Well, we might see it fly after all.http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101125/NEWS02/11250311/1007/Lockheed+plans+Orion+test+flighthttp://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101124/BREAKINGNEWS/101124037/1007/NEWS02/2013+test+flight+could+lead+to+mission+to+asteroid++moon+by+2015
The GTA is taking shape.
Quote from: mike robel on 11/25/2010 12:24 pmWell, we might see it fly after all.http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101125/NEWS02/11250311/1007/Lockheed+plans+Orion+test+flighthttp://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101124/BREAKINGNEWS/101124037/1007/NEWS02/2013+test+flight+could+lead+to+mission+to+asteroid++moon+by+2015Interesting. Is this even remotley realistic?Well, at least the 2015 manned flight to an asteroid must be fantasyland. What asteroid would they go to? And what vehicle would they launch on? Certainly not the D4H, which, besides not being human-rated, doesn't have anywhere near the necessary performance for a manned asteroid (or moon) mission.
Quote from: nickyp on 11/08/2010 02:49 pmThe GTA is taking shape.Sorry for my ignorance, but at what facility is the Orion GTA being built? I know that most of the NASA centers have a piece of this development from some aspect or another, but where is this GTA?
the CM was required to provide volume to ensure CPAS main parachute density was ≤ 38 lbm/ft³. For the first two review periods, the projected main parachute pack density was between 43.7 and 54.2 lbm/ft³.
It is being assembled at Lockheed Martin in Michoud. This facebook page has alot of really interesting photos regarding test articles and what not. Some pictures of the Thermal Protection System going on. There are a few outdated people who post on there that still won't let go of the Ares 1..http://www.facebook.com/ORIONCREWEXPLORATIONVEHICLE
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nasa-costs-20101228,0,2011017.story
I would have to agree. The amount of time it takes to get a BOE capable Orion is excessive given the amount of time this project has gone on. If BOE flight is to take place it should take place on dragon or other capsules.
Quote from: marsavian on 12/28/2010 01:42 amhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nasa-costs-20101228,0,2011017.story Interesting content. It also says:And rather than looking to build a fully loaded capsule capable of flying to the moon, NASA will build it in stages to match the budget. Under the latest plan, NASA and Lockheed would produce an unmanned test vehicle by 2013, and then a simple manned capsule in 2017.By 2018, Orion would be ready to go to the International Space Station, and by 2020 would be capable of going to points beyond the moon for extended stays. That's not so impressive. A quick DIHV (boilerplate?) test launch in 2013 to maintain political visibility, then four more years to manned launch to orbit (on what?), then ISS a year later. With Boeing talking about manned test flights of CST-100 in 2015, and Commercial Crew expected to enter service by 2016, Orion will be pretty late to the game by 2018, and still LEO only and yet to offer any greater capability than the competitors. Dragon (whether selected for Com. Crew or not) is expected to have flown countless times by then, and fundamentally seems to represent much more of what is needed for (non-lunar) BEO exploration (a lightweight, shorter-duration capsule with a high-energy heat shield). I'm not seeing why Orion fills a role unfilled elsewhere, much less worth the money. -Alex
I totally agree Marsavian. I have always looked upon it as Commercial doing LEO, and the Government working towards BEO, so this doesn't surprise me at all really. And we need to remember that there isn't a defined BEO capability that needs to be fulfilled just now, so why build a BEO Orion if you don't need one in the next eight years?
I think if we're going to bother making Orion, we ought to at least start making a mission module and/or a lander right now.
From OV-106:....Then Augustine and company came in and gave "flexible path" (a generally fine concept *IF*, and only if, you have people that are serious about it) and those who really don't want to do anything saw that as the "in" needed for really doing nothing. And now, here we are.