What is your favorite Command pod. Why? (real edition)

[awsomejwags]

This is the real life version of my favorite command pod post

[Tommygun]

I voted for Dragon in part because it is helping to privatizing space and it's affordability compared to government designed spacecraft.

[KvickFlygarn87]

Dragon. Dragon all the way. Because 'tis purty.

[xenomorph555]

Vostok, first, true sci-fi look to it and furthered humanity greatly. Plus its still in use today (bion-M).

[Simon Ross]

Soyuz the B52 of the space age. It ain't pretty, but no one has developed a cheaper or safer way to get 3 humans into LEO

[SargeRho]

Soyuz because of it's track record. Might be taken over by Dragon if it's as reliable.

[R0cketC0der]

Soyuz the B52 of the space age. It ain't pretty, but no one has developed a cheaper or safer way to get 3 humans into LEO

That is until DragonRider will be used.

[Simon Ross]

That is until DragonRider will be used.

Making assumptions about a paper capsule against one with nearly 50 years real life service ?

[R0cketC0der]

Making assumptions about a paper capsule against one with nearly 50 years real life service ?

It is already cheaper. A single falcon 9 launch costs 56m$ plus the DragonRider capsule. I'm not entirely sure how much that costs, but I'm assuming that it is less than 14m$. So at 7 seats we have a price of less than 10m$ per seat. NASA pays the Russians currently 70m$ per seat on souyz launches. Russia itself probably pays a lot less per seat for its own launches, but I doubt that they let NASA pay more than 7 times the cost that they pay themselves.

Also DragonRider is far more than just a paper capsule. The only difference to the currently already used cargo dragon is that it has a LES and seats. I don't think there will be any problems with the latter one and the thrusters for the LES are already fully developed.

[xenomorph555]

It is already cheaper. A single falcon 9 launch costs 56m$ plus the DragonRider capsule. I'm not entirely sure how much that costs, but I'm assuming that it is less than 14m$. So at 7 seats we have a price of less than 10m$ per seat. NASA pays the Russians currently 70m$ per seat on souyz launches. Russia itself probably pays a lot less per seat for its own launches, but I doubt that they let NASA pay more than 7 times the cost that they pay themselves.

Also DragonRider is far more than just a paper capsule. The only difference to the currently already used cargo dragon is that it has a LES and seats. I don't think there will be any problems with the latter one and the thrusters for the LES are already fully developed.

Doesn't make it reliable, how do you know it won't explode after launch, also the spacex delay curse.

[Bearsh]

I like the looks of the SpacEX dragon capsule... it's cool.

[TerLoki]

Dragon, because it's pretty much the first next generation capsule to fly. Here's hoping everything goes as planned for Dragon development!

[Nibb31]

In the real world, nobody uses the term "pod". It's either a capsule, or a module, or a spacecraft.

If it's going to be on looks, then DreamChaser wins... or Kliper.

[Simon Ross]

It is already cheaper. A single falcon 9 launch costs 56m$ plus the DragonRider capsule. I'm not entirely sure how much that costs, but I'm assuming that it is less than 14m$. So at 7 seats we have a price of less than 10m$ per seat. NASA pays the Russians currently 70m$ per seat on souyz launches. Russia itself probably pays a lot less per seat for its own launches, but I doubt that they let NASA pay more than 7 times the cost that they pay themselves.

Also DragonRider is far more than just a paper capsule. The only difference to the currently already used cargo dragon is that it has a LES and seats. I don't think there will be any problems with the latter one and the thrusters for the LES are already fully developed.

With respect, I really think you need to do a wee bit more research into the difference between an unmanned system and a manned system.

On paper, yes, Dragon looks a great system, so did Shuttle, until they started to fly it

Not being negative, but you really have to have hardware flying before you can make like for like comparisons

[R0cketC0der]

Doesn't make it reliable, how do you know it won't explode after launch, also the spacex delay curse.

The Falcon 9 is pretty reliable. Most launch failures are due to decoupling issues or engine failures, but the F9 has engine-out-capabilities, uses only two stages and non-explosive decoupling which makes it possible to test the decoupling mechanism before the launch. It doesn't have enough flights to make any meaningful judgement on its actual reliability, but on paper it's looking pretty good. It will also be the only spacecraft with LES functionality all the way up to orbit.

[Javster]

The Shuttle, because it's unique and was (still is) a sign of manned space exploration.

[Orionkermin]

Gotta go with the "Gusmobile." Something about it just gives me that buddy cop, we can do anything feeling.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Orionkermin

[szputnyik]

Soyuz. The tried and true, and safe workhorse of Earth to LEO transport.

Edited April 24, 2014 by szputnyik

[Kryten]

The Falcon 9 is pretty reliable.

There've been four launches of 1.0 and five of 1.1. You'd have to be psychic to get any meaningful reliability figure from that kind of sample size.

[Deathsoul097]

On the subject of Dragon and Falcon 9, most rockets have a major failure within the first five launches. Currently the Falcon has a 100% success rate, AFAIK, and so too did the Saturn V. (All failures of Saturn V launches, such as Apollo 13 were caused by other hardware in the payload.) That said, I think that comparing the Dragonrider and the Soyuz at this point is out of context, as the Dragonrider hasn't flown yet, and there is a whole lot more of a difference between a cargo pod and a crew pod that just seats and a LES.

And for all that, I voted Buran. It isn't exactly a proper command pod in the sense I think you are referring to, but it stands as my favourite spacecraft of all time, and I believe had it not been for the Soviet economic collapse, we may have had quite contender against the shuttle. (Plus it has a much more interesting name than the dribble NASA seems to produce, "Space Shuttle" and "Space Launch System" to name a couple. I mean come on, you can fly the Blizzard Shuttle to obit by the Energy launcher, or the Space Shuttle with the ET+Stack.)

Buran FTW.

-N-

Edited April 24, 2014 by Deathsoul097

[KASASpace]

Gemini

Cheap

Small

Light

Effective

And most important, It got the job done.

[KASASpace]

On the subject of Dragon and Falcon 9, most rockets have a major failure within the first five launches. Currently the Falcon has a 100% success rate, AFAIK, and so too did the Saturn V. (All failures of Saturn V launches, such as Apollo 13 were caused by other hardware in the payload.)

Like the original Atlas-Centaur.

Now, Apollo 13 was a good launch, except for the second stage. The center engine's pogo got too intense, and it was pure luck the computer realized it last second.

Now, Apollo 4 had only a few parts fail, that's 99.99% reliable.

The Saturn I, on the other hand, has had, out of only 10 launches, no failures.

[Beowolf]

SpaceX Dragon is the best, certainly. Much of that's probably just because it's the newest design, though. I actually thought it was ugly first time I saw the design.

But since you asked "favorite", I voted Gemini. I wish we could get a big-budget Project Gemini movie, along the lines of The Right Stuff and Apollo 13. Gemini flights were the only times our American astronauts were being real test-pilots in space.

Heck, at the beginning of Gemini, NASA thought you could rendezvous by pointing at the target and thrusting forward. Just like in KSP, it didn't work! James McDivitt burned half the Gemini IV RCS fuel trying to rendezvous with their spent Titan 2nd stage before NASA gave up and moved on to other experiments.

Knowing how cautious NASA is today, it's hard to imagine Gemini being run by the same agency. Nearly every mission ran into major problems, and often life-threatening ones. But every crew came home. And every time we learned new and often crazy things about spaceflight that made Apollo possible.

The Wikipedia pages on each individual mission have pretty decent descriptions of the problems encountered, and how the astronauts improvised to survive. But I'd appreciate book recommendations if anybody has one.

[KASASpace]

Nearly every mission ran into major problems, and often life-threatening ones. But every crew came home. And every time we learned new and often crazy things about spaceflight that made Apollo possible.

Very true.

Especially Gemini VIII.........

Very fateful mission that was, in fact, one of the crew members was quite important........