Poll

CST-100 or Dragon 2? - Which of the two spacecraft will carry out the first successful CREWED test flight? (Successful defined as achieving one complete orbit and returning its crew unharmed back to Earth).

CST-100
20 (17.1%)
Dragon 2
97 (82.9%)

Total Members Voted: 117


Author Topic: CST-100 or Dragon 2 - Which will be the first successful CREWED test flight?  (Read 3468 times)

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 1056
Just to vote ..and for old times sake, I'll say Boeing

I dont really think that NASA cares who goes first...and I dont think Boeing cares either.  First is "nice" but no one remembers who flew the first large turbojet in commercial service.  :)

I would like Chris to get his place in history.  he is a good guy and a good pilot...but so far it doesnt look like that is the way it is going to turn out  see :)

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10440
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7291
  • Likes Given: 5091
Just to vote ..and for old times sake, I'll say Boeing
I am shocked. I am sure the rest of us are too

Quote
First is "nice" but no one remembers who flew the first large turbojet in commercial service.  :)
I thought you did. Or something similarly awesome.

Quote
I dont really think that NASA cares who goes first...and I dont think Boeing cares either. 
Nasa:False. NASA is not a monolith, it's factional. I am sure there is a large faction that cares very much that SpaceX "gets its comeuppance" and will make sure to keep throwing up bureaucratic roadblocks to make sure it comes out that Boeing wins. 

Boeing: False as well.. The Boeing CEO has a big mouth and has written some checks his company can't cover with his noise about Mars. So of course Boeing wants to win. Don't try to fool anybody.
« Last Edit: 09/16/2018 03:03 AM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline JH

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 279
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: UAV, I've seen the term "Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle (RPAV)" or something similar, used to avoid the gender bias.

Side question: Why change the acronym? Unmanned and Uncrewed both start with a U. I'm genuinely curious.

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 1056

I am shocked. I am sure the rest of us are too

so I assume you were equally as shocked that I said right now it doesnt look like Boeing is going to win ?


Quote
I thought you did. Or something similarly awesome.

thanks for making my point :) few remember.  I would have loved to have seen the Comet fly first in the late 40's but mom and dad were children. so I have to settle for grainy black and white videos




Quote
Nasa:False. NASA is not a monolith, it's factional. I am sure there is a large faction that cares very much that SpaceX "gets its comeuppance" and will make sure to keep throwing up bureaucratic roadblocks to make sure it comes out that Boeing wins. 

then you must be equally sure that since NASA is "factional" there is a large faction that cares very much that SpaceX flies first...

I would be curious what "bureaucratic roadblocks you think that SpaceX is getting that Boeing is not.  So far what "I" have seen is that NASA and all the independent audits have been equally harsh and to a large extent "equally" bureaucratic.

but there is of course a lot at stake here. MUCH MUCH more than just bragging rights. something a lot dont seem to grasp.

 If there is a failure and people die in the initial years, it could be 1) catastrophic for commercial efforts such as commercial crew and cargo and 2) would validate the judgment of MOST of NASA which I am quite sure  wants both companies to fail 3) kill any emerging political support in the Congress. 4) give Congresspeople from NASA states a big hammer to bang with. 

it is my judgment that "bureaucratic " NASA has no real interest in seeing commercial efforts succeed, this is why the lunar "thing" is being more or less planned to be "station acquisition and deployment part duex".  Maybe you think otherwise?



Quote
Boeing: False as well.. The Boeing CEO has a big mouth and has written some checks his company can't cover with his noise about Mars. So of course Boeing wants to win. Don't try to fool anybody.

Oh that top gun phrase (wonder if it makes it into the remake) :)

My suggestion is that Dennis doesnt think anyone is going to Mars anytime soon (a "thought" that I happen to agree with) and kind of is expressing that in his sentiments.  He has a kind of sarcastic bent about him (in my opinion)

just think how glorious it will be when Dennis is proven wrong (and me as well )


I would like to see Chris make  history...he is a good guy and a great pilot.  as I said earlier, it doesnt look like its going that way.  but lets see.  I wish both "safe flights"

« Last Edit: 09/16/2018 08:10 PM by TripleSeven »

Offline RobW1

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 20
I don't think "manned" was ever really OK.

A few years ago I might have agreed with you, but gender issues that have been suppressed for a very long time are getting more and more attention.

"Manned" implicitly excludes women. It sets the tone that women aren't good enough to be astronauts, scientists, etc... There's a huge problem with women not being well represented in nearly every field of scientific study. There's a major gender gap in employment in almost every profession, along with a significant pay gap. Women are clearly not operating on a level playing field and never have been.

It does you no harm to include women in your language. It certainly does harm to exclude them.

For the record, I do think such archaic / implicitly biased verbiage should be corrected. Re: UAV, I've seen the term "Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle (RPAV)" or something similar, used to avoid the gender bias.

The mods here are excellent, thank goodness.

The term "manned" is gender-neutral. It was derived from the Latin word for "hand", and basically means "controlled by hand" (which has, until recently, required a human onboard). A good, and related, parallel is the Spanish expression "mano a mano", which gets used colloquially in English to mean "man to man" (usually in a "let's fight" sense) but which actually means "hand to hand". It is about as gender-specific as, say, any French noun - such nouns having an arbitrary "gender" assigned to them. The fact that the French word for "cat" is "masculine" does not preclude the existence of female cats, or cast judgement on the worth of female cats, or anything of the sort.

If you want to examine and correct gender imbalances in employment, a better thing to do would be to examine exactly why comparatively fewer women seem to choose careers in engineering, physics or related fields, rather than reading gender bias into language where none actually exists - and exercises in examining and correcting gender imbalance should be undertaken with care.

Here in Australia our curriculum designers have decided to try to correct the gender imbalance in the "hard" sciences by taking steps to make them more appealing to girls - or so they think. In the process they have effectively ruined the subjects they have touched in this way, and also apparently indicated that they believe girls are turned off by the calculational aspects of these subjects, or can't handle it. For instance, the physics curriculum for the final years of high school in my state has essentially become a sociology course. Students get too many questions on the social applications of technology rather than the problem solving side which is what physics should be about. One example from the curriculum document: "Students will process information to comment on Einstein's and Planck's competing views on whether science research is affected by social and political forces." This nonsense is not physics! At least one of the top universities in my state now assumes that its first-year physics students have essentially seen no actual physics at all in high school. I've tutored three students in high school physics, including one girl, and all of them hated this side of it. They want the real stuff.

Anyway, more on-topic. I voted SpaceX Dragon 2, but really who knows? It seems that the projected order of the first manned flight changes once or twice each year. Whichever one "wins", I hope that both have relatively trouble-free first flights and both spacecraft rack up successful careers.

The term "manned" is gender-neutral. It was derived from the Latin word for "hand", and basically means "controlled by hand" (which has, until recently, required a human onboard). A good, and related, parallel is the Spanish expression "mano a mano", which gets used colloquially in English to mean "man to man" (usually in a "let's fight" sense) but which actually means "hand to hand". It is about as gender-specific as, say, any French noun - such nouns having an arbitrary "gender" assigned to them.

I'm sorry, and this is OT, but I've studied latin for 5 years, I'm very passionate about etymology and researching the roots of our current words, and I can easily tell that this is merda bovis.

The etymology for 'manned' is as easy as it can get. Every dictionary will tell you as much. What are your sources?

On topic: I voted D2, because I feel SpaceX's seriousness and competence in the certification process is underestimated by many here.
Failure is not only an option, it's the only way to learn.
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the custody of fire" - Gustav Mahler

Offline EnigmaSCADA

  • Member
  • Posts: 68
  • Earth
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 0
So, about the flights, I think it will be Dragon but I wouldn't at all be surprised if it's Starliner, I have no "preference" and will be happy as hell for the first AND the second when they happen. I do think it will be close, maybe <4 months apart.

I will be extremely disappointed, no, furious, if it ever comes to be known that government employees sandbagged one, or pulled strings for another over such a thing. Sentimentality or whatever the flag on the ISS, are you kidding? If things like that drive the schedule & decisions at NASA the whole agency should be disbanded & those involved ruthlessly, and publicly, shamed for eternity.


The off topic part: Whew, just read through this one... Man, surprised at all the hand-wringing over grammar -  ie. "manned". Anyone that's deterred from their dream over such a thing would never amount to anything anyway, there are way bigger, and more overt obstacles than a completely benign word to get past. For those who aren't interested in making a living in the area and just feel it's somehow exclusionary or offensive, my prognosis for you is far sadder, you are doomed to a life of a victimhood that paradoxically you gravitate toward or feel is somehow virtuous. Get over yourselves.


Offline tyrred

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 187
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 433
Voted Crew Dragon 2 - because I'm totally biased.  Boeing has become too big to fail.

Edit for posterity
« Last Edit: 09/17/2018 10:44 PM by tyrred »

Offline whitelancer64

Re: UAV, I've seen the term "Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle (RPAV)" or something similar, used to avoid the gender bias.

Side question: Why change the acronym? Unmanned and Uncrewed both start with a U. I'm genuinely curious.

IMO "uncrewed" implies it could be flown with a crew. "Remotely Piloted" also is far more accurate, way too many people think these pilot-less aircraft are flying on their own.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10440
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7291
  • Likes Given: 5091
(mod) Manned vs. Crewed? That discussion is over. Drop the stick and back away from the dead equine carcass slowly.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline SimonFD

I voted Boeing, as they've dealt with NASA for far longer than SpaceX have, are aware of their factions and foibles, AND know how to manipulate them. 

<caveat>I did this with a "mahoosive cynic" hat on so may not be accurate ;) </caveat>
Mrs Doyle: "What would you say to a cup of tea, Father?"
Father Jack: "FECK OFF, CUP!"

Offline AS_501

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 0
I'm with jbenton.  Space-X goes first because of its operational experience with Falcon 9 and Dragon cargo as an integrated system.  Space-X could add to the visibility and drama of this flight by launching during the Apollo 11 anniversary period (liftoff on July 16!).

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
Yes, please change "manned" in the question to "crewed"

It's a gender neutral term, it doesn't take away from or add to the scope of the question, and it hurts NO ONE AT ALL for our language to be inclusive. It may even be helpful, since there's no implication of excluding women. Frankly I think it's even more important because there IS, in fact, a woman involved in this context. Sunita Williams.

except that the term "manned" is also gender neutral... just as is "one giant leap for MANKIND." 

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
Yes, please change "manned" in the question to "crewed"

It's a gender neutral term, it doesn't take away from or add to the scope of the question, and it hurts NO ONE AT ALL for our language to be inclusive. It may even be helpful, since there's no implication of excluding women. Frankly I think it's even more important because there IS, in fact, a woman involved in this context. Sunita Williams.

Does NASA not still operate a "manned spaceflight center?" or has that been subjected to the gender politics of the era as well?

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
Really tough call as this can easily go either way.
Spacex seems ahead as far as the rocket and reentry systems go but Boeing seems to have a better handle on the details.
Not details, paperwork.

not this same old "powerpoint spacecraft" tripe again. you are at least three years or so out of date, if in fact, it ever had any real truth to begin with...

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
I voted Dragon 2 will carry crew first.

My reasoning is based on the progress that SpaceX and Boeing have showed, and not based on other factors (i.e. who I wish would be first). More specifically, the engine test anomaly that the Starliner had in June is going to give SpaceX some breathing room for their first flight.

...except that we really do not know enough detail about the anomaly to reach such a conclusion. Without understanding the seriousness of the valve issue, or how far along a fix was when it was revealed, there is simply not enough data to reach a conclusion, only an assumption.

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
CST-100 with Fergie to "capture the flag" he left at ISS when he commanded the final Shuttle flight STS-135. NASA will milk the PR value...

I voted for Dragon, but have long harbored a suspicion that NASA would put their thumbs on the scale to get this outcome.
Perhaps this “symmetry” with Ferguson is an indication of which way NASA thinks the “race” will go.
(Any cynicism about NASA is hard earned on my part.)

NASA will go with whomever they have confidence in being ready, which is part objective, but part subjective. A year ago, I would say they gave indications of being more "comfortable" with Old Space, but increasingly we see that New Space is winning over skeptics.

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 8
I'm betting D2 makes the first MANNED flight for reasons already given by earlier posters.

I'm hoping neither vehicle ever makes a CREWED flight, since if the people inside one of these highly automated vehicles ever need to serve as crew it probably means something has gone badly wrong.

well we could refer to them as "payload"...but if we still  test flew monkeys we might have to differentiate it as "living payload".otherwise we risk  incurring the wrath of the pro-monkey factions...but that would then be the same as people, so we need yet another term...but then again, "Human payload" is pretty insulting to highly-trained astronauts...mmm. how about we just stick with what worked well for decades and say, "manned."

Offline Chris Bergin

Yes, please change "manned" in the question to "crewed"

It's a gender neutral term, it doesn't take away from or add to the scope of the question, and it hurts NO ONE AT ALL for our language to be inclusive. It may even be helpful, since there's no implication of excluding women. Frankly I think it's even more important because there IS, in fact, a woman involved in this context. Sunita Williams.

Does NASA not still operate a "manned spaceflight center?" or has that been subjected to the gender politics of the era as well?

I think it may have something to do with women astronauts. Let's not have posts on this, it's embarrassing. It's crewed. Anyone who doesn't like it can go on "Should be in the kitchen, not flying in space . com"

Offline whitelancer64

Yes, please change "manned" in the question to "crewed"

It's a gender neutral term, it doesn't take away from or add to the scope of the question, and it hurts NO ONE AT ALL for our language to be inclusive. It may even be helpful, since there's no implication of excluding women. Frankly I think it's even more important because there IS, in fact, a woman involved in this context. Sunita Williams.

Does NASA not still operate a "manned spaceflight center?" or has that been subjected to the gender politics of the era as well?

For the record, it was renamed, it has been the Johnson Space Center (JSC) since 1973.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Tags: