I was onboard USS ANCHORAGE for the Orion exploratory Flight 1 recovery. I watched Orion splashdown and we pulled her into our well deck. I was part of the team trained to ensure the capsule did not sustain damage from fire or regular ship board movements
@aryanmohalik46952 жыл бұрын
oo i saw the the video in youtube
@DARisse-ji1yw4 жыл бұрын
Mercury & Gemini get no respect, but perfected the tech needed by Apollo to get to the moon.
@luciusvorenus94454 жыл бұрын
Especially, Gemini. Gusmobile gets no love
@DucNguyen-pl8zg4 жыл бұрын
Lot of respect from me.
@brendandaly62044 жыл бұрын
Riiiiiiight good on u
@jerminnigor40954 жыл бұрын
Gemini was a sexy craft imo
@DARisse-ji1yw4 жыл бұрын
@@jerminnigor4095 Agena thought so too !
@DARisse-ji1yw4 жыл бұрын
Forks & knives haven't changed much in centuries. The basic shapes are forms that follow function. The cone capsule works.
@richardclingempeel17824 жыл бұрын
Amen ! "If it ain't broke, don't fix it !"
4 жыл бұрын
SpaceX: "Give me a spoon."
@inemanja4 жыл бұрын
@ that "spoon" exploded last year. "forks and knifes" couldn't explode
@cursedcliff75624 жыл бұрын
@@inemanjaWhat
@inemanja4 жыл бұрын
@@cursedcliff7562 read the previous comments. dragon contains hypergolic fuels in landing phase - apollo and orion ditch all "escape hardware during the ascent". ok?
@beachboardfan95444 жыл бұрын
316 Cubic feet!! Any NYC native should be more than comfortable in that thing!
@RobynHarris4 жыл бұрын
Beach&BoardFan Yeah, but you need one point twenty-one gigawatts to power the air conditioner in a NYC Summer.
@beachboardfan95444 жыл бұрын
😆
@Doones514 жыл бұрын
for 6 months in a car with your 3 buddies? NY'ers would kill each other long before then.
@xiaoka4 жыл бұрын
If a cozy NYC studio apartment has 8’ ceilings then it’s probably around 1600-2400 cu ft...
@richycartels35073 жыл бұрын
Know that when you said roomy capsule, you are basing it on "cubic" feet...meaning measuring upwards as well, "not" just side to side space as in "square" feet. Orion capsule is just slightly wider in diameter then Apollo capsule...the extra room comes in leaving out the 1960's computer's and switches of the Apollo capsule. The reason for NASA going back to Apollo shape/design is because so they can use the emergency abort system of Apollo....that of which the crew didn't have designed into the Space Shuttle fleet, resulted into the fatal Challenger crew of seven(7) to needlessly all loose their life on takes-off in 1996.
@sewashburn05294 жыл бұрын
50+ years later and we still don't have a moonbase like in Space: 1999. What a disappointment that we haven't effectively built on the foundation that was laid in the 1960s.
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
@J Calhoun Wasn't it Nixon who took the greenback off the gold standard?
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
@J Calhoun Yeah, OK you're one of them. I get it. Everyone is entitled to their own idea of when history began.
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
@J Calhoun I lived through those times too and you have no idea what my politics are or if I have any. Having said that, why don't you be my teacher? Please tell me what exactly it was that Carter did that is "the root cause of most of our current middle east problems". Also, please define "our" in this context.
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
@J Calhoun Thank you for going on record for all to see. That's all I need.
@javierderivero92994 жыл бұрын
I have to blame scientists ...they haven't been able during the last 60 years to figure out how to escape gravity at reasonable prices....just now, during the last 10 years) the mix of new technology ( computers, new material,etc), entrepreneurs (Bezos, Musk, Branson, etc) and NASA new policy have reverse the previous trend ...others countries like China, Europe India etc have profited of new advances...but we had to wait more than 50 years
@MEugeneDavis4 жыл бұрын
Dude, I'm the son of one of the guys who built the F-1 engines. I have touched one, when I was 10. My dad was some sort of big wig in the factory. He never called himself anything but a Lead Man, but he had a design change suggestion that was used and he met Werner Von Braun. He worked at the Canoga Park Rocketdyne complex. The Apollo program financed my childhood.
@MEugeneDavis4 жыл бұрын
@@dks13827 because they lost the plans. And my dad is gone.
@StarshipTrooper4 жыл бұрын
a couple of errors in the video: number 1: nasa was directed to go to the moon in 2017 not 2019, 2019 was when they accelerated those goals number 2: EFT-1 was in 2014 not 2012
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
thank you for spotting this. I covered a lot of ground and sometimes things slip through the cracks. I need to find some reliable fact-checkers to work with.
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
I corrected these issues in the caption file. thanks again for pointing this out!
@eliharman4 жыл бұрын
NASA was directed to go to the moon in 2004. SLS/Artemis is pretty much just a reboot of Ares. Even in 2004, the plan was to not actually do anything until 2020.
@StarshipTrooper4 жыл бұрын
Brandon Smythe ? I just spotted errors in the video, not like I said that I could do better
@StarshipTrooper4 жыл бұрын
Eli Harman not really, that plan was to go the ISS by 2015 and then when the Ares V entered operation , launch the Orion 13 mission and Ares V rocket with Altair and dock in orbit and then use the EDS to go to TLI and then land. Ares V was barely funded and Altair was never funded, the only thing that really got funding is the ISS part since that was nearer in the future. When constellation was announced, the moon return was 16 years in the future. Now when Artemis was announced, the moon return was 5 years in the future and now we got a fully functional moon rocket, moon capsule and 600 million dollars of funding for the lunar lander. The approach is different as well. Constellation had ISS involved and 2 rockets. Artemis does not use ISS and uses 1 rocket. Artemis builds a lunar space station around the moon while constellation was similar to Apollo
@anthonyhunt7014 жыл бұрын
Apollo 9?................Can't forget the awesome job done by McDivitt, Scott & Schweikart!
@AdmiralPreparedness4 жыл бұрын
During the explanation of the Apollo spacecraft heat shield, the video showed the Space Shuttle Thermal Protection System Ceramic Tile coming out of a high temperature furnace. The Apollo Heat Shield was hand made from a honeycomb assembly with a heat ablative material injected into each honeycomb tube by workers. It was designed to burn away taking the heat along with it.
@kevinb3812 Жыл бұрын
Right you are... and the Orion uses very similar ablative material on it's heat shield as well!
@machia07054 жыл бұрын
Mercury Gemini Apollo Orion Safe, proven shape.
@starleighpersonal4 жыл бұрын
Soviets/Russians:hold my beer
@SnowboardScientist3 жыл бұрын
And Artemis?
@winstoncantwait1023 жыл бұрын
@@SnowboardScientist Orion is the crew module of the SLS and the SLS is a part of the Artemis program
@David-in2xt3 жыл бұрын
they're the first four planets rocky like ours.
@Republic3D3 жыл бұрын
Soyuz, Dragon, Crew Dragon, Starliner.
@jmstudios4574 жыл бұрын
Someone who gives Orion the attention it deserves. I feel most spaceflight youtubers gloss over project artemis altogether.
@_mikolaj_4 жыл бұрын
Sadly most youtubers preffer juicy bit fake clickbaits than amazing things
@_mikolaj_4 жыл бұрын
@@cin806 you are talking only about phase 1. 2020-2024. Meanwhile there is also much more interesting phase 2, including plasma powered DSS. Lets be honest, if SpaceX will not adapt, plasma propulsion will throw starship off the market
@jmstudios4574 жыл бұрын
@@cin806 It's not that I don't like starship. It's just that if moon exploration doesn't turn a hardy profit than nope
@badtrekee43484 жыл бұрын
They are canceling the Artemis program keep sucking Boeing off
@badtrekee43484 жыл бұрын
@@cin806 Its being canceled so Boeing can keep milking NASA dry with its job program SLS= Shelby launch scam
@Kufstein74 жыл бұрын
Great vid!! I go Orion. Much respect to Mercury, Gemini and Apollo of course👍🏾
@Nottsboy244 жыл бұрын
Yup 👌 Apollo lunar module is my favourite spacecraft though ☺
@keco1854 жыл бұрын
How could anyone be comfortable going to mars in Orion? That thing is tiny for an extended mission
@Dr.TJ_Eckleburg4 жыл бұрын
I believe for the Mars mission it would actually have an additional module for living space.
@DemoR4 жыл бұрын
This feels almost exactly like a promotional video straight from NASA, but with more depth. Amazing work!!!
@traviswinch45364 жыл бұрын
I just found this channel. I really enjoyed the comparison between the two capsules. A small thing I noticed was at 12:41 when talking about the ablative heat shields made for the capsules from the 60's you showed the silicon based cube tiles opposed to the pain-in-the-ass resin based heat shields that were actually used. Great job on the video.
@xworkerbee4 жыл бұрын
You omitted talking about getting astronauts safely thru the Van Allen belts. This has been a primary concern of NASA's dating back to the Gemini missions.
@xworkerbee4 жыл бұрын
@Supercede Good! Runnin With The Devil is a good start.
@patrickmeyer28024 жыл бұрын
Quick thing. You were showing space shuttle heat tiles while talking about ablative heat shields. The space shuttle's heat shields were non-ablative. They just absorbed, transferred, and radiated the heat, they didn't burn away.
@achterlijkeidioten4 жыл бұрын
Just a thought: Apollo should never have been cancelled. It would have given access to the moon for decades, the development and continuation of Skylab would have been a breeze, no need for ISS or the Space Shuttle. No need to hitch a ride on the Soyuz for the past almost ten years. Apollo could then easily have been developed into Constellation, with enhanced capabilities. A lot of time and money was wasted in the past 50 years due to continuously changing goals and politics.
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
It's a sad thing
@rykbrown18934 жыл бұрын
100% agree! As cool as the space shuttle was, it was a complete waste of money. Had the Apollo program continued, we'd have a full on colony on the moon by now, and probably be exploring Mars as well.
@keiththorpe95714 жыл бұрын
Great video, however, one correction. Max temps that the ablative heat shield on Apollo CMs had to contend with were around 5000 degrees F., not 25000 degrees.
@paulmoffat93064 жыл бұрын
US got to the Moon in only 9 years, from a start of NO maned spaceflights at all, in an era of slide rules, mechanical calculators, computers that took up entire floors of a building, and hundreds of manual draftsmen. Today it is almost 10 years since ending a maned spaceflight system, and STILL no new flights have happened yet, in an era of super computers, CAD design, worldwide communications, etc, despite having DECADES of experience. Meanwhile, Russia has plodded along with essentially the same hardware for 20 years, and only pauses of a MONTH or 2 when an accident happened, and has continuous upgrades. The US goes into 'shock withdrawal' of a period of 1-2 YEARS when there is an accident.(US is RUN by Lawyers)
@thetommoody4 жыл бұрын
Yes Paul, all good points but you're missing the absolutely largest point here...there is NO contemporaneous race to beat the Russians to the moon as there was in the 1960's. If you believe that this country was driven by this ridiculously idealistic goal from JFK to further science and technology to land a man on the moon by the end of the 1960's then you've really not been paying attention. We went to the moon and spent the appropriate amount of money simply and clearly to beat the Russians and when we did, we slowly and meticulously dismantled the manned spaceflight program (yes I do realize the benefit of the Shuttle program). Project Orion and Artemis are certainly lofty goals but please pardon my skepticism until we see results.
@YDDES4 жыл бұрын
You willfully ”forget” to take the enormously decreased funds into consideration.
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
In my latest episode, I pit Starliner and Crew Dragon head to heard. A must watch!!! 🐉🚀 kzbin.info/www/bejne/qJOlimSNbMaFppI
@davidt80874 жыл бұрын
How many stupid ads will you put man? Adblocked
@inemanja4 жыл бұрын
@@davidt8087 are you a patron?
@allangibson84944 жыл бұрын
It doesn't look like Boeing will be going to the ISS this year due to serious software errors. The 737Max will be in the air before Starliner gets another unmanned run.
@powerfulstrong56733 жыл бұрын
I don't see any difference between Orion capsule and Apollo Command Service module. Orion capsule is the old technology of the Apollo program!
@frankperkins8100 Жыл бұрын
That was outstanding. The first full explanation on the new spacecraft I've seen.
@phoenixrising45734 жыл бұрын
Ares I was not cancelled because it was overtime and budget... It was cancelled, because like the shuttle, it was dangerous, and had an extremely limited abort window. SLS is a giant make -work and pork barrel project for the Alabama Aerospace mafia. Orion would have made an excellent successor to the Apollo capsules, but is quite a few years late.
@kerbonautics52174 жыл бұрын
Even though most of this info was available before elsewhere, this is the best single collection of information I can find in video form.
@JayVal904 жыл бұрын
The modern NASA human spaceflight division is a jobs program more than a science program.
@carso15004 жыл бұрын
Thats why spacex is soo important
@clarissadanae73704 жыл бұрын
Exactly, comparing the Apollo program to the Orion program is like comparing fact versus fiction.
@MasterChief-sl9ro4 жыл бұрын
It's a skills program.. You are training people with high end skills. That takes years to produce..Why Rome fell.. It lost all the people that had the skills. To rebuild it. Once you lose them. You are stagnant and decay...Just how nature works. It weeds out the unproductive...
@Galm1Cipher03 жыл бұрын
@@carso1500 nah it really ain't
@garretthines82392 жыл бұрын
Pay a visit to the Huntsville Space Center in Alabama. There they have a scale model of the capsule which clearly demonstrates why they chose the teardrop shape. You can rotate by hand the model in a wind tunnel and feel the forces. The teardrop shape is inherently stable always aiming it's blunt end forward. When you try to rotate it the air flow around it exerts a great force against that motion returning it back to blunt-end forward. What is happening is the air passing around the edges of the blunt end push on the cone exerting a force to straighten it and it pushes until the cone is downstream again and has equal forces around it.
@jrcat22584 жыл бұрын
Wow, this video has really made it clear to me that spaceflight has been standing still for 50 years. The modules are basically the same, designed for the same purpose. This is nothing but Apollo version 1.2.
@stun97714 жыл бұрын
JRcat...Yep, unfortunately space has now been commercialised, Nd is being set up as the domain of the wealthy, and thanks to POTUS, militarised...I bet JFK is spinning in his grave...todays power people have few morals...
@WSCLATER4 жыл бұрын
And it has as much chance of reaching the moon as they had in 1969. It's all illusion snd hoax.
@FrankyPi4 жыл бұрын
@@WSCLATER In your delusional head yes.
@Jan_Strzelecki4 жыл бұрын
_Wow, this video has really made it clear to me that spaceflight has been standing still for 50 years._ That's because, in regards to the manned Moon missions, the spaceflight _has_ been standing still for 50 years. _The modules are basically the same, designed for the same purpose._ If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Each part of _Apollo_ Command Module had a specific purpose, and those specific purposes haven't really changed. Even then, the design _has_ been improved upon, as explained in the video.
@chukmil98244 жыл бұрын
I hate to saa you are right
@christopherjames8364 жыл бұрын
Great videos! I can still remember as a young kid watching the Apollo missions on tv.
@tonydinkel4 жыл бұрын
Excellent work! However, I think you missed the biggest reason that we are back to a "gumdrop" capsule design. It is a matter of historical record that the gumdrop design capsule is not susceptible to damage to its heatshield by debris shed from a large external tank and solid rocket boosters. It is sealed up against the service module until it is needed. It is only exposed just before it needs to complete its mission. This was the fundamental flaw with the Space Shuttle system, the orbiter, with its fragile heat tiles, hanging from the tank was a sitting duck for stuff falling or shedding off the tank. The gumdrop design proved its reliability even after a serious explosion in the service module as occurred in apollo 13. Also, the gumdrop design makes it much easier to escape from a launch vehicle that is breaking up as it can be severed from the main vehicle and pulled to safety as we have just witnessed in the SpaceX qualification test. Crew escape from any other type of vehicle would involve either ejection seats or a self-contained escape capsule to be integrated into the other than gumdrop design.
@dmlewis34 жыл бұрын
It didn't help the Shuttle that the EPA required the insulation on the big orange tank to be CFC-free. The original formulation didn't come loose.
@tonydinkel4 жыл бұрын
Absolutely yes. More research should have been done as to the impact of the freon free formulation. Another case of environmentalists driving government policy and affecting things they shouldn't.
@dragonsword73704 жыл бұрын
Gemini had ejection seats. Not preferable since it could have killed them but... just saying.
@jwjones19794 жыл бұрын
Upgraded bathrooms? Orion. No Apollo bags for me!
@Nottsboy244 жыл бұрын
Oh my goodness 😃 i know, poor astronauts had to make sure it all went in the bag...a crude way of going to the bathroom 👌
@Mr.Deleterious4 жыл бұрын
Dude you're awesome. Keep it up. Love the news, updates and history on all things space.
@Mister_Pedantic4 жыл бұрын
The comment made at the 2:00 point has been oft repeated over the years but the Russians were not as far ahead as they were made out to be. They had bigger boosters which allowed heavier payloads but most of their crewed flights were little more than "Me First" stunts. Who here remembers Voskhod I? They shoe-horned three cosmonauts into a craft designed for two so Pravda could say "Sorry Apollo". Before the end of the Gemini program, the US was ahead to stay.
@mr88cet4 жыл бұрын
Excellent comparison and historical perspective. Don’t forget Apollo 7!
@w9gb4 жыл бұрын
Constellation was cancelled because it was behind schedule and over budget. (Sound familiar? Auditor just gave same report about SLS). Altair was cancelled because it was also WAY over-budget (SpaceX built entire company / rocket, / capsule on same or less $$ over 10 years).
@gavinminton4574 жыл бұрын
Nicely done video. Orion is practically a component from Von Braun’s Apollo Applications concept that couldn’t survive the inevitable budget cuts post lunar landings. My opinion is that had Orion been ready in the 90’s or early 2000s it would have perfect timing but being ready in the early 20’s with that insane per seat cost, it doomed for failure (or, at least, the SLS portion is) destine for the minimum flights possible to save face against the sunk cost of the system. With per pound launch cost dropping thanks the SpaceX and Blue Origin and others, it will be impossible to justify SLS and the overweight Orion.
@thethirdman225 Жыл бұрын
*_"With per pound launch cost dropping thanks the SpaceX and Blue Origin and others, it will be impossible to justify SLS and the overweight Orion."_* I'm sorry but that's just absurd. There is no comparison between commercial launches into LEO and going to the Moon. It's like the difference between driving to the supermarket and driving 1,000 kms across a desert and back. Even the re-entry is completely different.
@MartianWolf4 жыл бұрын
Excellent video! Orion has been around for a while now, so I can’t wait to see the first crewed launch! Another interesting point is the destination, Apollo went right into a low orbit around the Moon, whereas Orion will dock with Gateway. Should be interesting
@AnthonyStevensFlorida4 жыл бұрын
While I admire the work NASA engineers have done despite shifting goals and budget constraints, I'm still disappointed to see all their manned mission plans include SRBs as part of the launch system. SpaceX has the right idea. Invest in totally reusable craft and leave SRBs to the military.
@rocketology11054 жыл бұрын
One thing that many people overlook is the cost making a launch vehicle reusable. But not the $$$ cost, the payload cost. If you look at the SpaceX F9, the difference in payload mass to orbit between expendable launch and landing of the first stage, it's about ~60%. This is due to the additional mass of the landing hardware, and the fuel requirement to boostback/ slow and land the booster. SLS would be incapable of performing it's mission if it had to give up 60% of it's payload mass to orbit to make it reusable. As for using the SRB's, they tried to leverage as much of the shuttle tech as possible, and, anything the government does is a "jobs program". Without SLS, Orbital ATK and it's supplier companies would like go under.
@RandomCommentDue4 жыл бұрын
@@rocketology1105 Just look at the payload difference between the SLS and Starship. Starship would need 2-3 other starships to refuel it just to be able leave LEO, and SLS can deliver ~50 more tons to LEO I believe.
@andrewreynolds93714 жыл бұрын
sorry, Anthony, but I couldn't agree less. btw, SpaceX *doesn't* have a fully reusable vehicle. for missions beyond LEO, they throw away the upper stage just like every other launcher. they do that because both the cost and weight penalties are sufficient to make trying to reuse such a stage impractical.
@pzoe38084 жыл бұрын
Too many SpaceX fan boys out there SpaceX has yet to prove It’s human safety record. The solid rocket boosters put more men and women in orbit in any other rocket in the US inventory.
@T3ki1a_4 жыл бұрын
@@pzoe3808 And killed more men too ;-)
@robertgordon83194 жыл бұрын
Great video. I moved to the space coast and watched the entire manned space program. As much as the space shuttle was impressive it was nothing compared to the massive Saturn 5 with those powerful F-1 engines which are still the most powerful rocket engine ever built. You could actually feel the power of the Saturn 5 15 miles away and those powerful F-1 engines made our mobile home windows shutter.
@timothyfeist73644 жыл бұрын
I would choose the Apollo capsule if I only could go once. 1 upfront cost is lower 2 I like having everything easily seen at a glance 3 nostalgia, be cool to use part of history P.S. having all those dials to look at read, understand, and infer further information from got me wondering about the difference in training cost between the two. Was this included in the price, or was the cost just the hardware?
@misterbeauregard2204 жыл бұрын
I see a lot of comments about the Orion CM just recycling the design of the Apollo CM. Why wouldn't it? It's a tried and tested design with a very high success rate. The difference with Orion is that it wasn't built with Slide-Rules and has modern computing technology.
@danielellis26174 жыл бұрын
I'm excited to see this FINALLY happening. But my biggest issue is the cost. Most of the engineering was already done from Apollo and the Space Shuttle. I feel like this is a hack job of left over parts thrown together at an absurd price. But I'm still happy we are going.
@dragonsword73704 жыл бұрын
I'm pretty sure from an engineering perspective the plans for both ships radically different. Just having smaller computers helps immensely and shrinking tech helps make a leaner ship as we're seeing now. Four per capsule? Plus 8 small engines to maneuver with and power and air is almost a non issue now? It's like comparing a dodge charger from yesteryear and today. The cost comes from building this new and that given price was for a mission of 4 tickets which means the ships price has a lower base. IF this design works well it will be worth the cost and that will go down after the assembly line comes on.
@taoskid87694 жыл бұрын
Cool, the Orion project will be exciting to follow. Thanks for the video!
@russelldixon56634 жыл бұрын
Does your price per seat comparison take Orions re-usability into account?
@williamgreene48344 жыл бұрын
When you take into account the billion+ dollar throw away launch vehicle the actual price per seat cost is likely to be stunning.
@Dr.TJ_Eckleburg4 жыл бұрын
Retiring the space shuttle was a disaster. We had the most flexible and sophisticated spacecraft ever conceived, and we threw it away. With commercial options like SpaceX and Starliner becoming available, the shuttle could have gotten out of the space taxi business (which it was overkill for anyway) and focused on a new set of specialized missions that took advantage of it's unique capabilities. Fewer missions per year would mean less pressure on the program, greater safety margins, and lower costs. And it could be used as a construction and launching platform for deep-space missions. We could use it to transport components for moon and mars missions and assemble them in space, without having to rely on tiny capsules and design entirely new heavy launch vehicles to get them off the planet. The money they're wasting on all these new systems (that are actually a huge step backward in capability) should have been spent on a deep refit and upgrade of the shuttle system, along with a new mission set. We could have done anything with the shuttle. Instead we lacked the imagination and foresight to think outside the box.
@atlas88274 жыл бұрын
Space shuttle was expensive and a death trap.
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
If you liked this video, then you'll LOVE my comparison on Blue Origin and SpaceX 😮🚀kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWSuf6CHlK6sqbc
@Raj_Luthra4 жыл бұрын
Hello. Your videos are amazing. Will it be posssible for you to do a video comparing of all the space capsules. From past space capsules to ones in development e.g ISRO's Gaganyaan. Showing their diamensions too, both with the service module/trunk and with just the capsule, also in metric units? I have searched myself but cannot find the exact information on some of the spacecraft. Thank you. :)
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
@@Raj_Luthra great idea! that's a ton of work, but I'm gonna add it to my list
@schlend44 жыл бұрын
Nearly Unlimited oxigen? Unlimited?! Come on stop making shit up..
@cowboybob70934 жыл бұрын
Nice to find a new space outlet. Lots of strong points and a good presentation. Someone along the way must have missed the 0:37 sponsorship statement because there were three ads. You've probably heard it already of course. NBD if this comment disappears, I'll still be looking out for your content. 👍👍
@dukecraig24024 жыл бұрын
@@INeedMoreSpace I can't wait for the first "space tourists" to come back from the moon with pictures of the Apollo landing sites, I can just hear all the hoaxers backpedaling now🤣🤣🤣. I'm sure they'll figure out a way of fitting them into their idiot conspiracy theories.
@myfavoritemartian14 жыл бұрын
-You forgot to say that each shuttle needed a year long refurbish (Rebuild) before it could be reused. It too really was a one shot vehicle as each refurbish cost as much or sometimes more than the original purchase cost. Even the SRB shells were not all reusable, some had a high rejection rate and needed new shells made. -You are way too young to remember, but good solar cells did not exist back then so solar panels were not available, or lithium batteries, they used the best tech gear we had, a fuel cell. So what you were saying is that everything was the same except for the small things that were updated. And they really were the same size because the Orion may have carried more people, but if you divide the interior space by the number of astronauts, it winds up nearly the same personal space. -It truly was a 1960's format (cone capsule, service module, parachutes, aluminum construction and silicone based heat shield) with year 2000 small tech items added.
@LisaBowers4 жыл бұрын
Personally, I'll take the capsule that doesn't require a felt-tipped pen to fix a broken circuit breaker switch. Apollo was _amazing,_ but I don't wanna get stuck on the moon. (Great video, TJ!)
@brianarbenz72063 жыл бұрын
I was 10 when Apollo 11 landed, so clearly I am of the Apollo generation. Comparing the Apollo Command Module to Orion would be like me comparing Rocky and Bullwinkle to Sponge Bob. The sentimental favorite from childhood wins out! As for mobility, 3 crew members in Apollo have about the same individual space as 4 in Orion. But there is the matter of the Orion toilet. That's a vast improvement over the no-fun Apollo way. Both craft are great. The ablative material for re-entry and its meticulous installation are the finest!
@crosbyking5665 Жыл бұрын
I was 10 too! Both spacecraft were marvels for their time
@brianarbenz7206 Жыл бұрын
@@crosbyking5665 The Apollo made the Mercury look like a Model T. The Space Shuttle made the Apollo look like a Model T. And at the close of the Shuttle program, I read that you couldn't get $50 if you sold the shuttle's computers at a yard sale. Things change exponentially.
@burggerbig1024 жыл бұрын
I prefer the dragon capsule or the starshipm
@_mikolaj_4 жыл бұрын
Well, dragon looks nice, but technicly, it's worse. It doesn't have multiroom structure and TOILET
@praveenneevarp48224 жыл бұрын
The dragon isn't capable of deep space missions only starship is.
@Patchuchan4 жыл бұрын
Dragon would need a propulsion module in the trunk and maybe a hab for lunar missions. I am surprised Spacex is not looking into that and going strait to the more ambitious Starship.
@georgeb83284 жыл бұрын
Patchuchan dragon is only meant for ferrying passengers, and going to the moon. That’s why spaceX is working on them both at the same time.
@macjonte4 жыл бұрын
Patchuchan They have looked into that, it was called the red dragon. 🐉 Feasible, but starship is cheaper.
@DieyoungDiefast4 жыл бұрын
Correct me if I'm wrong (and probably am) but I don't recall Orion undergoing a launch abort test like Space-X just completed. Without that I'll be difficult to justify manning the ship when the competition had to prove itself. Another thing, all very well going on about Orion being reusable, (could probably re used Apollo if you tried hard enough) but the rest of the system apart from the srb's gets dumped, great way to cut seat costs.
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
DieyoungDiefast Orion did do a very successful in flight abort a few months ago
@johnniewilliams60334 жыл бұрын
Boeing can’t even put a spacecraft in orbit. What an expensive piece of junk we all had to pay for.
@hydrochloricacid21464 жыл бұрын
They did send a spacecraft into orbit...
@karlthemel26784 жыл бұрын
The more spacious Orion is the capsule of choice, but not necessarily with 4 astronauts. Therefore, Orion flights are much more expensive unless they can be done with a reusable launcher rather than SLS (two Vulcan or new Glenn launches? One Vulcan or New Glenn launch and a cargo Starship brings an interplanetary propulsion stage?). -Interesting video, thank you.
@gwo7224 жыл бұрын
Definitely I prefer flying a SpaceX Crew Dragon rather than an Apollo or a Starliner for low earth orbits. And Starship to go to the Moon and to Mars rather than an Orion.
@gwo7224 жыл бұрын
@@dks13827 That is the reason why I said SpaceX Crew Dragon for Low Earth Orbit and Starship to the Moon and Mars.
@its11104 жыл бұрын
A seat on Orion may cost more but it is worth more. It's a better value. For one matter, the mission duration is much extended.
@stevechinz4 жыл бұрын
Just when I was thinking I need more space!
@GBS10434 жыл бұрын
Apollo was designed in an era where the engineers were much smarter and had a much better understanding of science and math. In other words, they knew what they were doing. I can't say the same about today's engineers. The increase in complexity of Orion, will lead to problems that will not be able to be corrected in flight. Sometimes, simple is best.
@manthony19564 жыл бұрын
I don't know that today's engineers and technicians are less smart than they were fifty years ago. The tools available today were on our wish list. I do know they will encounter and solve different challenges. My children are millennials. None of them have decided to go into engineering, or high tech. But their children seem to have the same fire and curiosity that I have as a "boomer."
@GBS10434 жыл бұрын
Today, there are tools like CAD that almost create designs by themselves. When I say the engineers back in the 1960's were smarter, that is exactly what I mean. They understood how everything worked and were able to design systems and circuits that worked, without CAD systems. Today's generation can't do that, because they really don't know how things REALLY work. The design tools have done that for them. They can't do the calculations in their heads, they really don't understand the math. Obviously, there are exceptions, but very, very few. I am trying to find someone who can do my job, so I can retire. I can't find anyone. I've been trough the process of looking for several years. Basically, the kids now are addicted to dumb phones. They know how to navigate menus , but have absolutely no idea how the phones work. They can't use logic to solve problems, because they aren't required to memorize anything. Compared to people fifty years ago, they simply have no education, at all. The solution ? Go back to teaching the same way and dump the dumb phones.. They are nothing more than toys and have become addictive. They are bad news for anyone, but really bad for kids. The phones are responsible for the dumbing down of everyone. Look at it this way, if we were allowed to play with ATARI's 24x7, or any other toy, in the same way kids 'play' with phones, we wouldn't be able to sit down. My new project, 'Dump the Dumb Phones and Get Smart', is designed to make using phones not cool. We have to get everyone to put those things down. They really are 'Dumb Phones', because that is what they do, make their users dumb. Also, they cause lot's of accidents and deaths, due to distraction. Most kids can't touch type, but they can type with their thumbs and when they attempt to do anything meaningful, they are simply 'all thumbs'
@More_Row4 жыл бұрын
Nice visuals 👍🏻
@stephenwilliams52014 жыл бұрын
Tks om. Was here for the first. Now hope to watch the next Set.
@rocketology11054 жыл бұрын
Well done! Very well laid out and researched! I have seen too many "science" channels popping up that don't do their research and instead rely on eye-popping graphics, full of misinformation. And if looking for great video idea, a full history of the SLS would be epic! Going all the way back to the SDLV (shuttle derived launch vehicle) through the National Launch Vehicle, Jupiter, and Constellation. I'd love to see that!
@robertmannel4446 Жыл бұрын
Excellent synopsis of the developments of the last 50 years.!
@denislaurin1694 жыл бұрын
Still the same, but improved and modernized. At 100 times the cost, over budget, and longer to develop than the Apollo entire moon program. Talk about a money pit. And still not crewed!
@rockyblacksmith4 жыл бұрын
Apollo had a clear goal, a clear deadline and near universal political support. All of which substantially boost efficiency, by benefit or by nessecity. I can't think of any manned program that has had such benefits ever since. Look at the space shuttle, or the space station plans (before the ISS), or everything around Orion. You always see goals and funding shifting, and often times nothing of the original intent remains within the finished product. So anyone trying to push for progress has to juggle multiple political agendas and work off of insecure funding. That is a recipe for inefficiency if I have ever seen one.
@humanstation8193 Жыл бұрын
Great KZbin page. Do you post T's to Europe? I think your KZbin is a GREAT educational support for kids in school, encouraging kids to work harder on their Maths, Physics,. Chemistry and Biology. Space is more part of our lives than ever but not often frames that way.
@InventorZahran4 жыл бұрын
NASA: *still innovating after 50 years* Apple: *can't innovate anymore*
@ynp19784 жыл бұрын
In the last 20 years or so there have been so many idea's...or suggestions on future space missions and spacecraft.....well I will believe it when I see an Astronaut standing on the Moon again after a half century.
@khoinguyen82384 жыл бұрын
I like penguin
@INeedMoreSpace4 жыл бұрын
I like penguins too but you have lost me on this!
@khoinguyen82384 жыл бұрын
@@INeedMoreSpace what do you mean? I like penguin
@khoinguyen82384 жыл бұрын
Also, nice video
@EdResleff4 жыл бұрын
Only a 50% increase in cost vs. 5 times the capability? I'd say that's a good trade off. Nice video...!
@timreed353 Жыл бұрын
The cost is base on if Apollo was built now. In fact is not even close to 50% more it's taken10 yrs to launch. It took half that time to launch Apollo. Updating old technology took to long should have started from scratch.
@max_galingumas94094 жыл бұрын
disliked because no metric units
@dazuk19694 жыл бұрын
Loved that dude...the Orion capsule is probably the most advanced crew cabin there is right now..(props to Lockheed Martin)...it is state of the art in design. They even developed a friction welding technique (something SpaceX could use). This is a welding method that does produce excessive heat, and you even fuse different types of metal together..which can be very difficult to achieve. Great information dude, i learnt stuff watching that....rEspect and peace to ya.
@MrHichammohsen14 жыл бұрын
As much as i love it, i would not travel in an Apollo for the lack of toilet.
@bryanchong17134 жыл бұрын
There is a toilet, just not what you think a toilet is.
@MrHichammohsen14 жыл бұрын
@@bryanchong1713 Don't want to cut my poop with two finger holes in a bag. Thank you.
@trevorsesnic81624 жыл бұрын
Subbed! I think an important note is the safety factors on them. While it seems like "how the heck are we getting to the moon for *more* money 50 years later," it's important to remember that Orion and SLS is FAR safer than Saturn V and Apollo. Anyway, great video! Can't wait to order some of your awesome shirts!
@respectdawildo_danjones508 Жыл бұрын
??? The Saturn V was the most successful SAFEST rocket ever built in history, not sure what your talking about
@monkeypants67644 жыл бұрын
Hmm im in the only 19% that likes apollo more than orion 🤔
@portfolio91 Жыл бұрын
WAIT you left out the other apollos. (Sorry, I lived through these.). This shows how they gradually tested out capabilities one by one without taking any big steps that could have failed miserably. Apollo 1: speaking of failing miserably, the first astronauts in the US space program to die, died on the launchpad when the interior of Apollo 1 caught fire. The standard atmosphere in US spacecraft was 5psi at 100% oxygen, thinking that a lower pressure would be safer in outer space. Well, the 100% oxygen wasn't. Fire swept through quickly. Gus Grissom (second mercury) died with the other two. The sealed capsule got like red hot on the outside. Big investigation, big overhaul, no more 100% oxygen, no flammable materials inside. Doors that open outward instead of inward. Etc. Apollo 2-6: unmanned tests. don't mess this up again guys. Apollo 7: JUST the command and svs modules, in earth orbit. Make sure the basics work. yawn. Apollo 8: Same, but orbit around the Moon! This was the christmas thing where Frank Borman read out of Genesis, and took photos of the earth rising up from the surface of the moon, and everybody got emotional about how we were just a little blue planet in big space. Everybody remembers this one. Apollo 9: They finally got the Lunar Module (lander) working, but Only in Earth orbit. Rusty Schweikert climbed out and they had special foot inserts in the front porch to keep hm from drifting away. Everybody ignored this one too. Apollo 10: All together now, orbit Moon AND the Lunar Module! But, just to test out both at once, no landing. And, a good thing they did. Turns out, the moon has funny gravitational stuff going on. The lunar module separated, they descended partway down, fired up the upper stage and tried to rendezvous and it didn't go well. I remember hearing these astronauts swearing on national television trying to find each other. Another learning curve for NASA. Apollo 11: Dad let me stay up all night for this one. Kikkin up some dust. That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. He did say 'for man' not 'for a man' even though that was what he intended to say.
@MYOB9904 жыл бұрын
It's a stupid capsule, 1960's technology that's been upgraded like a house on HGTV.
@hydrochloricacid21464 жыл бұрын
Orion is better than Apollo in most metrics. It's larger, lighter and most likely safer.
@nairbvel4 жыл бұрын
Some of that "1960s technology" is based in simple things like aerodynamics, balance, utilitarian approach vs. experimental approach, and the desire to create a tool to do a couple of different jobs well enough & long enough to figure out the best way(s) to get to the next job. Orion is NOT tech from the 1960s; it's a physical design based on lessons learned -- sometimes at great human cost -- from the 1960s on through the latest developments.... all limited by funding from a disinterested government. The Dragon capsule (with a slight modification of the same shape) has a different purpose, thus is designed to carry more people and act a little differently -- and was designed & created with the knowledge gained by the 1960s tech you're dissing. The same goes for the Starliner, which is designed more in line with the NASA job description and thus looks more like Apollo than the Dragon. They're all "kissin' cousins" and their passengers will live or die based on how well the lessons of the "1960s technology" have been learned.
@ditto93004 жыл бұрын
If it ain't broke dont fix it
@AnonymousFreakYT4 жыл бұрын
Obviously Orion for its modernness and spaciousness. One thing I've always been curious of is the spaciousness of the LM on the moon's surface. I know it was tiny inside, and the astronauts on the longer (Apollo 15-17) stays were there for multiple days, with many hours each day inside the LM. I don't think I've ever seen film/video of the astronauts inside the LM on the surface of the moon, only ever in orbit/transit. I'd love to know how insanely cramped the LM was during astronaut downtime between spacewalks.
@mirozen_4 жыл бұрын
After reading your comment I looked around and found another video on KZbin that at least gives an exploded view of the ascent module the astronauts stayed in while on the surface, though it doesn't talk about how they spent their time in that cramped space! :-) Hope this assuages your curiosity a bit!
@Huntress_Hannah4 жыл бұрын
Obama administration: Do this Trump administration: no do that NASA: WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM MEEEEEEEEEEEE 😭😭😭
@SpectreOZ4 жыл бұрын
More like... Obama administration: cut costs/programs
@JacksonTyler4 жыл бұрын
This has been going back all the way to Clinton’s presidency
@cinellixa4 жыл бұрын
Obama , nasa will put all its effort into musilum appreciation.
@WSCLATER4 жыл бұрын
Money.
@monkeypants67644 жыл бұрын
Hannah R. true
@cudathehawgjetfixer75204 жыл бұрын
Orion is just like the Retro Muscle cars, looks like it's predecessor but has more modern and updated systems that make it more aesthetic and wanted, plus NASA finally got its head back on straight, the moon is the gateway to the solar system for human travel. NASA needs to build a base station on the moon then launch to Mars, Titan and the Asteroids from there. Less weight to get away from the gravitational pull and less energy to get to the distant targets for humanity!
@speed7exc4 жыл бұрын
GEMIN - EYE
@clwomble4 жыл бұрын
speed7exc Sorry, it was pronounced Geminee.
@Nick-wn1xw4 жыл бұрын
NASA always pronounced it GEMIN-EEE. Nice correction TRY.
@usamat32974 жыл бұрын
Thank you for posting. Informative. I suspect that the ISS commercial crew program will eclipse the Orion program to the point that the major difference between Apollo and Orion capsule will be that Orion gets cancelled before it gets used for real. Orion and SLS are likely to join the Constellation program into the bit bucket of history.
@maxwellcrazycat9204 Жыл бұрын
Considering how that the current regime in power now 2022 is sending our country towards bankruptcy . I would not be surprised that Orion gets canceled.
@dannyh82884 жыл бұрын
Another big difference. Apollo crewed by the BEST people our nation could produce. Orion crew slots will be filled via a politically correct quota system. Just watch and see.
@zakiranderson722 Жыл бұрын
Michael Collins would've loved an orion capsule.
@gordontyree98584 жыл бұрын
Awesome video! Much respect for Mercury, Gemini and Apollo... but I’ll take the ride on Orion for sure! Orion May look like Apollo, but it’s much safer and much more advanced. Can’t wait for future missions!! Thanks for the video!
@kevinb3812 Жыл бұрын
Some people think NASA is going backwards compared to the Shuttle. Well like it or not, the Shuttle was dangerous. The crew had to be 45 seconds into the flight in order to abort it. The Apollo and Orion capsules have powerful launch-abort rockets that could pull the crew to safety immediately and effectively with a parachute landing. They are simply safer to fly than the Shuttle ever was and that's no small thing. I'm glad for the Orion Capsule!
@Doones514 жыл бұрын
I don't think i would want to be in an Orion capsule all the way to Mars
@remo274 жыл бұрын
You are smart. The Orion capsule is incapable of supporting crew for the minimum 3 to 9 month (depending on how close and what kind of engines you use) journey to Mars.It's useful for Lunar and near Lunar missions (like say, a mission to repair a telescope or something in L1 or go to a space station there). However NONE of that stuff is funded yet nor in development. That's how much of a joke the SLS program is. Can't decide on a destination ( Mars! An Asteroid! The Moon! Both the Moon and Mars!), doesn't have a Lander funded for the moon (NASA is STILL SOLICITING COMMERICAL CONTRACTS - meanwhile the House passed a bill that, if it passes congress and the Pres would basically gut the moon stuff, go for Mars, and BAN using commercial landers), doesn't have a Space Craft for long duration missions such as Mars and ...well, it's a basically a jobs program with kickbacks for certain legacy contractors and the congress is corrupt, incompetent, and doesn't want to hand the 'other side' a victory, hence our lack of long term plans and hence NASA's current total dysfunction :(
@RichardShelton4 жыл бұрын
Being 70 years old, I grew up adoring the Mercury 7 astronauts and closely following NASA's space efforts. I really enjoyed your presentation and your ability to make complex things easy to understand. I think I'd pick the new technology to ride in, but don't mean to disrespect the Apollo capsule in any way. Thank you for your video, please consider me subscribed!
@oscartango82344 жыл бұрын
Orion is also the space capsule that will probably go to mars. A little small for long periods in space
@justcruisin814 жыл бұрын
Keep up the good work. You may on your way to 1 million subscribers by the end of the year 👍
@Redwane-Music2 жыл бұрын
Here you go. They are finally going back now. It was about time because many started to lose faith in NASA's story that they did go to the moon, before with Apollo in 1972,including me. Well, looking forward to it.
@laz73544 жыл бұрын
Great video trying to show it's not 60s and 80s tech and proving it's 60s and 80s tech + touch screens.
@brokensoap17174 жыл бұрын
Space capsules worked in the same fundamental ways in the 70's as they do now Of course they are going to be similar
@laz73544 жыл бұрын
@@brokensoap1717 brilliant
@Habs86914 жыл бұрын
Anything that goes into space and re-enters the atmosphere should not be re-usable. The violence perpetrated on the craft during re-entry is beyond belief. Just look at Columbia if you want to see what saving money by re-using stuff will result in.
@rohscx4 жыл бұрын
Habs8691 SpaceX says hi 👋
@DirtyOldSailor4 жыл бұрын
First visit to your channel. Very informative and well edited. Not a hard decision, Subscribed... Looking forward to watching old and new content.
@dougmc6664 жыл бұрын
If the Orion capsule is as successful as the Apollo capsule was, history will remember them as version one and version two, the differences are minuscule.
@Mike-01234 Жыл бұрын
Nothing beats the Saturn V the roar from the 5 F-1 Engines burning kerosene. Solid Rocket boosters are not as impressive.
@kamipollna2255 ай бұрын
I’m Artemis era I was born like 1 y[redacted because personal information] after the 2014 test flight, it will be wild witnessing the first moon missions after Apollo
@jakubnemcek54454 жыл бұрын
I think the most important change between Apollo and Artemis is LOP-G because astronauts can stay there for longer time, it makes possible to land everywhere on the moon and demonstrates ion thruster in human spaceflight.
@scottdongnguyenkhang28784 жыл бұрын
It is funny that KSP use more computer power than the Apollo program computer power
@allangibson84944 жыл бұрын
Mercury did not use an ablative heat shield - it used a metallic heat sink made from Beryllium.
@jhutsebaut4 жыл бұрын
Given the CO2 scrubbers, solar panels, and ability to recycle water why are they limited to just 21 days? What is the limiting factor?
@mako88sb4 жыл бұрын
Consumables such as food plus the commode uses replaceable waste storage canisters. The DSG(deep space gateway) module will add significantly to the mission duration capability.
@yoskarokuto35533 жыл бұрын
"We must SOLVED theses challenges before we SEND PEOPLE through this region of space !"
@jaydee51564 жыл бұрын
When the shuttle program went public. My response was oh great! A space truck.
@thethirdman225 Жыл бұрын
Remember too that the Apollo shape was decided upon because it was, to some extent, flyable.