Orion vs. Federation

[Casualnaut]

Remember when Vostok and Mercury capsules were the big thing? Probably not, but Russia and the United States are doing what they were doing around 50-60 years ago: to building the next innovative capsule. Here are the new capsules of this generation!:

 

Orion - The US has Lockheed Martin and Airbus working on the Orion Capsule. Meant to take humans farther than ever, Orion is supposed to send 4 astronauts to capture some asteroids and go to Mars in the near future. It is supposed to go with the Deep Space Habitat, which is also being developed.

Federation - You have probably never heard of Federation, but it is Russia's new replacement for Soyuz. Federation is a 6-seater meant for the Moon and possibly Mars. It is supposed to dock with the supposed Russian Lunar Orbital Station, and possibly help in colonization of the Moon. It possibly might send Russians to Mars if they design it to. Able to survive reentry, the heat shield possibly could have little landing legs. Said to slow down in atmosphere using environmentally-clean retro-rockets, Roscosmos hopes to have all phases of atmospheric flight be harmless to the environment.

Which craft would you prefer? The all-lunar Federation capsule or the into-the-unknown Orion capsule?

[tater]

Orion in partial form has actually flown, and the next flight article actually exists. PPTS (or whatever it is called these days) is farther away from flying people than Orion is (and that's saying something, given the whole SLS/Orion debacle).

[_Augustus_]

Orion has kind of already flown and the next 2 capsules are under construction. Sure, it'll probably be cancelled within the next 5 years and might only fly with a crew once, but at least it exists.

Federation/PPTS is basically a paper project.

[tater]

There's a mockup or it, lol. Course there's a mockup of the Millennium Falcon, too.

[Starman4308]

Of the two, I honestly suspect the ISRO vehicle is the most likely to be a long-term success. I strongly suspect Orion will fly once or twice before the Senate quietly quashes that entire embarassing porkbarrel program, with US astronauts carried to space aboard commercial vehicles like the Boeing CST-100 Starliner and SpaceX Dragon. Federation... maybe if it saves Roskosmos some money? They'll be deprived of their cash cow of sending US (and probably Canadian/European) astronauts to the ISS once the US commercial vehicles start regularly flying.

[tater]

Orion will continue until there is an actual craft already functioning that shows how pointless it is, because it's a jobs program, and Congress is unaware that "sunk cost" is a fallacy. So when a BFS flies past Orion stuck to DSG, or Blue shows up to resupply the Starbucks Orion is docked to with something better, then they'll think about killing it.

[_Augustus_]

35 minutes ago, tater said:

So when a BFS flies past Orion stuck to DSG, or Blue shows up to resupply the Starbucks Orion is docked to with something better, then they'll think about killing it.

What about Elon's Moon tourism?

[tater]

17 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

What about Elon's Moon tourism?

Yeah, the TPS will get a workout, for sure. The life support is still not as long-duration, but that could easily be addressed with a mission module I'd think. That said, we're not talking about what WE think, but what the Congress thinks, lol. I think it will take a more profound thing than D2 past the moon, honestly. Something they cannot ignore---"Remind me, why are we spending 4 B$ a year on SLS/Orion when we can buy a BFR mission with vastly more capability for half (whatever) that?"

[_Augustus_]

3 minutes ago, tater said:

I think it will take a more profound thing than D2 past the moon, honestly. Something they cannot ignore

You think they'll ignore the first manned deep-space mission in nearly 50 years? 

[DerekL1963]

2 hours ago, Casualnaut said:

Federation - You have probably never heard of Federation, but it is Russia's new replacement for Soyuz.

New replacement for Soyuz being the operative term...  Their previous three (or four?  I've lost count) replacements for Soyuz (stretching back into Soviet era) having failed to materialize for one reason or another.

[_Augustus_]

19 minutes ago, DerekL1963 said:

New replacement for Soyuz being the operative term...  Their previous three (or four?  I've lost count) replacements for Soyuz (stretching back into Soviet era) having failed to materialize for one reason or another.

TKS/VA *did* fly many times (unmanned) and the FGB module became the basis for many Mir modules and now Zarya + Nauka.

[DerekL1963]

24 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

TKS/VA *did* fly many times (unmanned) and the FGB module became the basis for many Mir modules and now Zarya + Nauka.

True.  But they never flew in their intended role - manned as a replacement for Soyuz.

[Kryten]

The Chinese next-gen capsule is a lot closer to flying than federation is.

10 hours ago, Starman4308 said:

Of the two, I honestly suspect the ISRO vehicle is the most likely to be a long-term success.

The ISRO vehicle does not exist as a real programme, just some tech demo funding.

[kerbiloid]

While big boys are competing in perfectionism, DPRK will come and outclass'em all.

Edited July 1, 2017 by kerbiloid

[NSEP]

Federation is still a concept, but Roscosmos/Energia is producing and updating manned spacecraft way more than NASA, from my knowledge. And i also heard that the entire SLS and Orion Program is not doing well. So, yeah. I don't know actually.

[kerbiloid]

On 01.07.2017 at 1:24 AM, Casualnaut said:

Orion is supposed to send 4 astronauts to capture some asteroids and go to Mars

 

On 01.07.2017 at 1:24 AM, Casualnaut said:

Federation is a 6-seater meant for the Moon and possibly Mars.

And unlikely the crew of any of them would spend weeks/months in chairs. So, a habitat is still required. (For Mars flight - exactly).
As almost all time they will spend outside the capsule, why at all make it huge, fancy and full of windows. It's just a capsule. A chauldron where you put the crew to deorbit.
So, again we can see that TKS is an ideal spaceship, while Mk1-2-style capsules just complicate the things.

P.S.
Dragon v.1 capsule (without docking berthing equipment) + ATV body, both inlayed with cushions. And with a toilet inside the bigger one.
(As it really had flied and even returned, while Dragon v.2 delta-V budget is still unclear: does it have fuel to land or to orbit/deorbit).

Edited July 3, 2017 by kerbiloid

[magnemoe]

21 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

 

And unlikely the crew of any of them would spend weeks/months in chairs. So, a habitat is still required. (For Mars flight - exactly).
As almost all time they will spend outside the capsule, why at all make it huge, fancy and full of windows. It's just a capsule. A chauldron where you put the crew to deorbit.
So, again we can see that TKS is an ideal spaceship, while Mk1-2-style capsules just complicate the things.

P.S.
Dragon v.1 capsule (without docking berthing equipment) + ATV body, both inlayed with cushions. And with a toilet inside the bigger one.
(As it really had flied and even returned, while Dragon v.2 delta-V budget is still unclear: does it have fuel to land or to orbit/deorbit).

Yes, the mars thing is to dock with something who might be an Armstrong cycler as it can work in deep space, it can also be used for an Mars direct return, here you will drop the transfer stage and go straight for aerobrake. 

An TKS setup should work for an astroid mission, it look like an small space station after all, I would want an sort of storm cellar for deep space work, not sure if it has an airlock who can handle the jet pack units like used on the shuttle who is something you would need. 
it has an docking port in rear, wonder if the plan was to dock them with an hub to build up an space station? 

[kerbiloid]

5 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

I would want an sort of storm cellar for deep space work,

And TKS's FGB is the best choice for it (as well as ATV would). A corridor 2x2 m wide, with lockers aside where you can put radiation protection.
While the capsule stays tiny, as nobody lives there until they jump back into atmosphere.
While in Orion-style capsule you have to make a huge protected capsule and to think how to land all this stuff 

5 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

it has an docking port in rear

Nope. In rear it has the capsule. Node is on its nose, right in the cabin. It just launches with its back on top.

Edited July 3, 2017 by kerbiloid

[magnemoe]

Just now, kerbiloid said:

And TKS's FGB is the best choice for it (as well as ATV would). A corridor 2x2 m wide, with lockers aside where you can put radiation protection.
While the capsule stays tiny, as nobody lives there until they jump back into atmosphere.
While in Orion-style capsule you have to make a huge protected capsule and to think how to land all this stuff 

Depend on the mission, if you want to go to Moon or meet an cycler, the Orion is nice, you want to go longer you need more room but the TKS would be a bit of an overkill for moon

[kerbiloid]

5 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

TKS would be a bit of an overkill for moon

Orion mass is ~25 t (crew of 4 for the Moon flight), TKS mass 19 t (crew of 3).
Both 6.3 t / person.

Edited July 3, 2017 by kerbiloid

[tater]

5 hours ago, NSEP said:

Federation is still a concept, but Roscosmos/Energia is producing and updating manned spacecraft way more than NASA, from my knowledge. And i also heard that the entire SLS and Orion Program is not doing well. So, yeah. I don't know actually.

None of this is true.

The Russians are flying Soyuz, obviously, but while they have talked of a replacement for a while, they have built nothing. They operate in the mode of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" combined with some incremental improvement.

SLS and Orion are likely in trouble in the long terms, but the annual SLS/Orion budget approaches the total budget of the Russian space program---it's not going anywhere, and it has actually flown, and the first few missions will certainly fly.

In addition, Commercial Crew/COTS has resulted in 2 manned spacecraft that should be flying next year (Dragon 2 and CST-100), all with relatively small expenditure (small for NASA, which would be huge for any other space program).

[NSEP]

3 minutes ago, tater said:

None of this is true.

The Russians are flying Soyuz, obviously, but while they have talked of a replacement for a while, they have built nothing. They operate in the mode of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" combined with some incremental improvement.

SLS and Orion are likely in trouble in the long terms, but the annual SLS/Orion budget approaches the total budget of the Russian space program---it's not going anywhere, and it has actually flown, and the first few missions will certainly fly.

In addition, Commercial Crew/COTS has resulted in 2 manned spacecraft that should be flying next year (Dragon 2 and CST-100), all with relatively small expenditure (small for NASA, which would be huge for any other space program).

Never knew about that, sorry. Thanks alot for the info Tater! Interesting stuff!

[Casualnaut]

Man I made some mistakes...

 

This is like putting ketchup on bacon. It doesn't make me feel good... 

[Bill Phil]

I'm almost afraid to admit I thought the OP was going to talk about Star Trek. The Orion Syndicate vs the Federation or something...

Glad I was wrong. Anyhow, Orion has flown in some shape or form. Federation hasn't, I think.

[DDE]

On ‎01‎.‎07‎.‎2017 at 4:52 AM, DerekL1963 said:

True.  But they never flew in their intended role - manned as a replacement for Soyuz.

Was it, though? I have serious doubts. In a way it seems to be an offshoot of the MOL-style expendable space stations; and it's called "heavy" for a reason. The Soviets in general seemed to seek two transport ships to be used simultaneously - Soyuz/Progress and TKS, and later Zarya (passenger, cargo or mixed) and Buran.

Ultimately, the future of the Federation depends on whether or not Roscosmos will ever have a long-term strategic goal. Right now the priorities are competing with SpaceX and Earth imagining, not manned spaceflight.

Edited July 6, 2017 by DDE