SpaceX Crew Successfully Return to Earth

[Pann]

Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken have returned to Earth aboard the SpaceX's Dragon capsule after a two month stay on the ISS.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53621102

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1290004579862667264

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1290018032950050816

What a fantastic achievement! Here's to many more successful missions!

[Zantos]

NASA saying they can save money by outsourcing human launches to private companies so they can spend it to go back to the moon and mars. The first moon launch was on a ship with the same technology as a calculator today. They could probably send someone there very easily and cheaply now. The real question is, are they even trying to?

[PC2]

That's insane that a business can do that now. Bravo!

@Zantos, of course NASA is looking into Mars but nobody has created a good mission design yet and there's no point in spending a trillion dollars over the next 20 years when the odds of failure might still be too high at that point.

[Nihilist74]

That's insane that a business can do that now. Bravo!

@Zantos, of course NASA is looking into Mars but nobody has created a good mission design yet and there's no point in spending a trillion dollars over the next 20 years when the odds of failure might still be too high at that point.

They probably well because the Chinese are trying to do it. The Chinese will push America like the Soviet Union did.

[PC2]

They probably well because the Chinese are trying to do it. The Chinese will push America like the Soviet Union did.

Yes obviously the USA won't settle for 2nd place but the idea that China already has the engineering and mission design for getting to Mars in the next 10-15 years is nonsense. You can't really start building stuff until the theory and overall design is ironed-out.

As far as the moon we will certainly go back but I don't think there is any big scientific breakthrough waiting for us on the moon so it's not really an urgent issue.

[Corvus]

If I was them, I'd have asked to stay up there. A lot safer than returning to the US in its current pandemic-ridden state.

But the fact that this happened is a good sign for moving forward with manned space exploration and setting up outposts. I doubt most of us will be around to see actually colonisation, no matter what Musk wants to do, but seeing an outpost on the Moon as the stepping stone for proceeding further will be a good first step.

[Endus]

NASA saying they can save money by outsourcing human launches to private companies so they can spend it to go back to the moon and mars. The first moon launch was on a ship with the same technology as a calculator today. They could probably send someone there very easily and cheaply now. The real question is, are they even trying to?

It wouldn't be remotely cheap nor easy. The issue isn't even really technological. In fact, a big advantage of the Apollo missions was the lack of technology.

Every single pound increases the cost to put a payload in space, and increases the fuel costs to push that payload to the Moon. While miniaturization has helped reduce weight for circuitry and such, we have so much more reliance on computer support and automation that we pack a heck of a lot more tech into things today. Cars are a decent comparison, in principle; cars are lighter today because the frames and panels have been made lighter, through better material tech, but the gains in safety are mostly in that same materials, in creating crumple zones and the like, and including things like airbags. Most of that just wouldn't be much help in a spacecraft. Some materials tech will improve things, but not by as much as you'd think, and those new materials are generally more expensive, not less, than historically used ones. Better navigation and displays are a nice comfort feature, but don't necessarily contribute a lot to safety and mission success. And the main cost is still going to be 95% lift and fuel costs, as it always was. That's where SpaceX's Dragon tech is really starting to make waves, because the reuseability reduces those costs significantly, moreso than any other technological innovation since the Space Shuttle (same principle, really; it was reuseable).

[PACOX]

NASA saying they can save money by outsourcing human launches to private companies so they can spend it to go back to the moon and mars. The first moon launch was on a ship with the same technology as a calculator today. They could probably send someone there very easily and cheaply now. The real question is, are they even trying to?

We never lost the ability to go to the Moon. Its not exactly 'hard' for rocket scientists who have a grasp on orbital dynamics. There was no need to go because all we were basically doing was driving then turning back around. We did that before we really learned how to live in space or why would even want to, we're still figuring that out.

The difference between moon landings back then and whats planned is that moon landings will be done from an orbital station with scientific objects involved. The goal is to have a be able to send astronauts down to the moon from the station as needed instead requiring a rocket to make the 3 day flight each time you want to do a scientific expedition. There's no need for a permanent human presence on the Moon, not right now, but if we could build a lab that astronauts can come and go as needed that will do a lot for science. Kind of how we might plot a base down in Antarctica and expeditions come and go as needed.

Astronaunts going to Mars will probably be stationed at an orbital outpost while only planets surface for brief moments of time.

[PC2]

It wouldn't be remotely cheap nor easy. The issue isn't even really technological. In fact, a big advantage of the Apollo missions was the lack of technology.

Every single pound increases the cost to put a payload in space, and increases the fuel costs to push that payload to the Moon. While miniaturization has helped reduce weight for circuitry and such, we have so much more reliance on computer support and automation that we pack a heck of a lot more tech into things today. Cars are a decent comparison, in principle; cars are lighter today because the frames and panels have been made lighter, through better material tech, but the gains in safety are mostly in that same materials, in creating crumple zones and the like, and including things like airbags. Most of that just wouldn't be much help in a spacecraft. Some materials tech will improve things, but not by as much as you'd think, and those new materials are generally more expensive, not less, than historically used ones. Better navigation and displays are a nice comfort feature, but don't necessarily contribute a lot to safety and mission success. And the main cost is still going to be 95% lift and fuel costs, as it always was. That's where SpaceX's Dragon tech is really starting to make waves, because the reuseability reduces those costs significantly, moreso than any other technological innovation since the Space Shuttle (same principle, really; it was reuseable).

Yes but cost/cheapness is a function of how good our technology is at any given point in time, so those two issues can't truly be separated from each other. If we can only land a person on Mars (and return them) in the next 10 years by bankrupting the economy for 1 mission then that means we don't already have the technology we're looking for.

[Easo]

Well, I just am glad that there are positive news too and that this brings us one step closer to renewed space exploration.

[BlackDruid96]

Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken have returned to Earth aboard the SpaceX's Dragon capsule after a two month stay on the ISS.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53621102

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1290004579862667264

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1290018032950050816

What a fantastic achievement! Here's to many more successful missions!

Finally! Some good news in 2020!

[Poopymonster]

Finally! Some good news in 2020!

NASA just got a transmission from Hurley and Behnken, asking when their capsule leaves for Earth.

[Forrest White]

They are going to ISS on November 14. Hope the weather won't change their plans.

[Overlord Anrakyr]

Can’t wait til we have a habitat on the moon.

Not gonna happen.

The Moon is considered kinda "public property" by international treaties, so no one country can build or take property on the Moon.

[Masark]

Not gonna happen.

The Moon is considered kinda "public property" by international treaties, so no one country can build or take property on the Moon.

That in no way prohibits constructing non-military bases on the moon.

Have a read of the actual treaty in question.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Outer...Treaty_of_1967

[Pann]

SpaceX have put some pictures of the Falcon 9 and Dragon, ahead of Saturday's launch, on their Twitter feed.

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/13...784680448?s=20

[smityx]

Hahahaha, who follows treaties anymore. You think the Chinese aren't going to eventually start setting civilian (aka Military bases) up basses on the moon. Then India, Then Russia, Then ESA, Then ... Then ...

[DeanFinniss]

this is really a breakthrough