ORION launch Scrapped for Today

Cancelled for today, ATS. I guess we have to wait just a little longer.

Cape Canaveral (AFP) - The first test launch of NASA's new deep space capsule, Orion, was postponed until Friday due to wind gusts and technical issues with the rocket, the US space agency said.

After multiple aborts in the nearly three-hour launch window on Thursday, NASA decided to try again Friday beginning at 7:05 am (1205 GMT) from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Aw man!

news.yahoo.com...

a reply to: lostbook

Got up early to wait on this. I was totally bummed that it got scrapped. Missed out on seeing the laser last night too because of the damn fog.

a reply to: lostbook

There is a post-scrub news conference today at noon EST (which is about right now).

The issue that caused the launch to be scrubbed was not and issue wit the Orion Spacecraft. Rather the issue was with the Delta IV Rocket and malfunctioning valves. Not sure why the valves malfunctioned, but I wonder if it had something to do with the frequent holds caused by high hinds (those holds causing frequent ramping up and ramping down the launch systems).

The Delta IV is the launch vehicle that will be used for this test to launch the Orion Spacecraft, but when Orion becomes operational, it will be launched by a different vehicle -- the SLS, which will probably come with its own set of problems that could scrub launches.

Well there have to make sure the launch is perfect or the pussy risk adversed dip #s in congress would use any failure as a excuse to slash NASA funding more and divert that money to the Military or there own pork barrel projects and the USA will be hitching rides on Russian space craft for another decade.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Well there have to make sure the launch is perfect or the pussy risk adversed dip #s in congress would use any failure as a excuse to slash NASA funding more and divert that money to the Military or there own pork barrel projects and the USA will be hitching rides on Russian space craft for another decade.

I sure hope not......

a reply to: crazyewok

I'll never understand why two more, brand new, shuttles were never built. Surely that would have cost less than hitching a ride on Russian rockets. The shuttles couldn't do everything Orion is poised to do, but the shuttles are proven.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: crazyewok

I'll never understand why two more, brand new, shuttles were never built. Surely that would have cost less than hitching a ride on Russian rockets. The shuttles couldn't do everything Orion is poised to do, but the shuttles are proven.

Actually one of the main problems with the shuttles were the fact they were stupidly expensive.

The orginal missions they were designed for to account for that cost were mostly scraped due to the end of the cold war and NASA got left with a hugely expensive craft to maintain.

For earth to orbit missions the soyuz can do do it gor nearly a third the price and upcomeing space x for less.

Only thing the shuttle could do no one else could was hubble repair for the rest of its missions it was overkill.

Wings in space may look cool but its actually a terrible design for spacecraft. Hence why the return to capsules.

a reply to: crazyewok

It might have been overkill for the majority of missions, however they are great to have on the back burner for missions that Orion will not be capable of. I'm pretty sure the shuttles could haul more payload than Orion can, as well as capture satellites... which Orion likely cannot do.

I'm not saying a smarter design wasn't necessary to keep costs in check and to develop a platform that can go places the shuttles cannot. But I just cannot see Orion being the workhorse that the shuttles were.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: crazyewok

It might have been overkill for the majority of missions, however they are great to have on the back burner for missions that Orion will not be capable of. I'm pretty sure the shuttles could haul more payload than Orion can, as well as capture satellites... which Orion likely cannot do.

I'm not saying a smarter design wasn't necessary to keep costs in check and to develop a platform that can go places the shuttles cannot. But I just cannot see Orion being the workhorse that the shuttles were.

Thing is you dont really need large cargo holds with manned mission now.

Large cago can be sent up via large unmanned rockets.

The shuttle eas hugley expensive to justify a few niche roles.

Infact its probably cheaper in most cases now to scrap a satilite and just replace it than to pay for a single shuttle lsunc.

As for military satilites the USAF has its own unmanned shuttle.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Orion is simply the crew capsule.

NASA's launch vehicle that will eventually take Orion and other payloads into space is called the SLS -- or space launch system.

The SLS consists of a family of rockets that are currently being designed that are intended to meet the spoecifc needs of various types of missions.



No SLS launch vehicles have flown yet. The rocket that was to carry the Orion Spacecraft today was a "Delta IV Heavy". Those have flown before. When the Orion becomes operational, it will not be launched by a Delta IV, but rather by one of the new SLS Rockets.

The Block I version of the SLS will be able to lift a payload of 70 metric tons of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO). The Orion Crew capsule could be one of those payloads, and can be sent into LEO or to the Space Station, or even to the Moon. The Block IB and the Exploration Upper Stage will take heavier payloads -- possibly larger cargo, or take an Orion Capsule (with a cruise stage) to the Moon.

That larger capacity payloads Block 1B t could take a payload beyond the moon, such as to an asteroid. The shuttles could not go beyond LEO.

Plus, the 70 metric ton payload capacity is greater than the Space shuttle

The Block 1 and 1B will use boosters similar to the shuttle boosters. The first Block 1 is scheduled to be test flown in about 3 or 4 years, taking an unmanned Orion Capsule around the Moon.



The proposed Block II is much larger. It will use advanced boosters and is planned to have a LEO capability of more than 130 metric tons (which is far greater than even the mighty Saturn V). The Block II is not scheduled to have its first flight for another 10+ years, but it will be necessary to get the large payloads into orbit that will eventually be the cruise vehicle required for Mars Missions.


Wikipedia -- Space Launch System (SLS)

Thanks for the perspective. U know your stuff.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Thanks for the information. I've not read about the SLS system designed to go along with Orion. It all sounds intriguing.

From their estimates though, this thing isn't going to ready in this decade, or possibly the next. I guess the point I'm trying to get at is in regard for the short term or current tasks. I believe one shuttle cost around one billion. Then had a cost of around 400 million for a launch. We're paying Russia, I think, 70 million per seat. For the the money that we're sending to Russia for seats, NASA could have built them to maintain independence. As a tax payer, I'm okay with NASA having the funding for that. I'd be okay with NASA having the same budget as military. But that's another discussion.

With decreased funding, developing Orion along with the production of two more shuttles likely wouldn't happen. In the long run, or until the Orion program is fully operational, I still believe it would have made sense financially to have two new shuttles to sustain NASA until Orion is fully ready to go.

Sorry if my thoughts sound cluttered.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: crazyewok

I'll never understand why two more, brand new, shuttles were never built. Surely that would have cost less than hitching a ride on Russian rockets. The shuttles couldn't do everything Orion is poised to do, but the shuttles are proven.

Nasa always overcharges for everything, they burn money faster than their engines burn fuel.