• NASA Backs Shuttle Successors
    30 replies, posted
[QUOTE] [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v9WYIeeK3fU/Ta0hVfVWQvI/AAAAAAAALHY/GPW1ZAPHfpQ/s1600/dragon.jpg[/IMG]Spacex Dragon Nasa has given an indication of the companies it thinks may be closest to offering commercial systems to carry American astronauts into space. With its shuttles about to retire, the agency has offered $270m (£166m) of funds to four firms to help them mature designs for new orbiting vehicles. Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada Corp and SpaceX hope to sell astronaut "taxi" services to Nasa by mid-decade. SpaceX, which has garnered much publicity recently, is perhaps the most advanced in its plans. It has already flown a rocket called Falcon 9 and a capsule called Dragon. It is being offered $75m over the next year if it meets certain milestones in advancing Dragon's crew-carrying capabilities. [IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1mkkr6nLCDA/Ta0hHzVgy6I/AAAAAAAALHU/mJPZAsCrbIc/s1600/CST100.jpg[/IMG] The long-established Boeing company stands to win the largest award depending on developments. It has a capsule design called CTS-100 which could transport up to seven astronauts to the space station. The $92.3m Nasa support will help Boeing get the vehicle through to its preliminary design review. [IMG]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HEKlO77KjY0/Ta0gqn1PdzI/AAAAAAAALHQ/AWy2YifuI5k/s1600/dreamchaser.jpg[/IMG] * Sierra Nevada Corp. of Louisville, Colo., snagged $80 million to further develop its Dream Chaser vehicle, a seven-person spacecraft, to a preliminary design review stage. Dream Chaser is a winged spaceship designed to launch atop an expendable rocket. [IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_zyHFvcqZ-E/Ta0gc8qQvCI/AAAAAAAALHM/n5OIRxvFPGg/s1600/blueorigin.jpg[/IMG] * Blue Origin of Kent, Wash., will receive $22 million to further the development of its space vehicle design and pusher escape system. Blue Origin was established by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos and is developing the cone-shaped vertical launch vehicle New Shepard. Nasa is keen that the next era of human spaceflight include a strong commercial element. It plans to substantially increase its seed funding in 2012. If you liked this article, please give it a quick review on ycombinator or StumbleUpon. Thanks [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/04/nasa-backs-shuttle-successors.html[/url]
That, looks fucking amazing!
That's out of this world!
Oh wow.
I expected SpaceX to receive more funding than Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corp since, in my eyes, SpaceX does more than those two companies combined to advance space travel. But it's still good news, technology for space travel will advance ten times faster in the hands of corporations rather than in the hands of underfunded and unfavored-by-republicans NASA.
That Dream Chaser looks badass. I've never heard of it before.
[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;29295548]I expected SpaceX to receive more funding than Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corp since, in my eyes, SpaceX does more than those two companies combined to advance space travel. But it's still good news, technology for space travel will advance ten times faster in the hands of corporations rather than in the hands of underfunded and unfavored-by-republicans NASA.[/QUOTE] My feelings too. SpaceX is the only one with real, functional hardware. Boeing and Sierra Nevada are still in the paper bird/mockup stage. Still, though, it's good to see them showing commitment to making the Dragon crew-capable.
Glad to see more than one company involved in this. If something is to be comercialised, competition needs to be included.
The Dream Chaser looks fucking incredible.
[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HEKlO77KjY0/Ta0gqn1PdzI/AAAAAAAALHQ/AWy2YifuI5k/s1600/dreamchaser.jpg[/img] It's like it's from the fifties. In the awesome way
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;29295964]My feelings too. SpaceX is the only one with real, functional hardware. Boeing and Sierra Nevada are still in the paper bird/mockup stage. Still, though, it's good to see them showing commitment to making the Dragon crew-capable.[/QUOTE] What? [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Delta_IV_Heavy_rocket_on_launch_pad.jpg[/img] How is that paper/mockup?
It is Dream Chaser, not Catcher.
[QUOTE=Kagrenak;29297356]What? How is that paper/mockup?[/QUOTE] I was speaking in regards to the actual capsule, which has yet to fly in any capacity. Everyone knows Boeing has a fairly successful history with their Delta line. Boeing already has a launcher, yet they couldn't develop a capsule to sit on top of it in the time a little startup like SpaceX developed their own capsule [i]and[/i] launcher?
the [i]Dream Catcher awwww yeaahh[/i]
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;29297428]I was speaking in regards to the actual capsule, which has yet to fly in any capacity. Everyone knows Boeing has a fairly successful history with their Delta line. Boeing already has a launcher, yet they couldn't develop a capsule to sit on top of it in the time a little startup like SpaceX developed their own capsule [i]and[/i] launcher?[/QUOTE] Yeah but the problem is SpaceX's launch history isn't exactly promising. I myself, would not volunteer to sit on top of a Falcon 1/9 right now, given their overall failure rate is more than 20%
[QUOTE=Kagrenak;29297459]Yeah but the problem is SpaceX's launch history isn't exactly promising. I myself, would not volunteer to sit on top of a Falcon 1/9 right now, given their overall failure rate is more than 20%[/QUOTE] That's actually pretty average for an experimental craft. Just look at the B-17 or the Osprey. [editline]19th April 2011[/editline] Not to mention NASA when they just started.
[IMG]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/6096/dcwk2108.jpg[/IMG]
Great news.
[QUOTE=Deweze;29299869][img_thumb]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/6096/dcwk2108.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] It's a fucking rocket dog head!
[QUOTE=Deweze;29299869][img_thumb]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/6096/dcwk2108.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] That's kind of inaccurate, the Dream Chaser is supposed to launch vertically on a Delta IV, not get dropped by a WhiteKnight.
So it's basically like Apollo? [editline]19th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Laserbeams;29297278][img_thumb]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HEKlO77KjY0/Ta0gqn1PdzI/AAAAAAAALHQ/AWy2YifuI5k/s1600/dreamchaser.jpg[/img_thumb] It's like it's from the fifties. In the awesome way[/QUOTE] Or from a Fallout game.
It's a lot more like a miniature space shuttle. They sit it on top of a Delta IV for the trip to orbit, then it reenters and lands on a runway.
Now put guns on it and we'll already have a space fleet.
[QUOTE=booster;29311793]Now put guns on it and we'll already have a space fleet.[/QUOTE] Because firing bullets in low earth gravity would not affect your aim at all, much less to say, they would probably float back in your face at a few kilometers/second.
[QUOTE=MendozaMan;29312736]Because firing bullets in low earth gravity would not affect your aim at all, much less to say, they would porbably float back in your face at a few kilometers/second.[/QUOTE] Then put spears on them. Can't shoot it? Ram it.
[QUOTE=MendozaMan;29312736]Because firing bullets in low earth gravity would not affect your aim at all, much less to say, they would probably float back in your face at a few kilometers/second.[/QUOTE] The impulse will be identical to the one in atmosphere and in the gravity field. As far as I remember jet fighters don't have problems with stopping on spot when firing their guns. Of course, it will noticeably alter speed of the vehicle, but it's nothing which couldn't be corrected by the engines which the vehicle normally utilizes.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;29314986]The impulse will be identical to the one in atmosphere and in the gravity field. As far as I remember jet fighters don't have problems with stopping on spot when firing their guns. Of course, it will noticeably alter speed of the vehicle, but it's nothing which couldn't be corrected by the engines which the vehicle normally utilizes.[/QUOTE] At least one of the Russian Almaz space stations was equipped with an onboard 30mm cannon that was fixed in position, so you had to rotate the whole station to aim it. I believe it was set up so that the station's primary thrusters would fire to compensate for the recoil. I do wonder whether the bullets create a space debris hazard. The cannon they used had a muzzle velocity of 780 m/s, while the velocity of your typical low earth orbit is around 7,800 m/s. If you fire in the retrograde direction, the bullets should have a low enough perigee to end up reentering. If you fire prograde, the bullets all wind up in an elliptical orbit with a high apogee. Earth's escape velocity is about 11,200 m/s, so the cannon won't come close to firing bullets out of Earth's orbit. So potentially every one of those bullets is a long-term debris hazard whether you hit or miss your target.
Spacex Dragon sounds like a sex toy.
Keep up the good work NASA.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;29315549]At least one of the Russian Almaz space stations was equipped with an onboard 30mm cannon that was fixed in position, so you had to rotate the whole station to aim it. I believe it was set up so that the station's primary thrusters would fire to compensate for the recoil. I do wonder whether the bullets create a space debris hazard. The cannon they used had a muzzle velocity of 780 m/s, while the velocity of your typical low earth orbit is around 7,800 m/s. If you fire in the retrograde direction, the bullets should have a low enough perigee to end up reentering. If you fire prograde, the bullets all wind up in an elliptical orbit with a high apogee. Earth's escape velocity is about 11,200 m/s, so the cannon won't come close to firing bullets out of Earth's orbit. So potentially every one of those bullets is a long-term debris hazard whether you hit or miss your target.[/QUOTE] wouldnt it burn up in the atmosphere?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.