Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,061 Excellent

About ZooNamedGames

  • Rank
    A Frequent Commenter

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Location
    Leaning on the Flight Director's Console
  • Interests
    Space. Space History. Retro Gaming. Getting into space.

Recent Profile Visitors

13,852 profile views
  1. Y’all do realize NASA said they have spare engines on site right? Set to take at most a week to perform a swap (if that’s even needed). Which currently does not appear to be the case. Jim even said that a retest may not be necessary if they got the data they needed. Everyone realizes the docking port on Orion can’t handle the forces of a tug in a reverse orientation (unless its extremely low thrust). Merlin (much less raptor) generates so much thrust that the docking port would be crushed, who knows what kind of damage the capsule itself would endure as it hasn’t been designed for t
  2. No photos yet but there's now 2 sets of SRB segments on the launchpad. Regardless of opinion- countdown to launch has begun with the stacking of these segments requiring them to launch within a ~year before they exceed their limits & need to be unstacked.
  3. This is still a problem. Is there any solution known up to this point? This issue is driving me mad. Worst yet, all the encounters I'm getting are anywhere from 2,000 days in the future to 50,000 days. It makes no sense.
  4. Despite the unavoidable delays imposed by COVID & the busiest hurricane season I’ve ever lived to see- SLS has only drifted 1 month off of the schedule I made back in July. I also ran the timeline past a Stennis SC worker & he agreed my timelines were close to what he expected based on their work. The booster was predicted to arrive before the end of the year back in July. Now, I’m predicting arrival before the end of January. Assembly & MLP integration by/before July. Testing close out by September, Wet Dress Rehearsal by or before November. Launch within that month is s
  5. I just made it to match the rest of the emotes.
  6. Well the first docking has always been slated for A3. I had been hearing that in light of Starliner’s issues that a similar docking test would be done on A2, however I hadn’t heard where in the mission it would be done. I find this ironic since Starliner did test the docking system, just didn’t attempt to rendezvous & dock but whatever. Good to test beforehand anyway.
  7. Well while you work on that, Artemis 1 Orion is fully built & waiting at the ksc while it’s sisters, Artemis 2 & 3 Orion’s finish production. Those 2, actually supporting lunar missions from the outset- rather than retrofitting.
  8. Also NASA saw that Ares 1 would be an expensive LEO vehicle (not to mention dangerous)- where a single vehicle would be cheaper to design than 2, 3 or however many you’d need to support LEO missions.
  9. Bear in mind it would hold more crew as well, if it couldn’t, then it’s just as limited as Orion in any respects. Orion can at least carry 4-6 astronauts. Dragon 2/Starliner is only rated to for a few hours to reach the ISS- not days or the week needed. I’ve read nothing that says they’d only wear vests. There will be dummies on A1 that will have vests- but that’s to collect data- not protect the crew.
  10. Somehow I missed this- But Dragon 2 doesn't have the radiation shielding to make the trip, doesn't have the ECLSS to (7 undocked days, just barely enough to make it to the moon at all), SM is insufficient to do any lunar operations, spacecraft frame isn't built for lunar re-entry, it's too tiny (I couldn't imagine living in what's the size of a SUV for 3 days with a crew of 3-4 others). Same applies to Starliner. By the time you modify those vehicles, they would exceed their launch vehicles abilities & necessitate a larger vehicle. Orion, is the only one that passes all of those
  11. And the vehicle was still in development. LOPG was first envisioned as the Deep Space Habitat in 2012- a year after SLS was signed into development. SLS was largely a LV built to ferry Orion & maybe cargo. It's destination was always deep space. Even before Artemis, EM-1 was to do a lunar flyby- this was back in 2012 as well. By comparison- Saturn V also lacked much in the end goal. In fact LOR was only selected 5 years before Saturn V first flew. Prior to that- the entire structure of Apollo was also- in limbo. Which is why the CSM's engine is so powerful- it was initially designed to lan
  12. It can still take multiple days, maybe even weeks to get a launch underway, so those loses are considerable.
  13. Never outright said SLS put it into any orbit. That'd be a challenge for a cyrogenic booster to keep its fuel from boiling off over the course of 3 days to get there.
  14. SLS is to send crew to LOPG, whereby they will descend to the lunar surface. By comparison, Apollo's Saturn V only did the TLI kick- relying entirely on the CSM to do the work. Whereas here SLS does the work. It's mission is crew to lunar orbit- of what kind is irrelevant since from LOPG, they can access any other orbit needed using another craft. "But Zoo, if SLS can't do it then clearly it isn't a good vehicle", Comanifesting cargo is a trait NASA has no interest in repeating. They can maximize the abilities of SLS best & keep costs down by splitting launches. Which is critical for susta
  • Create New...