Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Regressive----the word for ocean/parachute landings

Donald L. Gilleland: SpaceX Dragon: a worthy successor to space shuttles? Shouldn't we expect more from the next generation?
Donald L. Gilleland, of Suntree, is a veteran and former corporate director of public affairs for General Dynamics Corp.
Posted June 27, 2012 at 4 a.m.
DiscussPrintAAA

PHOTO BY UNCREDITED

In this image provided by NASA, the SpaceX Dragon commercial cargo craft is grappled by the Canadarm2 robotic arm at the International Space Station May 25. Expedition 31 Flight Engineers Don Pettit and Andre Kuipers grappled Dragon and used the robotic arm to berth Dragon to the Earth-facing side of the station's Harmony node. Dragon became the first commercially developed space vehicle to be launched to the station. (AP Photo/NASA)
Everyone seems excited over the success of SpaceX's Dragon capsule. Looks like we may once more have a way to get our supplies and astronauts to the International Space Station. Given time we may even be able to develop a new age commercial shuttle to take our astronauts to more distant planets.

But, before we get all giddy about the first success of the SpaceX Dragon, let's look at the regressive history Dragon represents. Our first manned spaceflight was Freedom 7, which carried American astronaut Alan Shepard to an altitude of just more than 116 miles in 1961.

That was followed by five more manned space flights using spacecraft, all of which looked like a bullet and all of which had to land by parachute in the Pacific Ocean.

Twenty years later, in 1981, we entered the era of the Space Shuttle. It was the only winged manned spacecraft to have achieved orbit and then returned to land like an airplane. These space vehicles were a source of great national pride. They still are.

Space Shuttle Atlantis ended a remarkable chapter in space exploration and communities across the United States will proudly display these shuttles until they become relics.

Unfortunately, their premature retirement left us with no way to resupply the International Space Station without piggybacking on the Russian Soyuz capsules. NASA has had to rent space on the Russian vehicles, at nearly $63 million per seat, to get our astronauts to the space station. There was no other way to get there.

Which raises the question: Shouldn't we have developed an alternative way to get to the space station before we retired our space shuttles? Why couldn't we have continued using these magnificent machines until we developed suitable 21st century replacements — and saved a lot of jobs in the process.

Just as relevant, why didn't we start building replacement vehicles 10 years ago? What happened to our national pride in the space program? Where were the scientists with a vision for the future? Regrettably these are now moot questions.

Retirement of the space shuttles opened a market for commercial development of space vehicles. SpaceX's Dragon capsule is the result. Its successful resupply mission to the International Space Station opens the door to further development of a system to deliver astronauts into the space environment.

But, take a close look at the Dragon capsule. Doesn't it bear a close resemblance to our early 1960s-era prototype space capsules that had to land in the Pacific Ocean?

Sure, the Dragon capsule undoubtedly has 21st century technology throughout, but doesn't it bear a strange resemblance to the 50-year-old look of the Mercury and Apollo capsules? And in the 21st century shouldn't we be able to do better than to drop our astronauts into the ocean?

A "Dragon 2.0" spacecraft is expected to do propulsive soft landings, but that is a distant dream. I'm as thrilled as the next person about regaining our national dominance in space, but I was expecting something a bit grander than a large bullet shot into space and parachuted into the Pacific Ocean again.

I was hoping to see something that resembled the sleek look of the British Concorde.

© 2012 TCPalm. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

DiscussPrint

More from TC Palm

2 dogs dead, owner injured after bees attack in Palm City
Port St. Lucie worker at Jensen Beach restaurant confesses to voiding transactions, pocketing $10,000 over 6 months
Vero Beach is No. 1 for foreclosed beachfront bargains, RealtyTrac says
Faiella, Berger argue as Port St. Lucie Council approves Novick's contract
Longtime Vero Beach rug dealer pleads guilty in drug, illegal imports case
Also in Guest ColumnsMore
James L. Fisher: A look at seven decades of media and sport shows how far U.S. culture has degraded from sophistication, sportsmanship
Margo E. Bane Woodacre, Steffany Bane Carey: Buckle up for the off-to-college roller-coaster ride! Tips on how to make the process much better
Stanford Erickson: The United States continues to elect Mama's Boys as presidents; why is that? What if Obama is re-elected?
From around the webSponsored Content
Why You Should Hurry to Take Advantage of Current Economic Situation
  (Bank of America Merrill Lynch)
11 Public Universities with the Worst Graduation Rates
(The Fiscal Times)
Oil sands innovation: Greater efficiency, fewer emissions, more supply
(ExxonMobil's Perspectives)
ATM error costs BofA big time
(Bankrate.com)
10 Things NOT to Say to a Person with Migraines
(HealthCentral.com)
[What's this?]
Comments » 3Hide
June 27, 2012
7:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Reply to this post
HarryPitts writes:
"What happened to our national pride in the space program? "

Good question.
I guess we need to settle for a pride in corporatism.
Privatization seems to be the salvation, according to one political ideology, viewpoint.
I recall the saying, the business of government is business.
So, if you buy into that, the next logical step is the systematic removal of government from all functions other than the few specifically held in the Constitution, Bill of Rights.
Wo-Hoo and dang right is a popular opinion, expressed in the LTE and Guest Columnist pages.
With that in place, we would not have had a national space program to lament.
For me, a chanting of Space-X, we`re number one is just not the same.

June 27, 2012
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Reply to this post
clarklindsey#205273 writes:
By far, the greatest barrier to practical spaceflight is its high cost. Successful technologies usually start expensive and with limited capabilities but through competition, multiple cycles of improvements, and a survival of the fittest process, eventually become affordable and highly capable. The success of the Dragon shows that this process is finally starting to happen with human spaceflight systems.

A NASA study found that the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket had been developed at a cost 3 to 10 times less than if it had been developed in the standard NASA manner (i.e. NASA design built via cost-plus sub-contracts with paper-work & man-power heavy NASA oversight). The same would certainly be true of the Dragon, which has cost only a few hundred million dollars to develop. NASA will have spent at least $10B on the Orion spacecraft before it flies. The Orion's capabilities in no way justify 20x higher cost. The Dragon, e.g., is also capable of deep space missions.

The current Dragon is not the final answer. There are multiple competitors, including Boeing's capsule design and Sierra Nevada's lifting body, that are competing with it. Major upgrades are also planned for the Dragon such as powered landing on the ground rather than splashdowns. A fully reusable Falcon 9 is also in development.

The Dragon's flight to the ISS is tremendously exciting because it signals the start of an era of steadily decreasing space transport costs, which in turn means we are on course to become truly spacefaring.

June 27, 2012
1:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reply to this post
Krebdj writes:
Please listen to Clark Lindsey. It pains me to see fellow space enthusiasts so confused about this at a time when we are finally on the verge of making real progress on this frontier for the first time in decades.

Make no mistake: the Shuttle was the real step backward. I know it looked "cool", but pause and think about this. We used to be able to go to the moon! Then, for thirty years, we were stuck in Low Earth Orbit (which is is much deeper in Earth's gravity well). In what sense was this a step forward? Think about the Shuttle's safety record. Look at the numbers for cost/pound to orbit. Again, it seems "cool" to land on a runway, but how does that matter compared to this incredible shrinking of capabilites? Remember, the Apollo program (which is actually something to be proud of) used ablative shielding, parachutes, and a water landing. SpaceX has returned to this because it *makes sense*. It is good engineering.

I think a lot of people are nervous because NASA's in house capabilities are at a long time low. However I think it is a mistake to equate America with the American government. Spacex is an American company that manufactures it's goods on our shores and does a better job for less money than the Russians or the Europeans. You have every reason to be prouder than ever.

Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Username * Don't have an account? Sign up for a new account


Password * Can't remember? Reset your password


Comment




Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.


Most Popular
Viewed Commented Emailed
Law enforcement officers raid Vero Beach pain clinic on 21st Street near U.S. 1 | Photo gallery, video
Updated 6/27/2012 at 3:29 p.m. 0 comments
St. Lucie County school employees to see 3 percent pay reduction
Published 6/26/2012 at 10:34 p.m. 55 comments
Faiella, Berger argue as Port St. Lucie Council approves Novick's contract
Updated 6/25/2012 at 11:16 p.m. 66 comments
Martin County School Board attorney seeks 'employment separation'
Published 6/26/2012 at 7:59 p.m. 43 comments
Martin County School Board OKs teacher contract with 'step' salary increase
Updated 6/26/2012 at 9:13 p.m. 26 comments
Photo Galleries

Law enforcement officers raid Vero… Indian River County Adopt A Pet New Sailfish Splash Waterpark opening…
Weather
Currently 36-Hour Your Photos

Currently
88°
Overcast
Wind: W 15mph
Today
89°
72°
More Weather »
Calendar
WEDNESDAYJUN27
THURSDAYJUN28
FRIDAYJUN29
MOREBROWSEIcon
Rock And Roll Band Camp
Vintage Guitar Closet, 7 SE Osceola St Stuart, Fl 34994 772-237-6580
9 a.m.
Opening Summit: State of the Region
Old School Square, Cultural Arts Center, 51 North Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach
9 a.m.
"Brush Heads" with Ginny Piech Street
Art Mundo Center for Creative Expression
9 a.m.
Wednesday Tea Dance
Save The First Dance, 881 N.E. Jensen Beach Blvd., Jensen Beach
2 p.m.
Support Group
HarborPlace Retirement Resort and Assisted Living Facility
3:30 p.m.
More Events »

Business Directory
Search Browse
Business: e.g. salon

Location: e.g. Stuart, FL



Powered by Local.com

No comments:

Post a Comment