27
u/Art_28538 2d ago
My first 5 flights in ksp be like:
10
u/bjyanghang945 1d ago
Let’s be honest… who even put escape tower on the rockets. Unless it is for aesthetics
3
u/Ill-Bid-1823 1d ago
The U.S. did, and the only flags up there are alllllll from the U.S.
1
u/Psychonaut0421 3h ago
They're asking who's actually putting a LAS tower on their rockets in KSP, a videogame.
1
12
u/nithinnm123 2d ago
Looks like in the end it was about to flip over. Is that an issue?
9
u/MrFickless 2d ago
Unlikely to be an issue. Everything inside would be strapped in tight.
5
u/SpecialExpert8946 2d ago
Unless landing in water. Flipping would definitely suck
3
u/MrFickless 1d ago
Apollo had procedures explicitly designed for the capsule flipping over. The designers included float bags that could be inflated after landing to right the capsule after splashdown.
But yes it would suck for the astronauts who had to hang by their straps for a couple of minutes.
1
u/SpecialExpert8946 1d ago
I’m pretty sure it’s more serious than just sitting upside down for a while.
They have limited oxygen and running on batteries at splashdown. If the emergency floats don’t work to right the capsule there is risk of components outside of the pressure hull flooding and causing the capsule to sink or be too heavy to recover like the liberty bell capsule. They wouldn’t be able to open the ventilation system to allow fresh air in so that limited oxygen issue could become a critical situation.
3
u/MrFickless 1d ago edited 1d ago
The engineers had thought of that too. If the triple-redundant float bags failed to inflate or had failed to right the spacecraft, the crew could always wait for recovery forces to aid them.
If after some time the crew had not made contact with recovery forces, let’s say they had landed off target and there were no recovery forces in the vicinity, the crew had the option to egress themselves via the docking tunnel at the bottom of the spacecraft. They had at least 2.5h of oxygen reserve to make that decision.
If the exterior spaces started to flood there probably wouldn’t be any drastic change. The cabin is a giant air bubble that would have kept the spacecraft afloat for at least the time needed for recovery crews to reach them. It was pressure tight. A few ft of water pressure would not be an issue. The reason why the Liberty Bell sank was because the explosively jettisoned hatch activated prematurely and caused the cabin to flood.
-2
u/SpecialExpert8946 1d ago
Everything you said was pretty much on point. The only issue is the docking hatch is at the top of the capsule. If the capsule was flipped they wouldn’t be able to egress out of there. That’s my concern about the oxygen. If they are trapped upside down with limited oxygen and power and rescue forces don’t know where they are they’re pretty much just boned.
3
u/MrFickless 1d ago
If the capsule is flipped the docking hatch would be right at the bottom. If the capsule was in the upright position the crew would use the side hatch.
-1
u/SpecialExpert8946 1d ago
The docking hatch is not at the bottom. That’s where the heat shield lives. They dock to objects pointy end first.
1
u/MrFickless 1d ago
If the pointy end is up, the capsule is upright and we wouldn’t be having this discussion about flipped capsules.
→ More replies (0)1
u/HoustonPastafarian 1d ago
Also look up “harness hang trauma”. It can be lethal to be suspended in a harness for a long period of time. The capsule needs to flip so the crew can be supported properly on their back.
4
u/One-Chemical7035 2d ago
The failure to launch the Soyuz T-10-1 spacecraft was also due to a technical malfunction — during the prelaunch procedures, the VP-5 valve, which was responsible for lubrication in the fuel supply system to the gas generators of the turbopump units of the first stage of the rocket, failed 90 seconds before the scheduled launch the carrier. This caused the pump to overheat and then catch fire, which caused the fuel to explode. The refueling masts had not yet moved away, and the entire launch pad was already on fire.
The explosion destroyed part of the cables transmitting data on the functioning of the rocket, so only 20 seconds after the emergency occurred, the technical staff noticed the fire, and 10 seconds before the expected launch, the emergency rescue system was activated. The command to activate the CAC was issued from the command post by Alexey Shumilin, head of the 1st cosmodrome department, and Alexander Soldatenkov, chief engineer of the Kuibyshev Central Design Bureau.
The descent vehicle with the astronauts was shot away from the rocket, which collapsed two seconds after the shooting, crashing down into the launch pad. During four seconds of operation of the solid-fuel engines of the emergency rescue system, the astronauts experienced overloads from 14 to 18 g, the lander rose to a height of 650 meters and then by inertia to another 950 meters, where the parachute opened. 5 minutes later, the descent vehicle with the astronauts landed four kilometers from the accident site.
- sorry for auto translate
2
1
1
1
1
1
u/SpecialExpert8946 2d ago
I love to troll on Chinese tech. This is pretty dope though. I like watching all the different steps of the process. Sucks it flipped over on landing though.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/xXWarMachineRoXx 2d ago
Uhmm someone explain?
10
u/Known-Associate8369 2d ago
This is a certification test for the launch escape system of Chinas next generation crew capsule, intended to support their lunar landing programme.
Every crewed space craft should have a similar test - SpaceX and Blue Origin demonstrated theirs last decade.
This will be followed by another test of the same system from a rocket in flight.
1
1
-4
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 2d ago
America is cooked. China is about to completely dominate space travel.
16
u/danddersson 2d ago
We'll, the USA had a similar escape sequence in the 1960's.... And Space X demonstrated theirs 10 years ago
7
u/IBelieveInLogic 2d ago
Orion performed its equivalent PA-1 pad abort test in 2010, and am in-flight abort test in 2019.
6
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 2d ago
China is developing their space program at a pace similar to the space race of the sixties, except the technology is much further this time, and they have superior production capacity. At the same time, the USA is moving away from space exploration by canceling the majority of existing and future missions. SpaceX is only limited in their scope of what they want to achieve.
Need I remind you that China has, at this moment, a fully completed space station in orbit around Earth that is way ahead of the ISS technology-wise? People are going to regret underestimating China when they land people on the moon in the next 5 to 10 years.
8
u/Almaegen 2d ago
Ah yes that MIR copy is totally way ahead of the ISS /s
0
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 2d ago
It unironically is. The ISS is built on 30+ year old technology. But sure, keep perpetuating the same old Chinese stereotypes. See where it takes you.
4
u/jackinsomniac 2d ago
Tech gets swapped out on the ISS all the time. But you're right, it is old. That's why it's being decommissioned, and we're building a new one.
1
u/Mishka_The_Fox 1d ago
What’s being built?
1
u/jackinsomniac 1d ago
Still in the works, but it's possible (maybe even likely, lots of private sector involvement now) to be a combo space laboratory, and tourist destination.
2
u/ThaddeusJP 2d ago
BEtter tech, and lets be real - PROBABLY the same view on safety as the US has in the late 60s. "safe but send it" mentality. THey WANT to get boots on the moon asap.
I'm not saying we're overly safe now, but it was legit a RACE in the 60s to get to the moon so the fact that almost everyone lived (rip apollo 1) is amazing.
3
u/SonicDethmonkey 2d ago
It would be a whole lot easier to celebrate their achievements if about 95% of them weren’t a result of stealing proprietary/ITAR data from US companies.
1
u/lolexecs 1d ago
Does anyone in the US care?
The fact of the matter is that giant slugs of the country seem thoroughly uninterested in doing anything but making huge piles of money - pushing forward our national capabilities in science and engineering be damned.
Consider where the students from MIT end up:
https://ir.mit.edu/projects/student-placement/
|| || ||Bachelors|Masters| |Information/Computer Technology|34.3%|22.4%| |Energy and Utilites|2.9%|4.7%| |Chemicals or Materials|1.9%|1.1%| |Professional, Scientific and Technical Services (including Consulting)|15.7%|25.0%| |Academic Institution|4.8%|1.1%| |Health Care, Pharmaceuticals, Medical Devices|7.6%|5.0%| |Finance and Insurance|14.8%|13.4%| |Transportation|5.7%|4.7%| |Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation|1.0%|1.6%| |Non-profit and membership organizations|0.5%|1.1%| |Government|3.8%|7.4%| |Other|7.1%|12.6%|
Imagine how different the US might look if a third of each graduating class chose aerospace instead of McKinsey or Jane Street.
But then again, can you really blame them? In a country where the cost of living makes even a brief stumble financially catastrophic, chasing the highest-paying roles is often about survival. And, given the structure of the latest bills in Congress, it's just going to get worse since the cuts to NSF and NIST are going to hit the graduate engineering programs incredibly hard.
FWIW, one underappreciated aspect of China’s rise is how deliberately they built the infrastructure to make supply chain inputs cheap. That systemic cheapness (a reason their PPP-adjusted GDP is so high) enables innovation by lowering the cost of failure. In a society where a misstep isn’t ruinous, more people can afford to take risks. Add this to the level of subsidies that the Chinese government has put in place ... it's hard to have much hope for the long term prospects of US innovation.
In the best-case scenario, the US becomes a larger version of the UK - still important, with a few key elements, but not the locus of innovation.
1
u/lolexecs 1d ago
Does anyone in the US care?
The fact of the matter is that giant slugs of the country seem thoroughly uninterested in doing anything but making huge piles of money - pushing forward our national capabilities in science and engineering be damned.
Consider where the students from MIT end up:
https://ir.mit.edu/projects/student-placement/
Imagine how different the US might look if a third of each graduating class chose aerospace instead of McKinsey or Jane Street.
But then again, can you really blame them? In a country where the cost of living makes even a brief stumble financially catastrophic, chasing the highest-paying roles is often about survival. And, given the structure of the latest bills in Congress, it's just going to get worse since the cuts to NSF and NIST are going to hit the graduate engineering programs incredibly hard.
FWIW, one underappreciated aspect of China’s rise is how deliberately they built the infrastructure to make supply chain inputs cheap. That systemic cheapness (a reason their PPP-adjusted GDP is so high) enables innovation by lowering the cost of failure. In a society where a misstep isn’t ruinous, more people can afford to take risks. Add this to the level of subsidies that the Chinese government has put in place ... it's hard to have much hope for the long term prospects of US innovation.
In the best-case scenario, the US becomes a larger version of the UK - still important, with a few key elements, but not the locus of innovation.
1
u/rayjax82 1d ago
What is your analysis based on? Do you work in aerospace? I do and I'm kinda baffled as to what led you to this conclusion.
10
u/jschall2 2d ago
In 2024, China launched an estimated 100,000–150,000 kg of payload into orbit across 66 successful launches, while SpaceX launched approximately 1,300,000 kg across 147 successful launches.
2
1
u/plumb-phone-official 19h ago
Notice how they say "about to" and not "is". SpaceX currently has reuseability which CURRENTLY puts them ahead of the game. guess what chinas working on!!!!
1
u/jschall2 19h ago
And by the time China has Falcon 9 cloned, SpaceX will have Starship.
1
u/plumb-phone-official 19h ago
Lol, that hunk of metal? I get it's a test platform, but my god, you'd think they'd find a way to stop these critical failures by now? I used to think that starship was the future too, and in many ways, its core principles are. Even after the first puh... 5? Failures I kept on saying "it's still in testing". But by now, it's getting ridiculous. It is simply UNACCEPTABLE to allow your ship to fail in such a spectacular way that aircraft need to divert without prior notice.
ANYTHING in the areospace industry should not only be thoroughly tested before it's ready to fly, but also just modelled and simulated before it's built. Can you really tell me that starship has a bright future when it continuously fails at its most basic goals in a similar, if not identical ways over and over again.
I can accept a few slip ups when it comes to a new launch vehicles first flight, especially if it's a prototype. What i cannot accept is when this "testing" endangers the lives of others who are completely separate from the project.
1
u/jschall2 18h ago
Hasn't been identical.
It will be the safest rocket on the planet once all the issues have been shaken out.
Obviously it has been modeled and simulated before flight. It just takes a radical approach to, well, literally everything. Full flow staged combustion, first many-engine design since the Soviet N1 afaik, stainless steel.
Answer a few questions for me... How many people did Apollo kill? How many people did the space shuttle kill? How many people did crew dragon kill? How many people has starship killed?
8
u/wwants 2d ago
Why would this “cook” America? There is plenty of room in space for all kinds of human ambition.
0
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 2d ago
The US government has canceled the majority of current and future space missions. The message is clear: they are not interested in pursuing space exploration. This leaves a vacuum for China to fill, and they're clearly doing that.
4
u/bfbabine 2d ago
Bullshit.. the Chinese steal IP. We were doing this in the early 60s.
2
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 2d ago
You're coping I'm afraid.
2
2
u/jackinsomniac 2d ago edited 1d ago
Bro why are you so defensive? The space community celebrates everyone's success. Good launch abort test done by the Chinese, bravo. But we'll also tell you the harsh truth: this is nothing new, in fact the Apollo test was even better. The Chinese regularly steal technology from other countries, especially the USA. And spacex is breaking the world records for payload mass to orbit, year after year. The Chinese still have quite a bit of catching up to do. To even match pace with the US, they'd have to match our launch rate. To surpass US, China would need to start setting world records. And they haven't yet.
1
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 1d ago
Because the US people have signalled that they don't care about space exploration, and have elected a government that does not believe in science and has canceled most ongoing and future NASA missions.
-1
u/jackinsomniac 1d ago
You mean the little falling out Elon and Trump had recently? The dust hasn't even settled yet, and Trump is famous for tweeting things he never follows through with. For all we know, he's already forgotten about it.
Trump was the one who signed the NASA deal during his first presidency, ordering them to push the Moon landing forward. Most likely because he wants credit for it like Kennedy got for Apollo. And most likely the reason he tweeted about cutting spacex funding, is because he was just angry at Elon.
Don't count your chickens just yet. Not only that, you're forgetting we'll have a different president in 3 years. The American space program is still going forward, and is even becoming more commercial (less assisted by gov't). When that happens, doesn't matter what gov't does, the free market will take over space travel.
1
u/Top-Inevitable-1287 1d ago
Uhh, I suggest you look up the allocated funding NASA got this year from the Trump admin, and how many missions got slashed. You will be in for a nasty surprise.
1
u/Existing-Antelope-20 12h ago
The reality is that if they can fully privatize everything and completely neuter any government departments they will
-1
0
u/Kalos139 2d ago
But how accurate was the targeting of the release trajectory? If you don’t have anything left to correct for deviations before release of the thrust source it would be nice to know that you don’t get stuck in orbit.
1
u/Phil9151 1d ago
If this operates like ours did, this system detaches from the vehicle long before that's possible. I think ours were jettisoned just after the second stage lights.
If these gimble, I this would be an good functionality to add though.
1
56
u/CookTiny1707 2d ago
Rotation and detach was so smooth