Isn't the latest NASA rocket design a bit of a let down?

Question

It looks like a step back to the Apollo Rocket if you ask me. When are we going to have a real space vehicle?

Answer 1

It actualy is a return to the *successful* Apollo rocket designs, but an improvement upon them. Since the Space Shuttle design was clearly so unreliable, we shoudln't stick with it, but why reinvent the wheel when the Apollo missions were comparatively so good?

Answer 2

Yes, I think it's a letdown too. Every spacecraft design has good and bad points though. One good thing about Orion is that re-entry should be easier and safer, because its shape is less complex than the Shuttle's, and because it doesn't have to fly, just fall out of the sky. Another good thing is that it can go all the way to orbiting the moon, which the Shuttle could not do. And all the computer components will be updated by about 30 years worth of technology... that is a real major advance.

The bad thing is that the cone shape of Orion is quite inefficient for doing any real work in space. The shuttle has a big cargo bay which could hold a lab, transport materials for building the international space station, provide a platform for repairs to satellites like the Hubble telescope, and launch satellites very precisely. It was roomy and versatile. The Orion is not a convenient shape, it doesn't open up like the shuttle bay, and it has much less usable volume inside than the shuttle. It is a transport vehicle not a combination transport/research vehicle. And since we're presumably sending people to space in order to discover new things about the universe we live in, why send them in a vehicle that makes doing research more difficult?

By the way, the shuttle is NOT horribly dangerous as other responders have implied. It has run over 100 missions (the upcoming one is STS-115) with two catastrophic failures, Challenger and Columbia. The Apollo program also had 2 serious failures (Apollo 1, on the ground, and Apollo 13) in only 17 missions. Of course we need to be sure our astronauts are as safe as reasonably possible, but that task has to start with proper risk assessment rather than with hand-wringing, finger-pointing, and nostalgia.

Answer 3

The "Orion" design is very inefficient and impractical, compared to the Space Shuttle. But remember who is in the White House and who controls the government. Their goal is always to waste as much of the taxpayers' money as possible and replace good, workable ideas with absurd plans that are difficult to undo.

When we return to a sensible government, the Apollo-like charade will be shelved, and we will return to sensible development along the lines of the Space Shuttle and other re-usable winged spacecraft. Lots of proposed improvements exist that would make the shuttle more efficient and safer. It's just a matter of politics.

But don't hold your breath for the Apollo style vehicles to be rolled out. Never happen.

Answer 4

Yes it is. Despite decades of research, NASA failed to develop a fully nonexpendable system that could dramatically lower the cost of reaching space. The demand to delivery people 10 times safer than the shuttle makes it all the harder. Nature is a ***** that way sometimes, and the decision to go Apollo style was ultimately necessary. But that doesn't change the fact they failed. I just hope NASA or (more likely) private industry continues to push techological limits and comes up with something better in the more distant future.

Answer 5

In a way it is a letdown, since what we really need is the space plane, which will someday simply fly into space. But I am all for the Orion spacecraft. It is 16. 5 feet in diameter, 4 times bigger than Apollo by volume. Just go outside and draw a 16.5 foot circle and see if you are not impressed. It will accomplish volumes more space exploration than the stupid shuttle ever did, and it will take us to the Moon and Mars and maybe beyond. The shuttle launched 100 metric tonnes into orbit, but 80 tonnes was the shuttle itself!! That is really stupid in my opinion. Please read the book "Entering Space" by Dr. Robert Zubrin, PhD for a good nuts and bolts realistic engineering discussion of what it will take to get us to the stars.

Answer 6

actually,It just looks like the Apollo modules.It actually uses technology similar to the Shuttle.Besides,your forgtting the thing isn't built yet.Thats just a concept.Lockheed martin,who jsut won the contract to build it,Will probably have it's own idea of what is should look like.

Answer 7

If you don't likel the design, then don't buy it/pay for it.

Oops, I forgot that this is a government agency. You are compelled to pay for it through taxation and you have no say in what they do with your tax money. Never mind.

Answer 8

Looks can be deceiving. I'll wait to see how it performs before I pass any judgments.