Meet Orion and SLS: America's Next Great Spacecraft - STEM in 30

[@montygill2835]

If they continued with the Saturn rockets and Apollo capsule and evolved them, I'm sure we would have accomplished more by now.

[@good_teanice_house6789]

Very good point.

[@joshuaamaral5855]

Politics

[@felixnuwahid9879]

Indeed

[@jefferykazimer]

Agreed! It's sad that what we accomplished during the late 60's and early 70's have seemed to slip into the rear-view mirror by now.

[@cinnamon-skateboarding5987]

Funding and politics are the backing for space exploration which is sad.

[@ThomasAntoniusOlsenJr.333]

SpaceX I feel will get to the moon before nasa... let alone Mars. Elon Musk is on a totally different level and has quite the team behind him!

[@jessiejordan5960]

If SpaceX goes to the moon, it will be with NASA funding for a NASA mission. SpaceX is a launch vehicle provider, not a space exploration entity.

[@theenjeneer2493]

The only reason spaced is A launch provider is because that’s how they make money the only reason elk founded the company is to get humans to mars

[@Tarheel13]

@@theenjeneer2493 going to Mars will be so easy. lol

[@gregesch5058]

cool. Now we can see saturn 5 concept in HD.

[@DrysonBennington1]

A few questions. Is the SLS capable of delivering a fully outfitted Lunar Habitat Module based on the Destiny ISS Module with Falcon 9 landing systems where the Destiny Lunar Habitat Module would weigh approximately 50,000 pounds? The Destiny Lunar Habitat module would be fully loaded with life support racks, automated guidance and control systems, landing struts, rocket engine and fuel. Will the SLS main fuel tank be able to be docked with the ISS to be used as a food growing lab? Losing the SLS main fuel tank to scrap after use is a waste of money giving the fact that Space X has been able to reuse rockets over and over again. The SLS main fuel tank might be huge but being able to dock it with the ISS would provide a very cost effective method of creating living space on the ISS for tourism, growing food for selling on Earth or transfer to the ISS in emergency along with general storage.

[@remliqa]

Considering that they can lift around 163 metric ton into LEO , I imagine the SLS can do all that you ask.

[@hunterxcraft8328]

Everyone hating on nasa is being ridiculous. The SLS is for pioneering new technologies for humanitym you csnt depend on companies for access to space. The SLS is incredibly important the cost of it while large shouldnt be concerning you. It's only use is for reaching the moon and mars and beyond not low earth orbit.

[@PistonAvatarGuy]

Wow, Orion is HUGE! Very cool! Those seats look positively archaic, though, it seems like some composite seats with more rounded edges and corners would be lighter and would make it easier for the astronauts to move around inside the capsule.

[@nicoepsilon0]

idontcare80 so just with glance you think you have a better design than what they came up?

[@patthewoodboy]

composites would be lighter and weight is imposrtant , so Idontcare80 has a good point

[@ify22n]

Maybe not the definitive design

[@siriapushpami4196]

13:58 did the bird fly over the fire

[@gamestv4875]

What do you do for Months on end in a small capsule stuck with grumpy astronauts missing their families on a Mars trip?

[@AndreBSaba]

There's going to be another modules

[@HalNordmann]

For those who say that SLS is somehow "stupid": The REAL purpose for SLS is to get NASA a heavy lift rocket they've been wanting for ages, with the lowest amount of engineering required - as it was thought "for cheap". Although it turned out to be expensive, most of these costs have been recurrent ones - engineer salaries, factory maintenance, etc. If most of your yearly budget for a project are costs you have to pay every year, it baloons up. Just a simple example: You need to produce something for 60 dollars and you need to spend 80$ per X time for food, rent, etc. If your boss gives you 100$ per X, you will spend a total of 300$ before the project is complete, but if he gives you 140$ per X then you only spend the 140$. Although it may seem counter-intuitive, sometimes the cheapest way to get something done is to give the one doing it more money.

[@Sleepysparkz]

Whoa they use elephants for fuel! So rad!!!

[@masonpaulsen7323]

Are they doing multiple orion missions as tests like they did with Apollo?

[@HalNordmann]

Just 1 - but since all the hardware is based on proven technologies, it doesn't need any more. Besides, NASA likely can't afford more.

[@eagle___shadow]

Good jobs👍👍

[@christinestill5002]

I watched the moon landing in real time. Now I’d just like to see the JWST launched. 2021?

[@Lukebarca]

At 11:20 she explains why NASA will lose to SpaceX.

[@billgates.got.ripped6965]

Hahaha so true!

[@In_Space]

NASA helps fund SpaceX, it only benefits NASA if SpaceX does well. They are not competitors.

[@srbroome]

seems a shame to throw away the reusable shuttle era engines into the ocean

[@brokensoap1717]

Better safe than sorry

[@hunterxcraft8328]

You cant give access to space just to companies. That's ridiculous. Space x is great but it's still a company and doesnt do anything for free. The SLS Is used to transport people and pioneering technology that will further and benefit all of humanity.

[@BlackWolf6420]

How are they going to transport people in Orion capsule to Mars? It’s like being locked up in a dark cell for nearly a year.

[@Pablotome97]

Yeah that's what i was thinking about, no enough room for four astronauts in a 12 month long trip

[@robertwalker3500]

That's a good question. Although the idea of being locked up, in a dark room, for any length of time seem questionable. I'm reminded of prisoners who are often locked up in these two similar elements (a dark room and a length of time). What concerns me more about your question is rooted in social interaction. It appears, for some reason or another, when people are in close proximity for any length of time conflict emerge from the unexpected. However, I'm sure the Orion crew would have spent some lengthy time together as part of their training and preparation. Perhaps they would have learn how not to push the wrong button in a crew's personality. Nevertheless, It's in human nature that we can become distorted about the intentions of others. This I'm sure will mark one of the most difficult task the crew will have to face.

[@siriapushpami4196]

It's not a dark room we have solar panels for electricity

[@HalNordmann]

Orion by itself can't go to Mars - it is designed as a part of larger system.

[@_mikolaj_]

Orion would dock to some sort of MTV. Which would probably have some habitat

[@exionem]

As cool as the Space Shuttle program was , it was never a safe means of space exploration. Sometimes the KISS principle is better.

[@mrsantana9094]

The space shuttle wasn't meant to be a Space exploration ship ... it was designed to build the ISS.

[@jessiejordan5960]

There's a lot of people that don't understand the space business in this comment section. SpaceX and NASA aren't the same thing. SpaceX is a launch vehicle provider, NASA is a space exploration entity. SpaceX doesn't manage missions outside of launch campaigns, after a spacecraft is confirmed in it's right orbit, their role ends. SpaceX might be the company that gets people to Mars or back to the moon, but it will most likely be under a NASA contract. And for all your bowlcuts going on about reusable stages. Nobody is ever going to put a high value payload, especially humans on a 2nd flight for anything. It will be first flight every time.

[@serenissimarespublicavenet3945]

Orion is soooo 20th century!

[@charliedallachie3539]

Yep, where are the UFOs 🛸 that’s what Area 51 is for

[@retrocny5625]

There's no difference between Orion's protective cover and how Apollo did it. Back in the Apollo days, it's acronym was "BPC" and it stood for Boost Protective Cover. It was utilized in the same exact way to protect the capsule during ascent and it was incorporated into the LES "Launch Escape System". It's clear why NASA went back to this system and that's because it simply is the safest method of keeping the crew alive in the case of a catastrophic failure during the launch phase. With a capsule and a launch escape tower like this, it gives the crew A LOT of versatility in the case of an abort scenario, and it would give the crew an option of surviving a critical failure at pretty much any phase in the launch, something the Shuttle never had. The Orion capsule itself however is just a small part of what would be needed for a manned mission to mars. They'd need another much larger habitation module, at least the size of one of the ISS's modules that would allow the crew to exercise, eat, sleep, etc. That's still a long ways off, but a mission back to the moon is pretty much ready to go as soon as the hardware is(IE: The lander).

[@dougmc666]

Both Boeing and SpaceX capsules did away with the launch escape tower and chose pusher style rockets that are usable all the way to orbit so they can abort from the second stage too. In case of the Crew Dragon the abort system stays with the capsule all the way to landing and is reused.

[@chrisa3126]

Awesome!

[@fishsquishguy1833]

NASA needs more test pilot types like in the days of Mercury and Gemini. Should hand all those leftover RS 25s to SpaceX and contract them to build the SLS instead of spreading the pork over 50 States.

[@CobusLaubscher]

Technically the orbiter of the space shuttle

[@WeBeGood06]

Cool, when is NASA is the antique SLS going to be put on display at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum

[@Tarheel13]

About the time starship pieces are.

[@montygill2835]

Constallation program would have sent crew and cargo on two different rockets.

[@dougmc666]

SLS can launch without Orion ie:cargo

[@JohanMsWorld]

I wish it was still december 19. Now its more mid 20, right? Johan.

[@montygill2835]

That's right Johan,the first flight is expected in summer of 2020 if everything is ready.

[@ianbarnard6184]

talk about hamsters in a cage my word! Imagine sitting in that rabbit hole for a year and a half to mars and back?

[@NotOurRemedy]

No way the upper stage “goes to the sun” She has to mean orbits the sun.?

[@McClarinJ]

What's next? A private company with a far greater payload capacity will probably land on the moon long before Orion is ready and at far less cost since the launch vehicle will not be trashed. That would be either SpaceX or Blue Origen, both of whom have mastered reusability. They will make an unmanned test landing or two, then ferry a load of astronauts to the moon and back, not just four individuals. There's a surreal denial of this probable outcome in presenting just the case for Orion.

[@Tarheel13]

lol

[@Tarheel13]

Musk has 12 months to prove to NASA Starship can be the lander.

[@montygill2835]

You need to get real,landing on mars won't happen before 2040,the next logical step is to learn to live on the moon. NASA has the funding for space launch system and Orion but also needs funding for a lunar base,this might be difficult for one country to do alone so an international effort is required (once the international space station has ended). Having learnt to live on the moon for a few years then it might be possible to go to mars.

[@s1n4m1n]

I'm from 2019. NASA is now bitching about how hard it is to launch before 2021. Ha. Trump ain't having none of it because he wants boots on the ground by 2024.

[@jfrtbikgkdhjbeep9974]

😳?!

[@montygill2835]

My guess,if the land on the moon with a crew of three one will be a woman.

[@charliewalker9443]

I feel really sorry for these fantastic workers and employees. To have the passion for space exploration and years of education, only to be told to make a one time use rocket, that will cost the earth to make and be forgotten about pretty quickly.

[@montygill2835]

I agree, it's like flying a new dreamliner plane from New York to Paris and then never use it again.

[@HalNordmann]

We don't have anything better yet. Starship is unlikely to fly anytime soon, so it is useful for now.

[@everbodylovesjamestheaband6495]

How much fuel does this Orion guy got

[@stuknda80z15]

cool we went backwards after trillions of dollars and almost 50 years we are right back at Apollo type rocket starting all over just bigger

[@TofuRecon]

the space shuttle program is the real set back here, would have been more efficient to just use conventional rockets to build the ISS. Not to mention, the 14 astronauts who lost lives due to the complexity in maintaining the "reusable" shuttle.

[@rona5328]

stuknda80z - It will never be bigger. Nothing will ever be able to top the Saturn V rocket or come close to the Apollo program.

[@jacobkudrowich]

@@rona5328 but it will be bigger than the Saturn v ?

[@mrsantana9094]

Yes we did, because they are "too scared". So the basis of the argument is, "we learned nothing". The girl says it is too risky to put the space ship next too so much fuel ... look at what SpaceX did, they put the space ship on top of the rocket. Send astronauts in a tiny capsule to Mars on, that is very stressful while SpaceX's vision is to send a starship with plenty of room for the astronauts to go about their activities.

[@dougmc666]

The SLS is mandated by the US Congress to transport 130 metric tons to LEO, the Saturn V was rated higher at 140 metric tons to LEO. But that discussion is about the SLS block 2 design which isn't scheduled to fly before 2030 so specs could change. It's not trillions of dollars, costs to 2025 are estimated to be $41billion for Orion, SLS and pad improvements. Unless you count the investment in the shuttle.

[@stormsfromcalifornia4379]

who is nasa kidding.scientist already said going to mars or another planets would be to risky bc of radition who in there right mind would trust srb on side i don't care if capsule is on top

[@MrNihilist74]

In 2021, are they going to just orbit the moon, or are they going to land on it?

[@montygill2835]

The second flight is expected to carry humans around 2022/23 and orbit the moon.

[@felixnuwahid9879]

11:20 lmao

[@cinnamon-skateboarding5987]

"We have to live with the fact the entire rocket wasn't ,made for re usability and every time it comes back we have to essentially rebuild it"

[@mathewferstl7042]

why do spacex fans have to ruin every and all discussions

[@mrsantana9094]

You can't go to Mars in a capsule ... capsules are good for around the vicinity space strips but for long duration missions, a capsule is not the answer, a couple of months inside a capsule would be very stressful for astronauts.

[@dougmc666]

You need the capsule to reenter the earths atmosphere, that means it has to go to mars, as far as duration, it's less than 30 days with a crew onboard.

[@BlackWolf6420]

I thought I was the only one thinking that

[@HalNordmann]

Orion is just designed as a part of a greater system - unlike Starship's stupid 'one-size-fits-all' approach.

[@Thegrimreaperswrath]

obsolete garbage. lets go falcon heavy, lets go spacex

[@davidroberts4831]

Hi 👋 NASA great 👍 video your technology could do with been up dated a bit like reusable rockets 🚀 it would save a lot of dollars 💵 in your money 💰 sorry 😐 but space x will get there first stay safe guys and girls ❤️david 🇬🇧👽

[@brucetharpe762]

DanTDM music...

[@garyklafta3411]

I think Elon Musk will outdo Orion.

[@primemac3dstudio18]

Orion is going to have a hard time finding water on mars for any landing. Orion will not find any water to land on the moon either. So I take it there skipping the landing part. So this Orion is more of a stunt.

[@dougmc666]

There are no plans to land Orion on the moon or Mars ever. Yes, the "stunt" is reentering the earths atmosphere at a bit less than twice the speed of the Space Shuttle or Crew Dragon.

[@HalNordmann]

Unlike Starship's stupid'one-size-fits-all'approach, Orion is just a component of a larger system. It has a dedicated lander.

[@charliedallachie3539]

Ugh we should have been more evolved by now...... we still don’t have a solution for long term like Alpha Centauri

[@blancovalverde760]

Elon Musk.. Will teach how is done....stay tune

[@Tarheel13]

NASA supports Musk.

[@KezieBeVibin]

Space x is better

[@abatos1146]

Competition makes better rockets for everyone.

[@jessiejordan5960]

NASA and SpaceX aren't the same thing. And saying that SpaceX is better is laughable, SpaceX is great at PR, that's the only true advantage they have.

[@HalNordmann]

@@jessiejordan5960 And at getting their stupid ideas funded, somehow.

[@brodyseiber265]

Space x is on a totally different level than these nasa rockets

[@wodenoftheangles3339]

These presentation wasn't politically correct enough.

[@antonioballve9779]

"do you have any advice? especially for the girls" I almost threw up

[@DGFishRfine1]

I ADORE human spaceflight, but SLS is becoming a joke. What a shame

[@timmystevenson]

Too small, way too small

[@felixnuwahid9879]

They can just improve Saturn V but choose not to 😬

[@dh7164]

Why all the hate for the SLS? At the very least, Orion will be able to get our crews to the station. And it can get to the moon and back as a normal journey. We can begin delivering and equipment and supplies to establish a permanent facility there, which can receive other kinds of space craft, and even become an assembly and launch point for exploration beyond the moon - one where spacecraft don't have to expend so much fuel trying to escape the atmosphere. I think people are beginning to have expectations for the space program, without the tax dollars or the technical contribution that would make such expectations somewhat fair. And even if SpaceX is building rockets too, they ultimately have no competitive way of resolving the cost because it simply doesn't pay for itself. Exploration is not always a self-sustaining venture. Until we start mining asteroids or deploying solar arrays that can deliver energy to us, or raise surplus crops on the surface of the moon, the only lucrative space venture is telecom satellites. There's nothing to whine about. Space exploration is not held back by NASA's inability for imagination. It is held back by the problems that hold us back in every other way - scarcity of resources and the darker side of human nature. If the US can't facilitate an economy that builds decent homes, roads, products and services etc., or a people that both overcome their differences with each other and their own selfishness to be a community that respects life and truth, and a military that protects all of it from those who consider us an obstacle to their own objectives, then we have neither the resources nor the reason to go to space. When we have taken care of those priorities, then we're free to engage in the noble activity of exploration - but we can only do it out of our excess, not out of our need. We're on our way back to having a decent launch pad for such activities, but I don't think we're there yet.

[@AmbientMorality]

We are not sending crew to the ISS on Orion, and LOP-G could be resupplied easily with existing Commercial Crew vehicles with modifications to the thermal protection system. SLS doesn't have much of a future because it is improbable that RS-25E funding will be provided in 2022. Vulcan-ACES will be nearly ready by then, so that also works for heavy lift missions (and is better at BEO than SLS). BFR will be getting close by then as well.

[@lavkmr1]

They keep changing too much ,

[@ArkaelDren]

So 90% of all materials, labor exc goes into the garbage bin "EVERY" launch? Wait, seriously this is an expendable rocket all but the return capsule? Let me lay out a scenario for you people. I am a US senator deciding the fate of the SLS program's funding 5 years from now. SpaceX is capable of launching the Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9 with a 95% reusable launch vehicle not to mention 70% cheaper launch costs with a proven safety record? Let me explain the reality of the SLS program getting funding in the future... NONE, ZERO, ZIP, NUNYA, BUPKISS, JACKSHIT, NEVER GONNA HAPPEN should I continue? I'm not a hardcore FanBoy but after watching this vid, with being in fabrication on the higher tech side, your never gonna prove to me legitimate business models going with this, unless its corrupt for some reason. BTW: I love the design and look of the SLS program.

[@mrsantana9094]

Sadly yes, a rocket that costs BILLIONS of dollars for just 1 single launch. Think about that for a second, it makes tax payers cringe.

[@bobbilaval6171]

Imagine your a US Senator and you have constituents that work for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, ATK, etc or live in the communities that are supported by this program. Imagine explaining to them why they are losing their job. That’s the only reason this program using Shuttle era components exists.

[@DJ-bh1ju]

14:30..... obviously being politically correct with most of the various races and religions represented...

[@kennethpace9887]

The SLS seems so limited...not big enough for trips past Mars. Not useful for trips shorter than the moon. You can't land on either since you can't get back off. WTH is this for other than visiting an asteroid? Total waste of money.

[@titanium7012]

The asteroid mission was cancelled ages ago. SLS is only for launching heavy probes and Orion, most Orion missions are to the moon plus block 2 is for mars missions, to go to mars they are of course going to use a habitat module for more space

[@Tarheel13]

lol