Author Topic: Orion Hardware Processing  (Read 208322 times)

Offline TheFallen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 800
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 159
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #140 on: 11/08/2010 06:35 pm »
By 2012.  With a proposal to launch the first test flight on a Delta IV in 2013

Offline Spacely

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #141 on: 11/08/2010 06:50 pm »
Well, it's looking like an actual... space kinda thing. 

I'm not all that keen on SLS.  I'm much more curious as to how Orion (and to a lesser extent, Dragon) will play out over these next six months.

Offline nickyp

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Glasgow, Scotland
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #142 on: 11/08/2010 08:40 pm »
Its looking great!  I can't wait to see it with its thermal protection and heat shield on next year.  The EVA tests with the mockup at the NBL provided some really nice pictures too :)

Do any of you guys know how close this thing will be to a finished flight article?

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #143 on: 11/25/2010 10:05 am »
Orion's heatshield substrate with the six compression pads installed:



Offline aquanaut99

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #145 on: 11/25/2010 02:07 pm »
Well, we might see it fly after all.

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101125/NEWS02/11250311/1007/Lockheed+plans+Orion+test+flight

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101124/BREAKINGNEWS/101124037/1007/NEWS02/2013+test+flight+could+lead+to+mission+to+asteroid++moon+by+2015



Interesting. 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.
« Last Edit: 11/25/2010 02:10 pm by aquanaut99 »

Offline MarsMethanogen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
  • Denver, Colorado USA
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #146 on: 11/25/2010 02:47 pm »


The 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?

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2307
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 369
  • Likes Given: 262
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #147 on: 11/25/2010 02:56 pm »
Well, we might see it fly after all.

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101125/NEWS02/11250311/1007/Lockheed+plans+Orion+test+flight

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20101124/BREAKINGNEWS/101124037/1007/NEWS02/2013+test+flight+could+lead+to+mission+to+asteroid++moon+by+2015



Interesting. 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.

The only thing I think is remotely realistic is the test flight.

Offline nickyp

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Glasgow, Scotland
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #148 on: 11/25/2010 03:22 pm »


The 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?

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
« Last Edit: 11/25/2010 07:13 pm by Chris Bergin »

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #149 on: 11/27/2010 03:40 pm »
Orion's main parachutes' packing volume looks increased (and corresponding pack density - reduced). Exactly like the NESC reported :
Quote
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.

The bags containing main parachutes look larger now.


Offline TheFallen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 800
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 159
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #150 on: 11/30/2010 07:09 pm »
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

Just a quick, trivial note... The Facebook page has now been renamed "Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle" :)

Offline marsavian

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #151 on: 12/28/2010 01:42 am »
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nasa-costs-20101228,0,2011017.story

But there are signs that NASA realizes that it must do things differently. Perhaps the greatest test case is the Orion spacecraft, which has so far cost $4.8 billion and is not likely to fly for at least another three years — and at an additional cost of $1.2 billion.Orion's prime contractor, Lockheed Martin Corp., has long complained that unnecessary levels of NASA oversight drive up costs and has pleaded with the agency to cut down on paperwork. Now, according to Mark Geyer, NASA's Orion program manager, the agency is relenting, scaling back layers of supervision and looking at other ways to cut costs.

But, Geyer said, the real change has been cutting down on supervision of Lockheed "to really focus on the higher-risk items and not all the stuff Lockheed knows how to do." "Lockheed had a lot of skill in building flight hardware. NASA doesn't have to watch that a lot," he said. Geyer said scaling back on layers of supervision has allowed NASA to cut Orion's overhead budget by 70%, and allowed Lockheed to cut some of its costs by as much as 47%. The money saved, Geyer said, has been invested into making electronics for Orion.
« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 01:53 am by marsavian »

Offline alexw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1230
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #152 on: 12/28/2010 05:45 am »
http://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

Offline pathfinder_01

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2106
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #153 on: 12/28/2010 08:55 pm »
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.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25588
  • Likes Given: 12245
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #154 on: 12/28/2010 09:01 pm »
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.
BEO (beyond Earth orbit), not BOE (back-of-envelope?)...
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline marsavian

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #155 on: 12/29/2010 10:44 am »
http://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

Orion is BEO-enabled by default design and any delay is tactical. The CxP legacy development just can't win, if development is purposely slowed to match LV, spacecraft and budget it gets criticized for not keeping up with Commercial even though this race only exists in the mind of commercial amazing people. If development is not held back it gets criticized for then enabling a capability that can't be used straightaway. Also just because this President doesn't want to go to the Moon it doesn't mean future ones won't, remember it's the Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). If you must reply with this mindset please do so on the many anti-Orion threads that exist on this site as this thread is about the hardware and I just posted factual details from that link not expecting the usual anti-NASA crowd to hijack this thread as well with the usual propaganda.

Offline nickyp

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Glasgow, Scotland
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #156 on: 12/30/2010 02:11 pm »
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?
« Last Edit: 12/30/2010 02:13 pm by nickyp »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25588
  • Likes Given: 12245
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #157 on: 12/30/2010 02:49 pm »
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.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #158 on: 12/30/2010 03:05 pm »
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.

Seems to me that was the plan.  While most inside NASA expected "tweaks" to CxP (and just about as many knew they were necessary) I think most thought the philosophy behind VSE to be sound. 

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.
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline mmoulder

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Orion Hardware Processing
« Reply #159 on: 12/30/2010 07:28 pm »
Quote

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.


Well said....

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1