Orion spacecraft docking with the ISS

[URProductions]

@SteveNovak No space exploration is a waste of taxpayers dollars. Orion was a great idea and Obama is a people pleasing loser.

[Vortigaunt501]

FAKE AND GAY

[EmisoraRadioPatio]

I hope this programme continues in development. It would be a shame for humanity if it was cancelled...

[KaOssis]

Talk about Litracay Incompetence! I was referring to the title you use for this Vid, NOT the fucking vid! Gotobed, and buy yourself a dictionary with 10,000 word's in it, not 2!

[KaOssis]

this is a computer generated video, and the owner should fucking state so in it's title, because it's FRAUDULENT NASA infertile sHitlerite!

[ZaneKaminski]

You're really immature, you know that?

It's obviously computer generated because Project Constellation is not, well, finished...

Despite this, we really don't need your stupidity with respect to this matter.

[cheitman1991]

Lol and i dont care what they call it, i will still refer to the Lunar Lander as the LEM

[hoggie643]

Will these craft be able to carry the amount of parts the shuttle does to expand the iss??It will be sad to see the shuttle go.imo

[abigail1922]

This is true meaning of awesome

[bombarderoazul]

They should have added an orbital module like the russian soyuz or the chinese shenzhou. In fact the Chinese shenzhou is probably the best one, because they can leave the orbital module in orbit for six months after the crew has returned and conduct experiments or function as a satellite.

[abigail1922]

The Chinese stole the technology fom the US

[dohoon1117]

Nah, it's just the old apollo shape. The Orion has 2.5 times Apollo's internal volume, and it has spcae shuttle toilets, and far better computers (if any of you guys knew that the shuttle uses CPU's made in the 1980's, as well as boeing 787 glass-cockpit design (although I really don't know what an airplane name is doing in this)

[cheitman1991]

Yeah and there will be 10 times less controls in the Orion compared to over 400 switches in the Apollo. Much more stream lined

[A86]

We're not going back to Apollo though we are using the general Apollo design. Albeit vastly updated and upgraded. The reason we're going back to that design is because it's vastly more efficient for lunar missions than using a spaceplane for lunar missions.

Comparing Orion to Apollo is like comparing MS-DOS to Windows XP Advanced or Windows Vista/Mojave. Orion will be more advanced than the Space Shuttle and also reusable. It will hold 4-6 astronauts instead of just 3.

[jamesthq]

i know the old saying dont mess with what works but still Nasa's imagination in spaceship design is lacking lol.

[A86]

"but still Nasa's imagination in spaceship design is lacking lol"

Not really. Orion is largely strictly utilitarian. There's no reason for it to be shaped any differently. Wings are not necessary to fly to the Moon and they would simply be destroyed upon reentry since interplanetary vehicles reenter Earth's atmosphere at much higher velocities and under more aerodynamic stress than the Space Shuttle.

[jamesthq]

well i know is all about creating the cheapest but best design I mean its not pimp my space craft I know. I don't expect them to put a space equilivent of a spoiler and spinners to make it flashy but still the shuttle looked cool this just looks like been there done that kinda thing even though I understand exactly what you mean.

[Membrane556]

The COTS vehicles are a lot more interesting then this thats where the real action is.

Dragon,dreamchaser,pretty can do all the same stuff for one tenth the cost including flying to the moon.

BTW Ares I is a spectacularly stupid idea as it's reinventing the wheel and a very expensive one at that and has no room for growth if the vehicle is too heavy.

This is a first in the history of spaceflight as every crewed launch vehicle before has had growth potential designed into it from the start.

[Aviator178]

for your information, to the people who think this is stupid, this has got to be one of NASA'S best ideas ever. The reason we ending the space shuttle program in 2015, is because it is really only used for satellite deplyment, and cargo to deliver to the ISS. Now we could honestly never use the space shuttle to go to the moon, there a few reasons, one not enough fuel, and two not enough thrust to eject out of earth orbit. So this a great idea, trust me I know what I'm talking about.

[Membrane556]

How they are implementing it is stupid.

If it wasn't for brain dead management at nasa this could be flying 5 even 7 years sooner and for half the development cost.

First dumb mistake building Ares 1 and not dumping it when it was found to have too many problems.

Second using a carbon copy of apollo's shape vs applying what was learned over the past 35 years.

[toodoo213]

The Apollo guys were way smarter dumbass! They were into space! Your into Pornograpy!

[Membrane556]

For it's time it was a smart shape but they didn't have supercomputers and fluid dynamic modeling the most powerful computer back in 1969 was less powerful then a cell phone today though it was out of date by the time it flew just go compare the specs of soyuz to apollo.

BTW the same guys who designed apollo also later did the X24 and HL20 shapes.

The sad fact is this is a dead end program and will be obsoleted by the time it flies by the various private and Russian vehicles.

[FafaDublin]

The space shuttle was going nowhere and was dangerous. Stupid Soyuz as people say is much more efficient and reliable than the shuttle.

So if the US decides to go back to an "Apollo on Steroids", then I have to applause!

[3A7C]

Ok. Space Shuttle: toilet, shower, sleeping quarters.

Apollo/Soyuz/Orion: Space diapers, living in your suit, and sleeping in your chair.

Since the lunar mission lasts at least 3 days, imagine living in those conditions.

Was it Yeager that said, "Spam in a can"?

[Membrane556]

Soyuz has a toilet in the orbital module also the shuttle does not have a shower they take sponge baths.

Copying the soyuz would have been a lot smarter then reusing apollo as they could have 2x the habital volume and an airlock for the same mass.

[csj1969]

Seems we are going backwards in technology, back to Apollo.

[xXxTeashxXx]

lmao nice cant wait till the orion comes out

[globemaster3]

i learnt

[globemaster3]

please can some1 tell me how to dock and de-dock in orbiter

[pyrogenix19]

yes please someone! I have been trying for weeks and I still cant get it to dock and de-dock

[lidul]

what do u mean?in a video game or in real life?

[CrankYanker606]

Indeed.