Launch News Orion EFT-1 Update thread

[Urwumpe]

 

[Codz]

13 minutes to reentry.

---------- Post added at 04:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:06 PM ----------

Orion is entering the atmosphere. LOS.

 

[N_Molson]

Entry Interface, expected LOS as plasma builds up.

---------- Post added at 04:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------

Looks like the drone IR camera locked on the spacecraft !

---------- Post added at 04:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:22 PM ----------

Subsonic !

---------- Post added at 04:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:24 PM ----------

Drogues deployed !

---------- Post added at 04:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:25 PM ----------

Mains deployed !

 

[Codz]

Beautiful! Three good chutes!

 

[N_Molson]

... and correctly unreefed. That drone view is completely amazing.

 

[Codz]

Splashdown confirmed!

 

[Schmidtrock]

Splashdown!!! :hail:

 

[Codz]

Welcome home Orion!

 

[N_Molson]

Splashdown at MET+04:24 !

Wow, that was a nice one, definitively worthing the wait. :thumbup:

 

[SiberianTiger]

Well done, America! :thumbup:

 

[Codz]

US Navy Seahawk is approaching the spacecraft.

---------- Post added at 04:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:32 PM ----------

This one feels really good. A job very well done.

 

[Admiral_Ritt]

That's a beaut of a test mission. Glad nothing fouled up. Rooting for
the asteroid visitation mission.

That delta IV heavy is a very impressive sight. but I see that each
booster section has ONE engine each. So I presume that ONE booster engine failure after launch wlll lead to a mission failure.
If that is true then what if there is failure at 30 seconds before booster separation, Can the rocket be configured and would it be light enough (fuel tanks mostly empty) to continue on 2 engines? (I know the central engine
cannot be the one that fails)

In the battle between Reliability and Man_Rated factors, is it better to
go with boosters with 2 engines each, so that you can lose one engine
and continue with the mission? as an example, reconfiguring the Delta iV
heavy with six engines means that the rocket could press on with 5 out of
6 engines.

 

[Codz]

Via NASAWatch.

 

[Astro SG Wise]

YEAH ORION! Great launch! How do I post videos?

 

[Prowler901]

Congrats to NASA and the whole ORION team! A beautiful test flight. And, a big THANK YOU to ULA for providing a perfect bird to send Orion spaceward.

 

[N_Molson]

That delta IV heavy is a very impressive sight. but I see that each
booster section has ONE engine each. So I presume that ONE booster engine failure after launch wlll lead to a mission failure.
If that is true then what if there is failure at 30 seconds before booster separation, Can the rocket be configured and would it be light enough (fuel tanks mostly empty) to continue on 2 engines? (I know the central engine
cannot be the one that fails)

In the battle between Reliability and Man_Rated factors, is it better to
go with boosters with 2 engines each, so that you can lose one engine
and continue with the mission? as an example, reconfiguring the Delta iV
heavy with six engines means that the rocket could press on with 5 out of
6 engines.

Be aware that each of the 3 boosters, or CBCs (Common Booster Cores) are independent on the Delta IVH, there's not even a crossfeed. So an engine failure would certainly cause an abort, because it means a whole booster and its propellant are lost. Another reason would be asymetrical thrust. If you shut down one of the side engines, the rocket would violently spin on its yaw axis and disintegrate.

But the RS-68 have an excellent reliability record, and are really nice pieces of hi-tech.

Also note that the Delta IVH isn't, as far as I know, man-rated. The Launch Abort System was added for this test flight in order to make sure it jettisons correctly during the ascent. In fact, that test-flight is probably a good step towards man-rating for that launcher, as everything went flawlessly.

As far as I know, the first manned Orion launch will use the SLS "70 tons" (which is designed to be man-rated) for a circumlunar or lunar orbital mission profile, but we have several years before that.

 

[fsci123]

Also note that the Delta IVH isn't, as far as I know, man-rated. The Launch Abort System was added for this test flight in order to make sure it jettisons correctly during the ascent. In fact, that test-flight is probably a good step towards man-rating for that launcher, as everything went flawlessly.

As far as I know, the first manned Orion launch will use the SLS "70 tons" (which is designed to be man-rated) for a circumlunar or lunar orbital mission profile, but we have several years before that.

I remember reading that one of SLS alternatives is a delta if heavy. I was really hoping that his launch could force government officials to reconsider using the delta.


As for the next mission, let's hope the next president dosent slash funding for the moonshot. I would really like to see another moon landing before I get to old to celebrate. But I have a feeling that if nasa dosent do it, space x will.

 

[statickid]

I would like another moon landing solely for the video footage quality that would now be possible.

 

[Astro SG Wise]

I may never forget the words that the narrator said as Orion splashed down. (Paraphrased) "America, there's your spacecraft."

 

[N_Molson]

But I have a feeling that if nasa dosent do it, space x will.

NASA is not a company, its the National space agency of the USA... It is geared towards space exploration, and, again, that will always be an extremely expensive activity. That's Science. You can have private companies behind to (try to) make some profit on those discoveries, but their role can't be exploration, because it doesn't pay and only a (big) nation can sustain the enormous expenses required. I think that a lot of people are completely misunderstanding the point of SpaceX (and Musk is responsible for this, but he clearly managed to raise public support).

I would like another moon landing solely for the video footage quality that would now be possible.

Yeah, I was thinking while watching the mission that the quality of the images was amazing (and live !) in comparison of the Apollo era. It's definitively one of the areas where technology boomed. Now you can almost follow a mission like you would watch an Orbiter replay. The drone view showing the parachutes deployement live was especially impressive. Soon it will be like in a movie but live, and they'll need a director to select the right cameras and viewing angles at the right moment in real time to maximize the dramatic effect. Or you will even be able to browse through the views from your TV/computer :blink: