-
NASA Invites Media to Orion Egress Testing with Astronauts in Gulf of Mexico
by
jacqmans
on 09 Jul, 2017 08:56
-
July 07, 2017
MEDIA ADVISORY
NASA Invites Media to Orion Egress Testing with Astronauts in Gulf of Mexico
Media are invited to watch NASA test the tools and techniques for recovering astronauts from its Orion spacecraft once it splashes down after completing its missions to deep space, and speak with personnel participating in the evaluations. The testing will take place Thursday, July 13, off the coast of Galveston, Texas.
NASA’s Orion and Ground Systems Development and Operations programs are collaborating with the U.S. Department of Defense to evaluate how to safely and effectively recover astronauts from Orion crew modules in a variety of scenarios after their missions end with ocean splashdowns. The testing is the first series of evaluations in open water and is taking place with the assistance of the U.S. Coast Guard, Navy and Air Force.
Media attending must be in place by 12:30 p.m. CDT Thursday for transport to the test location via a Coast Guard vessel. Reporters who wish to participate must contact
[email protected] or 281-483-5111 by 5 p.m. Tuesday, July 11.
NASA’s Orion spacecraft is built to take humans farther than they’ve ever gone before. The agency is building a flexible, reusable and sustainable capability and infrastructure beyond the moon that will last multiple decades and support missions of increasing complexity. Beginning with launch of the first integrated mission of SLS and Orion, this new deep space exploration system will create a capability from which future generations will benefit.
Explore more about NASA’s Orion spacecraft at:
http://www.nasa.gov/orionLearn about Ground Systems Development and Operations at:
http://www.nasa.gov/groundsystems
-
#1
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 13 Jul, 2017 21:52
-
-
#2
by
Jeff Lerner
on 13 Jul, 2017 22:18
-
Are those actually astronauts in the raft ??....anyone recognize who they are ??
-
#3
by
whitelancer64
on 13 Jul, 2017 22:52
-
Are those actually astronauts in the raft ??....anyone recognize who they are ??
I took it upon myself to ask in a reply to the tweet.
-
#4
by
woods170
on 14 Jul, 2017 08:46
-
Testing w/crew today in the waters off Galveston to ensure astronauts can get out of Orion safely after deep space missions atop @NASA_SLS
https://twitter.com/nasa_orion/status/885615360279404544
Emphasis mine. That is baloney. NASA d*mn well knows they can get the astronauts out safely after a deep space mission. They learned everything they had to learn half a century ago. IMO this is just another PR stunt to hide the complete lack of any meaningfull progress in manned spaceflight.
-
#5
by
darkenfast
on 14 Jul, 2017 09:08
-
Obviously the ocean treats the spacecraft different after a deep-space mission than it does after a measly LEO mission. Enough so that NASA will blow millions of taxpayer's money to hire a Navy amphibious combat ship and four or five hundred crew and helo squadron professionals to go recover it.
-
#6
by
Khadgars
on 14 Jul, 2017 16:52
-
Testing w/crew today in the waters off Galveston to ensure astronauts can get out of Orion safely after deep space missions atop @NASA_SLS
https://twitter.com/nasa_orion/status/885615360279404544
Emphasis mine. That is baloney. NASA d*mn well knows they can get the astronauts out safely after a deep space mission. They learned everything they had to learn half a century ago. IMO this is just another PR stunt to hide the complete lack of any meaningfull progress in manned spaceflight.
I think I have to respectfully disagree. They may have the "procedures" how to get astronauts out safely, but no one has done that for 50 years and with Orions particular design. Definitely some PR here for sure, but there is value as well.
-
#7
by
Jim
on 14 Jul, 2017 17:25
-
Testing w/crew today in the waters off Galveston to ensure astronauts can get out of Orion safely after deep space missions atop @NASA_SLS
https://twitter.com/nasa_orion/status/885615360279404544
Emphasis mine. That is baloney. NASA d*mn well knows they can get the astronauts out safely after a deep space mission. They learned everything they had to learn half a century ago. IMO this is just another PR stunt to hide the complete lack of any meaningfull progress in manned spaceflight.
that was 40 years ago. None of the people are still involved. There was no actual manual written to provide instructions.
-
#8
by
ncb1397
on 15 Jul, 2017 00:50
-
Obviously the ocean treats the spacecraft different after a deep-space mission than it does after a measly LEO mission. Enough so that NASA will blow millions of taxpayer's money to hire a Navy amphibious combat ship and four or five hundred crew and helo squadron professionals to go recover it.
Since we aren't doing an amphibious assault in the next couple days, it really doesn't matter.
-
#9
by
darkenfast
on 15 Jul, 2017 07:42
-
Obviously the ocean treats the spacecraft different after a deep-space mission than it does after a measly LEO mission. Enough so that NASA will blow millions of taxpayer's money to hire a Navy amphibious combat ship and four or five hundred crew and helo squadron professionals to go recover it.
Since we aren't doing an amphibious assault in the next couple days, it really doesn't matter.
Actually the money DOES matter. I spent twenty years in the Navy and I'm pretty sure NASA isn't getting these assets for free.
-
#10
by
ncb1397
on 15 Jul, 2017 17:24
-
Obviously the ocean treats the spacecraft different after a deep-space mission than it does after a measly LEO mission. Enough so that NASA will blow millions of taxpayer's money to hire a Navy amphibious combat ship and four or five hundred crew and helo squadron professionals to go recover it.
Since we aren't doing an amphibious assault in the next couple days, it really doesn't matter.
Actually the money DOES matter. I spent twenty years in the Navy and I'm pretty sure NASA isn't getting these assets for free.
Even if true, it is an intragovernment transfer of funds that has no affect on taxpayers which the person I was responding to invoked. More fuel may have been used. On the other hand, less fuel may have been used in this exercise than if the ship was on patrol. No munitions were expended either, which would be the case if they were doing other exercises. Using currently un-used government assets would be cheaper than renting commercial vessels.
-
#11
by
darkenfast
on 15 Jul, 2017 19:41
-
Navy ship don't just sit there unused. They have a multi-year program of training, maintenance and deployments to meet the requirements set down by the government and anyway, amphib ships don't go on "patrol". They have a specific mission. If you want to pretend that the money spent on these recoveries is imaginary and that a slimmed down commercial operation would be more expensive, go right ahead.
These bloated recoveries are just one of the many ways in which the whole SLS/Orion system is going to spend itself out of existence.
-
#12
by
ncb1397
on 16 Jul, 2017 16:18
-
Navy ship don't just sit there unused. They have a multi-year program of training, maintenance and deployments to meet the requirements set down by the government and anyway, amphib ships don't go on "patrol". They have a specific mission. If you want to pretend that the money spent on these recoveries is imaginary and that a slimmed down commercial operation would be more expensive, go right ahead.
These bloated recoveries are just one of the many ways in which the whole SLS/Orion system is going to spend itself out of existence.
Amphibious assault ship Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) departed Sasebo, Japan, earlier this week for a routine patrol in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, which falls under the 7 th Fleet area of responsibility, according to Navy officials.
The Bonhomme Richard will finalize certifications and conduct joint for operations along with the 31 st Marine Expeditionary Unit.
https://www.navytimes.com/articles/amphibious-assault-ship-bonhomme-richard-departs-japan-for-routine-patrolSan Antonio class ships have operated as part of CTF-151, an anti-piracy task force(i.e. patrol).
Anyways, if the U.S. Navy was at near 100% utilization at relative peace-time, they would have 0 capacity to respond to any major conflict.
-
#13
by
woods170
on 17 Jul, 2017 12:45
-
Testing w/crew today in the waters off Galveston to ensure astronauts can get out of Orion safely after deep space missions atop @NASA_SLS
https://twitter.com/nasa_orion/status/885615360279404544
Emphasis mine. That is baloney. NASA d*mn well knows they can get the astronauts out safely after a deep space mission. They learned everything they had to learn half a century ago. IMO this is just another PR stunt to hide the complete lack of any meaningfull progress in manned spaceflight.
that was 40 years ago. None of the people are still involved. There was no actual manual written to provide instructions.
Incorrect. There was a complete set of recovery procedures including back-up scenario's and emergency procedures. All written down and required reading for everyone involved in any form of water/land egress training. Also updated regularly. Updated so often in fact, in the lead up to Apollo 11, that some iterations never made it to all the folks involved. Which in turn led to a little-know procedural scr*w-up when the Apollo 11 crew was extracted from the Columbia CM.
-
#14
by
Khadgars
on 18 Jul, 2017 23:47
-
Testing w/crew today in the waters off Galveston to ensure astronauts can get out of Orion safely after deep space missions atop @NASA_SLS
https://twitter.com/nasa_orion/status/885615360279404544
Emphasis mine. That is baloney. NASA d*mn well knows they can get the astronauts out safely after a deep space mission. They learned everything they had to learn half a century ago. IMO this is just another PR stunt to hide the complete lack of any meaningfull progress in manned spaceflight.
that was 40 years ago. None of the people are still involved. There was no actual manual written to provide instructions.
Incorrect. There was a complete set of recovery procedures including back-up scenario's and emergency procedures. All written down and required reading for everyone involved in any form of water/land egress training. Also updated regularly. Updated so often in fact, in the lead up to Apollo 11, that some iterations never made it to all the folks involved. Which in turn led to a little-know procedural scr*w-up when the Apollo 11 crew was extracted from the Columbia CM.
What does that have to do with Orion? That is dated to June 21 1971 and has little relevance for today. Even if this "manual" were still in-use today, it would not preclude the Egress testing performed by NASA in the Gulf of Mexico.
-
#15
by
Coastal Ron
on 19 Jul, 2017 06:24
-
Anyways, if the U.S. Navy was at near 100% utilization at relative peace-time, they would have 0 capacity to respond to any major conflict.
Our military trains to keep our country safe - until they are needed to keep our country safe.
I think NASA using the Navy to pick up the Orion is yet another legacy from Michael Griffin's "Apollo on steroids" approach. I'm sure if an analysis was done building a custom retrieval platform towed by a commercial tug would turn out to cost the U.S. Taxpayer far less.
-
#16
by
catdlr
on 21 Jul, 2017 02:25
-
NASA Tests Orion Crew Exit Plans in the Gulf of Mexico
NASA Johnson
Published on Jul 20, 2017
A NASA and Department of Defense team evaluated the techniques that will be used to make sure astronauts can exit Orion in a variety of scenarios upon splashdown after deep space missions, using the waters off the coast of Galveston, Texas, to test their procedures in July. The team used a mock-up of the spacecraft to examine how the crew will get out of Orion with assistance and alone. The testing is helping NASA prepare for Orion and Space Launch System missions with crew beginning with Exploration Mission-2 in the early 2020s.
-
#17
by
RonM
on 21 Jul, 2017 04:23
-
Note at the end of the video, Orion is being hauled out of the water by a small Coast Guard ship.
-
#18
by
Arch Admiral
on 23 Jul, 2017 23:05
-
It wasn't widely advertised, but the test of Orion being recovered in a big Navy landing ship's internal dock was pretty much a failure. The command module had a much more violent response to ocean swells than the LCUs and LCACs normally docked in these ships. It was very difficult to keep it straight on its cradle as the dock was pumped out. Simple hoisting worked much better for Apollo and Dragon and will probably be adopted for Orion too.
Note that this test was done in a flat calm, not normal open-sea conditions.
-
#19
by
woods170
on 24 Jul, 2017 18:37
-
It wasn't widely advertised, but the test of Orion being recovered in a big Navy landing ship's internal dock was pretty much a failure. The command module had a much more violent response to ocean swells than the LCUs and LCACs normally docked in these ships. It was very difficult to keep it straight on its cradle as the dock was pumped out. Simple hoisting worked much better for Apollo and Dragon and will probably be adopted for Orion too.
Note that this test was done in a flat calm, not normal open-sea conditions.
Yes. NASA had to try something new again despite having a 5 decades old procedure in hand that worked, and still works, perfectly. What a waste of money.
-
#20
by
Jim
on 24 Jul, 2017 18:53
-
It wasn't widely advertised, but the test of Orion being recovered in a big Navy landing ship's internal dock was pretty much a failure. The command module had a much more violent response to ocean swells than the LCUs and LCACs normally docked in these ships. It was very difficult to keep it straight on its cradle as the dock was pumped out. Simple hoisting worked much better for Apollo and Dragon and will probably be adopted for Orion too.
Note that this test was done in a flat calm, not normal open-sea conditions.
Yes. NASA had to try something new again despite having a 5 decades old procedure in hand that worked, and still works, perfectly. What a waste of money.
They tried doing it with a smaller ship than a carrier. They were actually trying to save money.
-
#21
by
Ike17055
on 04 Aug, 2017 00:27
-
Obviously the ocean treats the spacecraft different after a deep-space mission than it does after a measly LEO mission. Enough so that NASA will blow millions of taxpayer's money to hire a Navy amphibious combat ship and four or five hundred crew and helo squadron professionals to go recover it.
Since we aren't doing an amphibious assault in the next couple days, it really doesn't matter.
...Hmmmm. Are you SURE of that??
-
#22
by
woods170
on 04 Aug, 2017 20:03
-
It wasn't widely advertised, but the test of Orion being recovered in a big Navy landing ship's internal dock was pretty much a failure. The command module had a much more violent response to ocean swells than the LCUs and LCACs normally docked in these ships. It was very difficult to keep it straight on its cradle as the dock was pumped out. Simple hoisting worked much better for Apollo and Dragon and will probably be adopted for Orion too.
Note that this test was done in a flat calm, not normal open-sea conditions.
Yes. NASA had to try something new again despite having a 5 decades old procedure in hand that worked, and still works, perfectly. What a waste of money.
They tried doing it with a smaller ship than a carrier. They were actually trying to save money.
I was referring to hoisting the CM from the water, in stead of floating it onto a cradle. You don't need a carrier for that, nor an amphibious assault ship. And I will point out that NASA is not prevented from using non-government assets for recovery of the crew and the CM.
-
#23
by
Khadgars
on 04 Aug, 2017 23:55
-
It wasn't widely advertised, but the test of Orion being recovered in a big Navy landing ship's internal dock was pretty much a failure. The command module had a much more violent response to ocean swells than the LCUs and LCACs normally docked in these ships. It was very difficult to keep it straight on its cradle as the dock was pumped out. Simple hoisting worked much better for Apollo and Dragon and will probably be adopted for Orion too.
Note that this test was done in a flat calm, not normal open-sea conditions.
Yes. NASA had to try something new again despite having a 5 decades old procedure in hand that worked, and still works, perfectly. What a waste of money.
They tried doing it with a smaller ship than a carrier. They were actually trying to save money.
I was referring to hoisting the CM from the water, in stead of floating it onto a cradle. You don't need a carrier for that, nor an amphibious assault ship. And I will point out that NASA is not prevented from using non-government assets for recovery of the crew and the CM.
I still don't understand why you keep questioning this, this is testing. They are testing to see what works and what doesn't. Nothing wrong with what NASA is doing.