User Panel
Quoted: I’m pretty sure that huge package jammed in there is cargo, which future dragon crew capsules will jam packed with as well as more than 2 dudes. It’ll look a lot more like the first pic than the second when it’s a real mission. View Quote Under the seats in hard bins, and not "a bag dangling there in front of your face". |
|
|
Quoted: I’m pretty sure that huge package jammed in there is cargo, which future dragon crew capsules will jam packed with as well as more than 2 dudes. It’ll look a lot more like the first pic than the second when it’s a real mission. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You would look that way too if a private company was making your countries entire space program irrelevant Soyuz interior: https://i.insider.com/5388b34decad04a3715e7a25 Dragon 2 interior: https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/astrotraining.jpg?w=730&crop=1 The shuttle controls looked an awful lot like this in the Soyuz. Definitely less cramped. A 40 year jump in tech is pretty incredible to see back to back. I’m pretty sure that huge package jammed in there is cargo, which future dragon crew capsules will jam packed with as well as more than 2 dudes. It’ll look a lot more like the first pic than the second when it’s a real mission. Good point. A two man crew, and shorter mission. For most, you're going to probably want to fit as much supplies as possible. |
|
|
Quoted: How many people know the names of these three men? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61270/Screenshot_2020-05-31-1440761.png View Quote Pavarotti, Domingo, and Carreras? |
|
Quoted: Space Hugs. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61270/Screenshot_2020-05-31_Crew_Demo-2_3_-1440912.jpg View Quote SOCIAL DISTANCING, you idiots!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/401845/crew-3_jpg-1440992.JPG .. has to be fun to be flying into the ISS. View Quote LOL@ the "EXIT" ... also WTF is " JEM " ? |
|
|
Quoted: The Docudrama Aliens proved that space is the realm of the Navy. How else are you going to have Space Marines? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Another example of why using USAF ranks for Space Force is nonsense. The Docudrama Aliens proved that space is the realm of the Navy. How else are you going to have Space Marines? If we remain a spacefaring civilization then space marines are an inevitability. Attached File But they will use current US marine rank structure. Privates, corporals, sergeants. The whole thing of master senior chief petty officer is just way too convoluted. |
|
Quoted: If we remain a spacefaring civilization then space marines are an inevitability. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1441042.JPG But they will use current US marine rank structure. Privates, corporals, sergeants. The whole thing of master senior chief petty officer is just way too convoluted. View Quote The senior enlisted rank better be Master Chief. |
|
|
Quoted: LOL@ the "EXIT" ... also WTF is " JEM " ? View Quote Japanese Experiment Module. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibo_(ISS_module) |
|
I'm surprised they haven't been touting the fact that SpaceX is owned by an African American.
|
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: LOL@ the "EXIT" ... also WTF is " JEM " ? Japanese Experiment Module. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibo_(ISS_module) |
|
.
I’m curious .... all the crap they were doing after opening the hatch, couldn’t they have done that BEFORE opening the hatch “Alright! Hatch open!” Waits-twenty-minutes-doing-things-that-could-have-been-done-before. |
|
|
|
Quoted: . I'm curious .... all the crap they were doing after opening the hatch, couldn't they have done that BEFORE opening the hatch "Alright! Hatch open!" Waits-twenty-minutes-doing-things-that-could-have-been-done-before. View Quote I don't know what the hatch opening procedures are. But perhaps on this initial crew cabin dock there were items on the check list that could only be closed out only after the hatch was opened - this is the first crew docking so I image there were a lot of 'lets check this box off' things that needed to be done. |
|
Quoted: . I’m curious .... all the crap they were doing after opening the hatch, couldn’t they have done that BEFORE opening the hatch “Alright! Hatch open!” Waits-twenty-minutes-doing-things-that-could-have-been-done-before. View Quote Do not question the rituals of the Omnissiah, filthy heretic! |
|
|
Quoted: No kidding. Booze of some kind, maybe a gallon or two of vodka at a minimum for your new Russian I'd have to be hammered to get on a rocket ship, I won't get on a fucking airplane sober. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Beer! No kidding. Booze of some kind, maybe a gallon or two of vodka at a minimum for your new Russian I'd have to be hammered to get on a rocket ship, I won't get on a fucking airplane sober. Sigline material right there! |
|
This success of Crew Dragon has brought my attention to the race between SpaceX and Boeing, and the contrasting differences between the two companies:
1- In-house vs partnerships/contracting 2- Nimble footprint vs large, defense-oriented multi-company contracting. 3- That probably spills over to project management methodology/styles. 4- $2.6B vs $4.2B 5- Real-world testing vs heavy reliance on simulator testing. 6- Appearance: Crew Dragon vs Starliner. 7- Marketing: SpaceX vs Boeing I have to satirically wonder if SpaceX is going into the airliner business. |
|
Quoted: This success of Crew Dragon has brought my attention to the race between SpaceX and Boeing, and the contrasting differences between the two companies: 1- In-house vs partnerships/contracting 2- Nimble footprint vs large, defense-oriented multi-company contracting. 3- That probably spills over to project management methodology/styles. 4- $2.6B vs $4.2B 5- Real-world testing vs heavy reliance on simulator testing. 6- Appearance: Crew Dragon vs Starliner. 7- Marketing: SpaceX vs Boeing View Quote |
|
To me, the biggest difference is one of mindset.
SpaceX’s entire raison d’etre is to put people into space, and to go to Mars, etc. - and they realize that they need to be commercially viable in order to do so, and thus have developed a very successful satellite/cargo launching operation. Making money is a necessary function for them, but it’s not really their ultimate goal. (At least for now ... it will be interesting to see what happens to the company once Elon Musk is no longer in charge.) Boeing’s entire goal and mission in the space sector is to be profitable, and to live off government contracts (both NASA and defense). I don’t think they really care one way or the other, they just want to make money. If that means building a booster for Constellation, or a heat shield for Orion, or components for SLS, they are happy to do so, and to milk FedGov for as long as possible. I don’t think anyone in Boeing’s leadership actually gives two shits about whether or not humans go to Mars, or we return to the Moon, etc. (especially with the McDonnell-Douglas culture that has taken over Boeing). |
|
Quoted: To me, the biggest difference is one of mindset. SpaceX’s entire raison d’etre is to put people into space, and to go to Mars, etc. - and they realize that they need to be commercially viable in order to do so, and thus have developed a very successful satellite/cargo launching operation. Making money is a necessary function for them, but it’s not really their ultimate goal. (At least for now ... it will be interesting to see what happens to the company once Elon Musk is no longer in charge.) Boeing’s entire goal and mission in the space sector is to be profitable, and to live off government contracts (both NASA and defense). I don’t think they really care one way or the other, they just want to make money. If that means building a booster for Constellation, or a heat shield for Orion, or components for SLS, they are happy to do so, and to milk FedGov for as long as possible. I don’t think anyone in Boeing’s leadership actually gives two shits about whether or not humans go to Mars, or we return to the Moon, etc. (especially with the McDonnell-Douglas culture that has taken over Boeing). View Quote Nailed it. Boeing and Lockmart have built an industry of waiting on the sweet teats of uncle Sam to dangle before them and latch onto them in perpetuity |
|
Quoted: To me, the biggest difference is one of mindset. SpaceX's entire raison d'etre is to put people into space, and to go to Mars, etc. - and they realize that they need to be commercially viable in order to do so, and thus have developed a very successful satellite/cargo launching operation. Making money is a necessary function for them, but it's not really their ultimate goal. (At least for now ... it will be interesting to see what happens to the company once Elon Musk is no longer in charge.) Boeing's entire goal and mission in the space sector is to be profitable, and to live off government contracts (both NASA and defense). I don't think they really care one way or the other, they just want to make money. If that means building a booster for Constellation, or a heat shield for Orion, or components for SLS, they are happy to do so, and to milk FedGov for as long as possible. I don't think anyone in Boeing's leadership actually gives two shits about whether or not humans go to Mars, or we return to the Moon, etc. (especially with the McDonnell-Douglas culture that has taken over Boeing). View Quote |
|
Quoted: The question is, is Elon Musk actually in charge. I think he's more the visionary/designer and less the manager. I think Gwynne Shotwell is probably a driving force behind accomplishing what Elon dreams up. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: To me, the biggest difference is one of mindset. SpaceX's entire raison d'etre is to put people into space, and to go to Mars, etc. - and they realize that they need to be commercially viable in order to do so, and thus have developed a very successful satellite/cargo launching operation. Making money is a necessary function for them, but it's not really their ultimate goal. (At least for now ... it will be interesting to see what happens to the company once Elon Musk is no longer in charge.) Boeing's entire goal and mission in the space sector is to be profitable, and to live off government contracts (both NASA and defense). I don't think they really care one way or the other, they just want to make money. If that means building a booster for Constellation, or a heat shield for Orion, or components for SLS, they are happy to do so, and to milk FedGov for as long as possible. I don't think anyone in Boeing's leadership actually gives two shits about whether or not humans go to Mars, or we return to the Moon, etc. (especially with the McDonnell-Douglas culture that has taken over Boeing). It is a mom/dad type relationship. |
|
Quoted: The question is, is Elon Musk actually in charge. I think he's more the visionary/designer and less the manager. I think Gwynne Shotwell is probably a driving force behind accomplishing what Elon dreams up. View Quote I agree that Elon doesn’t “run” SpaceX in terms of actual operations. His role is to provide the vision and direction for them, but he has extremely competent people actually running the operations for him. |
|
Quoted: To me, the biggest difference is one of mindset. SpaceX's entire raison d'etre is to put people into space, and to go to Mars, etc. - and they realize that they need to be commercially viable in order to do so, and thus have developed a very successful satellite/cargo launching operation. Making money is a necessary function for them, but it's not really their ultimate goal. (At least for now ... it will be interesting to see what happens to the company once Elon Musk is no longer in charge.) Boeing's entire goal and mission in the space sector is to be profitable, and to live off government contracts (both NASA and defense). I don't think they really care one way or the other, they just want to make money. If that means building a booster for Constellation, or a heat shield for Orion, or components for SLS, they are happy to do so, and to milk FedGov for as long as possible. I don't think anyone in Boeing's leadership actually gives two shits about whether or not humans go to Mars, or we return to the Moon, etc. (especially with the McDonnell-Douglas culture that has taken over Boeing). View Quote One thing you can say about Elon is the guy is a true believer. He really believes down to his bones in space exploration and human expansion. It's not about having just another revenue stream. With NASA in the early days and the Moon landings were about saying the US had the best rockets. It really wasn't a science mission. |
|
Quoted: I agree that Elon doesn’t “run” SpaceX in terms of actual operations. His role is to provide the vision and direction for them, but he has extremely competent people actually running the operations for him. View Quote He is an actual design engineer and developed much of the systems himself. Of course a team of engineers and nerds have run with his designs. He signs off on the design specs himself. |
|
Quoted: I'm curious .... all the crap they were doing after opening the hatch, couldn't they have done that BEFORE opening the hatch "Alright! Hatch open!" Waits-twenty-minutes-doing-things-that-could-have-been-done-before. View Quote They don't want to go diving right in. They need to let the stink waft in gently so they can get used to it and not spray puke everywhere. That wouldn't look good for the cameras. |
|
Quoted: This success of Crew Dragon has brought my attention to the race between SpaceX and Boeing, and the contrasting differences between the two companies: 1- In-house vs partnerships/contracting 2- Nimble footprint vs large, defense-oriented multi-company contracting. 3- That probably spills over to project management methodology/styles. 4- $2.6B vs $4.2B 5- Real-world testing vs heavy reliance on simulator testing. 6- Appearance: Crew Dragon vs Starliner. 7- Marketing: SpaceX vs Boeing I have to satirically wonder if SpaceX is going into the airliner business. View Quote Space shuttling business yes! Peeps and products. |
|
Quoted: No, it should become a tradition that the first spaceship of a line that is American made should be named Enterprise. View Quote Original Trek Enterprise was a Constitution class vessel. The first ship of that line was named the Constitution. Next gen... it was a Galaxy class... updated one for the later movies was a Sovereign Class. I'm not sure... but maybe the one from Enterprise ... since it was an experimental prototype ship might have been the only time the Enterprise was the first ship in a line. |
|
Quoted: I have to satirically wonder if SpaceX is going into the airliner business. View Quote Point-to-point Earth only flights have been discussed as a possibility. |
|
Quoted: If we remain a spacefaring civilization then space marines are an inevitability. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1441042.JPG But they will use current US marine rank structure. Privates, corporals, sergeants. The whole thing of master senior chief petty officer is just way too convoluted. View Quote The UNSC SPARTAN II program, of which Master Chief Petty Officer John 117 was a part of, was run by UNSC Naval Special Warfare Command. The UNSC Marine Corps used Marine Corps ranks. I see no reason not to have Space Navy SEALs and Space Marines. |
|
Quoted: well... I mean not even the titular Enterprise was the first ship of its line. Original Trek Enterprise was a Constitution class vessel. The first ship of that line was named the Constitution. Next gen... it was a Galaxy class... updated one for the later movies was a Sovereign Class. I'm not sure... but maybe the one from Enterprise ... since it was an experimental prototype ship might have been the only time the Enterprise was the first ship in a line. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: No, it should become a tradition that the first spaceship of a line that is American made should be named Enterprise. Original Trek Enterprise was a Constitution class vessel. The first ship of that line was named the Constitution. Next gen... it was a Galaxy class... updated one for the later movies was a Sovereign Class. I'm not sure... but maybe the one from Enterprise ... since it was an experimental prototype ship might have been the only time the Enterprise was the first ship in a line. Personally, I am against any military tradition being based on a cheesy television show. |
|
Quoted: Personally, I am against any military tradition being based on a cheesy television show. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: No, it should become a tradition that the first spaceship of a line that is American made should be named Enterprise. Original Trek Enterprise was a Constitution class vessel. The first ship of that line was named the Constitution. Next gen... it was a Galaxy class... updated one for the later movies was a Sovereign Class. I'm not sure... but maybe the one from Enterprise ... since it was an experimental prototype ship might have been the only time the Enterprise was the first ship in a line. Personally, I am against any military tradition being based on a cheesy television show. Well - we don't have royalty. We had to pick something! |
|
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.