Tell me: Your favorite spacecraft!

[Tex]

Hey guys!

This time, I wanna know: WHAT is your FAVORITE SPACECRAFT and WHY?

Please note that this covers anything that goes up into space; it can be any space station, debris- even a favorite piece of space trash you've heard about! I just want to know what you Kerbonauts think.

I'm torn between two crafts myself. One would have to be the U.S. Space Shuttle, as it was the most versatile crew-carrying space vehicle ever designed, and it served us well for 30 years.

The other thing would have to be any one of the SuitSats! In case you don't know, they are basically old space suits that are filled with garbage from the ISS, and usually a transmitter, and are jettisoned from the station as a sort of $5,000,000 garbage bag. Plus, they look creepy as all heck as they float away.

[Themohawkninja]

Skylon by far. A lighter, more versatile SSTO version of the Space Shuttle, plus no major design issues on the part of the SABRE engine to the best of my knowledge, it really does seem like the future of space travel, or at the very least, the new cheaper way to resupply the ISS/launch small satellites.

[Nibb31]

Skylon is still vaporware and powerpoint slides.

My personal favorite is the LM. It's ugly, yet the purely functional design makes it tremendously elegant. It's also taken astronauts to boldly go where no one has gone before... or since.

My second favorite is Gemini, because... gullwing doors!

Edited January 11, 2014 by Nibb31

[Themohawkninja]

Skylon is still vaporware and powerpoint slides.

Not true. The SABRE engine is being actively developed, and working prototypes are the current stage of development. The cooling system has been shown to work, and is officially a valid working technology by the ESA:

In November 2012, Reaction Engines announced it had successfully concluded a series of tests that prove the cooling technology of the engine, one of the main obstacles towards the completion of the project. The European Space Agency (ESA) has evaluated the SABRE engine's pre-cooler heat exchanger, and accepted claims that the technologies required to proceed with the engine's development had been fully demonstrated.

Edited January 11, 2014 by Themohawkninja

[DisarmingBaton5]

A Reliant Robin.

[Skyler4856]

The Apollo Command Module

[ZedNova]

The Saturn V and Soyuz, sexy looking spacecraft that just work, no questions asked.

[Deathsoul097]

Buran.

The "Blizzard" shuttle is by far the most elegant and best spacecraft I have seen, IMHO. Much better thought out than the Shuttle. Unmanned capabilities were included from the start, plus jet engines to allow powered landing, increased payload mass from 24.8T to 30T, a launcher (Energia) already existed that only needed minor (In the grand scale of things) modifications to work. Plus no SRBs meant bail-out by parachute would have been an option if the command section was jettison-able.

[Tankbuster32]

And the Energia could be used without the Buran, it was great. PS I like Code Geass too

[maccollo]

Saturn V, the only craft that has ever taken humans beyond LEO.

[KASASpace]

Gemini.

It was the best spacecraft ever designed. It was so versatile that it could have gone to the moon cheaper than the Apollo program, and by 1967, or even late 66. It was cheap, effective, and got the job done. It was the biggest mistake to throw it away like garbage, stupid Apollo requirements. Specifically designed so Gemini couldn't qualify. On;y 1 ton and 1 crew slot short.

[Bioman222]

Javascript is disabled. View full album

10char

[Themohawkninja]

Buran.

The "Blizzard" shuttle is by far the most elegant and best spacecraft I have seen, IMHO. Much better thought out than the Shuttle. Unmanned capabilities were included from the start, plus jet engines to allow powered landing, increased payload mass from 24.8T to 30T, a launcher (Energia) already existed that only needed minor (In the grand scale of things) modifications to work. Plus no SRBs meant bail-out by parachute would have been an option if the command section was jettison-able.

The unmanned "capabilities" are called the one test it ever flew. It was also practically a copy of the Space Shuttle with regards to it's aerodynamics and it's mission, as it was designed to put cargo into LEO with the catch of allowing various classified military craft into orbit.

That being said, I can attest to the fact that Russia (or at least one of their government officials, and maybe he was being sarcastic) thinks that the Buran was superior to the Space Shuttle, for reasons unknown.

[Deathsoul097]

The fact that the Buran and the Shuttle were almost identical, was because for once the americans had gotten something almost perfect. This was not something the soviets were happy with. And as for thinking the Buran is superior, I believe it is. Higher payload capacity, and unmanned capabilities, along with the launcher already existing, and functioning on it's own. Also, it was designed with being able to be flown unmanned in mind, and that was why it flew it's first flight unmanned. It also did make other test flights in atmo, just as the shuttle did. The one flight it flew that you listed was the only one that went to space (Which was a perfect success, IIRC). I am not trying to have an argument, I simply want to say what I know on the subject. You may well know better or worse than me, but AFAIK what I have listed is correct.

[mythbusters844]

It's so perfect, and shiny. It is my favorite spacecraft: The Apollo Command/Service Module

[kiwiak]

Specifically designed so Gemini couldn't qualify..

Were its service module engines powerfull enough for moon-earth burns and service module itself capable of delivering needed amound of energy, supplies, ets for lunar voyage? Was its heat shield sturdy enough to witstand trans lunar velocity? It probably wodl have to be dreasticly rebuild... it was designed as training spacecraft from the start, didnt it? So what reason to suddenly try to take it all the way to the moon (well i heard that there existed some plans to do this).

[rpayne88]

Were its service module engines powerfull enough for moon-earth burns and service module itself capable of delivering needed amound of energy, supplies, ets for lunar voyage? Was its heat shield sturdy enough to witstand trans lunar velocity? It probably wodl have to be dreasticly rebuild... it was designed as training spacecraft from the start, didnt it? So what reason to suddenly try to take it all the way to the moon (well i heard that there existed some plans to do this).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gemini

This had potential but was canceled before it could mature.

[Brotoro]

I like Little Joe II flight A004.

…but it was a spacecraft TEST…didn't fly into space.

[crazyewok]

For spacecraft that have finished developmemt Soyus takes my spot for no 1.

For craft in R&D or were before politics got in the way:

Orion (nuclear propulsion)

Nautikul X

Skylon

[crazyewok]

Skylon is still vaporware and powerpoint !

Whats your problem? Really?

Do you just hate the fact tecnology progressing?

Do you love current chem rockets to much you dont want to let go?

Does the new and unkown scare you? God forbide a whole new frontier opens up!

It cause its a british design?

Skylon is a valid and solid project thats been hittings its milestone.

[Albert VDS]

Favorite old: Saturn V

Favorite new: Falcon 9 and Dragon.

[Aghanim]

Why everyone seems to be Skylon fanboy here? Nibb31 is making a good point, although I also like Skylon itself

My favorite spacecraft seems to be either the Shuttle/Buran or Saturn V

But there is nothing to stop me saying that my favorite spacecraft is Starship Enterprise or ISV Venture Star...

[Klingon Admiral]

Ariane V and ATV

European spacecraft, best spacecraft

[Nibb31]

Whats your problem? Really?

Do you just hate the fact tecnology progressing?

Do you love current chem rockets to much you dont want to let go?

Does the new and unkown scare you? God forbide a whole new frontier opens up!

It cause its a british design?

Skylon is a valid and solid project thats been hittings its milestone.

Skylon is mostly hype. It's 4 old geezers that have been working in a shed for 30 years. Don't get me wrong, it's an interesting concept, but it's well beyond what REL can handle alone. It's great that they are gaining some interest from ESA, but those are just preliminary studies and lab experiments. It's going to cost billions and take decades to develop all the technology they need. They'll need to get BAE or EADS on board, but those companies don't seem to be interested.

Just about everything in Skylon is new and unconventional, and yet REL estimates that it will only cost $12 billion. Sorry, but I don't believe that. It took Boeing $32 billion and 10 years to develop the 787, which is just an airliner with fairly mature and well-understood technology. EADS spent $25 billion dollars to develop the A400M, which is just a conventional turboprop cargo plane. With cost estimates so hugely underestimated, it throws a shadow of doubt on their performance and operation estimates too. Besides, airliners and military aircraft projects have a market, with firm orders years before the first test flight and minimal risk. There simply isn't a mass market for hundreds of Skylons with daily or weekly orbital launches.

I don't have anything wrong with technology advancing, but armchair engineers are annoying. Most of them have read a hyped-up article or two on the net and have no experience in engineering or research or economics or politics. Yet they somehow know better than an entire multi-billion dollar space industry with thousands of aerospace engineers who have been working on this stuff for decades.

Believe me, if there was an better way of putting stuff into orbit, the folks at Boeing, EADS, SpaceX and elsewhere would be working it. These are among the smartest people on the planet. It takes a lot of arrogance to believe that you are smarter than them because you have it all figured out after reading a few articles on the net and landing on Duna in KSP.

Edited January 12, 2014 by Nibb31

[EuSouONumero345]

Soyuz and Soyuz-like spacecrafts