6511th Parachute Test Group - El Centro, CA ... this is where all the chutes were developed, tested and certified for the space program. You can find a page on FB for that unit.
Wasn't all of this worked out 65 years ago by NASA going from Project Mercury through Gemini and then ending with Apollo? Did all that prep and success get thrown out along the way and now it all has to be re-invented? These videos act they are coming up with something entirely new. Even with the concept of the heat shield and soft landing in the ocean, parachute braking.?.... What exactly is the major difference with Orion and those earlier program technologies? Just askin'...
The form is dictated by function to shed speed very quickly without killing occupants. Powered deceleration and landing such as SpaceX is developing just isn’t practical with the mass and velocity of an Orion returning from trans-lunar mission.
coconinoco I know. But these engineers are behaving like they came up with 1) heat shields on the bottom 2) parachute deceleration and 3) ocean landing. I'm just saying the basic concepts for these things are not new. There are still plenty of people around who remember all these things being used in much earlier projects. Your answer and that of ELECTOSTATIC ION ENGINES seem to imply that these are new concepts. It has been said that even the Shuttle could have done a glider landing even after a trans-lunar mission. Too bad the Shuttle was too big for lunar work. Wouldn't that have been nice?...The SpaceX powered landing should work for short lightweight tourist flights. But I personally would not like to take that ride up...
Pinkieweasel The only thing I'm saying is that Orion project is actually so different from the Apollo program that better and safe ways had to be developed because of size, speed, heat on reentry and weight are concerned. The capsule concept is still the most cost effective way to launch and return to earth, though none of it is cheap.
I think they did it because what they did previously was 40~50 years ago. But now things are different and technology has advanced, plus the safety that comes along with it as well. Things change, so why not this as well?
@@kaiusernameisbetter2522 they do not reuse them because not only would they be hard to refurbish as they are explosively cut and it would be hard to find them in the first place.
Diameter in feet, feet per second, miles per hour? What's going on? In the early years NASA used the metric system. And now? Back to the imperial system?
ELECTROSTATIC ION ENGINES indeed if those chutes fail Orion will be at the bottom of the South Pacific and crushed until nothing is left. they must work if we are going to get Orion back in one piece this ship will be hauling crew to the ISS in 6 missions.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Man the room in that little landing module is amazing, NASA somehow managed to pack 7,200 "square" ft of parachute fabric somewhere inside it.
It's actually quite big, not huge but it's bigger than apollo
6511th Parachute Test Group - El Centro, CA ... this is where all the chutes were developed, tested and certified for the space program. You can find a page on FB for that unit.
Had no idea so many were used. That's really neat.
Always fascinating and informative. Thank you.
Why do parachutes sometimes fail to open? Isn't there some kind of guaranteed positive parachute inflater?
Go NASA!!
Thank you for sharing this with us :)
Wasn't all of this worked out 65 years ago by NASA going from Project Mercury through Gemini and then ending with Apollo? Did all that prep and success get thrown out along the way and now it all has to be re-invented? These videos act they are coming up with something entirely new. Even with the concept of the heat shield and soft landing in the ocean, parachute braking.?.... What exactly is the major difference with Orion and those earlier program technologies? Just askin'...
The basic differences are size, weight and speed.
The form is dictated by function to shed speed very quickly without killing occupants. Powered deceleration and landing such as SpaceX is developing just isn’t practical with the mass and velocity of an Orion returning from trans-lunar mission.
coconinoco I know. But these engineers are behaving like they came up with 1) heat shields on the bottom 2) parachute deceleration and 3) ocean landing. I'm just saying the basic concepts for these things are not new. There are still plenty of people around who remember all these things being used in much earlier projects. Your answer and that of ELECTOSTATIC ION ENGINES seem to imply that these are new concepts. It has been said that even the Shuttle could have done a glider landing even after a trans-lunar mission. Too bad the Shuttle was too big for lunar work. Wouldn't that have been nice?...The SpaceX powered landing should work for short lightweight tourist flights. But I personally would not like to take that ride up...
Pinkieweasel
The only thing I'm saying is that Orion project is actually so different from the Apollo program that better and safe ways had to be developed because of size, speed, heat on reentry and weight are concerned. The capsule concept is still the most cost effective way to launch and return to earth, though none of it is cheap.
I think they did it because what they did previously was 40~50 years ago. But now things are different and technology has advanced, plus the safety that comes along with it as well. Things change, so why not this as well?
Like the Soyuz, will Orion have the small rocket boosters on the bottom that fire right before touchdown to soften the landing even further?
No, it won't need them as it will land in the ocean, not on land.
Zach Lewis My lack of attention... Its gonna come back to get me someday. Thanks for pointing that out.
This looks like an old Apollo capsule! I love it!!!
And this glass cockpit is protected from the deadly Van Allen radiation belts? NO. this is all bull.
Kay Hurt And Islam is a religion of peace 👌🏻
@@DebbyHurtado817 no it has quite a bit of radiation shielding built into the walls.
Are they going to collect the first parachutes or let them in the ocean polluting it? What about all the other small parts?
They collect tehm and reuse them i believe
@@kaiusernameisbetter2522 they do not reuse them because not only would they be hard to refurbish as they are explosively cut and it would be hard to find them in the first place.
they are not recovered
Diameter in feet, feet per second, miles per hour? What's going on? In the early years NASA used the metric system. And now? Back to the imperial system?
Karl Knaddel No no sir what they are using is the RETARD SYSTEM BECAUSE THEY ARE A BUNCH OF KNUCKLE DRAGGING RE-TARDS!
genius
it all depends of the chutes they must work to put Orion in the water.
Safely!
ELECTROSTATIC ION ENGINES indeed if those chutes fail Orion will be at the bottom of the South Pacific and crushed until nothing is left. they must work if we are going to get Orion back in one piece this ship will be hauling crew to the ISS in 6 missions.
goods baru pake exyu
Hi
december and this ufo flies
Eric Gibson But... it's pretty thoroughly identified. So it would be a PTIFO
Big head I don't like you!
LOL no wonder we can’t get to Mars
Welcome to the 1960s. For Pete's sake, private companies are doing thrusted landings and NASA is still doing splash downs.
Spacex also does splashdowns
Orion isnt built by nasa its built by lockheed just like dragon is built by spacex for nasa.
mirando los videos nasa gana dinero?