew: Astronaut Flight Prep |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2018 11:27:01 PM EDT
[#19]
BREMEN, Germany NASA has released new target dates for test flights of commercial crew capsules in development by SpaceX and Boeing, with unpiloted demo missions by SpaceX's Crew Dragon and Boeing's CST-100 Starliner spaceships now scheduled for January and March, followed by crewed orbital missions in mid-2019. The new schedule for the commercial crew test flights was released Thursday by NASA, which promised more timely updates as the Crew Dragon and CST-100 Starliner near their first space missions. In early August, when NASA last announced schedule targets for the commercial crew test flights, SpaceX's Crew Dragon was expected to launch as early as November on a test flight to the International Space Station without any crew members on-board. At the same time, Boeing's CST-100 Starliner was to launch on a similar demo mission in January. more in the link https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/10/06/no-commercial-crew-test-flights-expected-this-year/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2018 11:48:48 PM EDT
[#20]
Sounds like Space X is ready and not delayed by them not being ready
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2018 10:28:33 AM EDT
[#21]
Soyuz failure and current concerns with SpaceX and Boeing screwed systems
"ASAP member Don McErlean outlined several issues that SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft needs to overcome, including a lack of a final resolution on the root cause of the failure of a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) that led to the pad explosion of a Falcon 9 more than two years ago. That is linked, he added, to the use of “load-and-go” fueling of the rocket that would take place, on commercial crew missions, after astronauts have boarded the spacecraft. “Ultimately, there has to be the acceptance and certification of a configuration which is judged by both parties to be free of the demonstrated characteristics that caused the failure in question,” he said. “This remains an open technical item that the panel believes has to be firmly resolved before we can certainly proceed to crewed launches.” Much more in the article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2018 11:19:46 AM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2018 1:08:55 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The slidewire baskets for the shuttle pad escape systems seem like an E ticket ride as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGMWdtQYkbcQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do they have an ascent abort test scheduled yet? Here is that video 
There's video out there of Apollo and Mercury abort tests - for some reason I can't find a Gemini one... I think the Soviets had a launch abort with Soyuz in the 80's...during fueling I believe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGMWdtQYkbcRocket stuff going badly goes badly real damn quickly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2018 1:16:57 PM EDT
[#24]
I salute our next generation of midget astronauts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2018 8:30:21 PM EDT
[#25]
 Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2018 1:34:14 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think if there were ever a need for those by the time the Astronauts got to them to use them the need would no longer be there. Rocket stuff going badly goes badly real damn quickly. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do they have an ascent abort test scheduled yet? Here is that video
There's video out there of Apollo and Mercury abort tests - for some reason I can't find a Gemini one... I think the Soviets had a launch abort with Soyuz in the 80's...during fueling I believe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGMWdtQYkbcRocket stuff going badly goes badly real damn quickly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2018 9:44:57 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm guessing they are there mainly as a security blanket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2018 10:44:55 PM EDT
[#28]
It is amazing that it takes all this effort to basically recreate what we did in the 60's. We have fallen so far
Sure it has new shiny paint and fancy electronics. But it's still a freaking capsule strapped to the tip of a ballistic missile. I mean, we used to have a freaking space plane. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2018 11:58:33 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is amazing that it takes all this effort to basically recreate what we did in the 60's. We have fallen so far
Sure it has new shiny paint and fancy electronics. But it's still a freaking capsule strapped to the tip of a ballistic missile. I mean, we used to have a freaking space plane. 
That’s why it was a colossally shitty idea, we spent the build cost rebuilding them between missions. At that rate a 737 flight on southwest would be $400,000 and only fly once a month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2018 1:03:06 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The shuttle was pretty fucking far from a space plane.
That’s why it was a colossally shitty idea, we spent the build cost rebuilding them between missions. At that rate a 737 flight on southwest would be $400,000 and only fly once a month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2018 3:57:18 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What you say is true. But for a first ever working concept.. it was pretty damn successful. First iPhone sucked compared to what we have now, first missile sucked, first airplane sucked.. you get the idea. I am sure if we developed the idea from the shitload of money/research/lessons we learned from the shuttle program, we could build something truly amazing. Now that we are rewinding back to the 60's, all that knowledge and experience is trashed and memory holed. But I am not a rocket scientist so I have no idea if that whole concept was fubared or we are just lazy and wen't with the easiest thing possible.  NASA's Big Mistake - The X-33 VentureStar Replacement Shuttle The shuttle was a design by committee failure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2018 10:34:53 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what the shuttle should have been. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeNytM7JdYY
The shuttle was a design by committee failure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2018 10:53:00 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what the shuttle should have been. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeNytM7JdYY
The shuttle was a design by committee failure.
SSTO isn't that great in Earth's gravity well, with reusable boosters and a reusable upper stage, you can do far more work with the same amount of equipment/fuel. X-33 is a cool engineering exercise that should have flown though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 2:45:12 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 2:58:15 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrP17gVWkAIuOSz.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 3:21:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting. I recall US Navy ships for pre-Shuttle ocean recoveries. Is that over? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrP17gVWkAIuOSz.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 3:40:07 PM EDT
[#37]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 3:50:51 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrP17gVWkAIuOSz.jpg Cool photos Chokey and Pavelow16478, thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 4:09:34 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What you say is true. But for a first ever working concept.. it was pretty damn successful. First iPhone sucked compared to what we have now, first missile sucked, first airplane sucked.. you get the idea. I am sure if we developed the idea from the shitload of money/research/lessons we learned from the shuttle program, we could build something truly amazing. Now that we are rewinding back to the 60's, all that knowledge and experience is trashed and memory holed. But I am not a rocket scientist so I have no idea if that whole concept was fubared or we are just lazy and wen't with the easiest thing possible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: The shuttle was pretty fucking far from a space plane.
That’s why it was a colossally shitty idea, we spent the build cost rebuilding them between missions. At that rate a 737 flight on southwest would be $400,000 and only fly once a month. We don't have the notes scribbled on the margins, recordings of conversations over a beer, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 4:23:08 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Soyuz failure and current concerns with SpaceX and Boeing screwed systems "ASAP member Don McErlean outlined several issues that SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft needs to overcome, including a lack of a final resolution on the root cause of the failure of a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) that led to the pad explosion of a Falcon 9 more than two years ago. That is linked, he added, to the use of “load-and-go” fueling of the rocket that would take place, on commercial crew missions, after astronauts have boarded the spacecraft. “Ultimately, there has to be the acceptance and certification of a configuration which is judged by both parties to be free of the demonstrated characteristics that caused the failure in question,” he said. “This remains an open technical item that the panel believes has to be firmly resolved before we can certainly proceed to crewed launches.” Much more in the article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 4:23:50 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Eh... What the shuttle should have been is pretty much turning into the BFR.
https://www.spacex.com/sites/all/themes/spacex2012/images/mars/BFR_Sep_A_Longnose.jpg SSTO isn't that great in Earth's gravity well, with reusable boosters and a reusable upper stage, you can do far more work with the same amount of equipment/fuel. X-33 is a cool engineering exercise that should have flown though. BFR is Shuttle on Steroids. It has a lot in common with early Shuttle concepts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 7:47:52 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wouldn't the Dragon 2 be capable of escaping from a failure like that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Soyuz failure and current concerns with SpaceX and Boeing screwed systems "ASAP member Don McErlean outlined several issues that SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft needs to overcome, including a lack of a final resolution on the root cause of the failure of a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) that led to the pad explosion of a Falcon 9 more than two years ago. That is linked, he added, to the use of “load-and-go” fueling of the rocket that would take place, on commercial crew missions, after astronauts have boarded the spacecraft. “Ultimately, there has to be the acceptance and certification of a configuration which is judged by both parties to be free of the demonstrated characteristics that caused the failure in question,” he said. “This remains an open technical item that the panel believes has to be firmly resolved before we can certainly proceed to crewed launches.” Much more in the article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 9:56:07 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What you say is true. But for a first ever working concept.. it was pretty damn successful. First iPhone sucked compared to what we have now, first missile sucked, first airplane sucked.. you get the idea. I am sure if we developed the idea from the shitload of money/research/lessons we learned from the shuttle program, we could build something truly amazing. Now that we are rewinding back to the 60's, all that knowledge and experience is trashed and memory holed. But I am not a rocket scientist so I have no idea if that whole concept was fubared or we are just lazy and wen't with the easiest thing possible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: The shuttle was pretty fucking far from a space plane.
That’s why it was a colossally shitty idea, we spent the build cost rebuilding them between missions. At that rate a 737 flight on southwest would be $400,000 and only fly once a month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 10:05:55 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Meanwhile NASA is still years away from flying their SLS, which is still billions from its first test flight. Oh, and it's just a collection of parts that our nazis designed. Sigh. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 10:08:06 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe that is SpaceX's contention. We've seen a mishap on the pad. We've seen a pad abort test. Here's an overlay of the two. Mute it. The music put on this video is loud and sucks... You have been warned.  Failed To Load Title here's the videos just side be side if you don't trust the above edit. (no need to mute this one. But the action starts at 35 seconds)  Compare SpaceX Launch Test Anomaly VS Abort Escape System |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 10:10:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
didn't really accomplish anything . 
<== DU is that way. The Shuttle saved the Hubble (and upgraded it many times), that alone made it worth while for science. Not to mention the many experiments done with spacelab then construction with the ISS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 10:49:33 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
which is backed up by evidence. We've seen a mishap on the pad. We've seen a pad abort test. Here's an overlay of the two. Mute it. The music put on this video is loud and sucks... You have been warned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9kovJ5SyjM
here's the videos just side be side if you don't trust the above edit. (no need to mute this one. But the action starts at 35 seconds) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf-UOVOYRxEQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I believe that is SpaceX's contention. We've seen a mishap on the pad. We've seen a pad abort test. Here's an overlay of the two. Mute it. The music put on this video is loud and sucks... You have been warned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9kovJ5SyjM
here's the videos just side be side if you don't trust the above edit. (no need to mute this one. But the action starts at 35 seconds) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf-UOVOYRxE |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2018 11:24:12 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/162/images-522173.jpg <== DU is that way. The Shuttle saved the Hubble (and upgraded it many times), that alone made it worth while for science. Not to mention the many experiments done with spacelab then construction with the ISS. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
didn't really accomplish anything . <== DU is that way. The Shuttle saved the Hubble (and upgraded it many times), that alone made it worth while for science. Not to mention the many experiments done with spacelab then construction with the ISS. Anything accomplished by the shuttle, could have been done by a cheaper and better design. Pains me to say it, but aviation culture doesn’t shy away from honest critique. Admitting it was a failed program, goes a long way to identifying the specific points of failure and building a better system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2018 12:07:32 AM EDT
[#49]
Wait til the big boy with Raptor motors comes out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2018 6:29:22 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know how I know you don't know what your talking about... Oh... N/m you don't use facts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Meanwhile NASA is still years away from flying their SLS, which is still billions from its first test flight. Oh, and it's just a collection of parts that our nazis designed. Sigh. How much has it cost? What are the core designs of the boosters and motors? |
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File