Things that annoy... how about this:

[rdwulfe]

So I was peeking around for neat space videos today... because that's what I do when I can, and found this:

At about 3:50 in, they show the Orion capsue de-orbiting. Okay, this video was made by _NASA_. This is no fault of the astronaut speaking, he likely never even saw the CGI clips they show... the thing fires its RCS directly towards earth, to de-orbit. Seriously, NASA? I mean, I know it was probably some PR-plebe's idea to show it that way, since they think that the normal american can't space, but c'mon!

Wulfe -- Annoyed at the dumbing down of the world. Had to vent.

[blizzy78]

You, Sir, should stay away from the movie "Gravity."

[Ippo]

You know, if the Pe is low enough and you do this at the right point in the orbit, you can actually re-enter.

But I still cringed, hard.

[Sky_walker]

At about 3:50 in, they show the Orion capsue de-orbiting. Okay, this video was made by _NASA_. This is no fault of the astronaut speaking, he likely never even saw the CGI clips they show... the thing fires its RCS directly towards earth, to de-orbit.

No he doesn't.

Spacecraft is already on descend trajectory. He is clearly using thrusters to move capsule away from the service module. Notice how short is the burn.

You're seeing things that are not there.

BTW: That video got by far more realistic reentry than KSP.

[WWEdeadman]

No he doesn't.

Spacecraft is already on descend trajectory. He is clearly using thrusters to move capsule away from the service module. Notice how short is the burn.

You're seeing things that are not there.

This. It's obviously just to get a safe distance from the debris. It would be too little of a burn to deorbit.

[rdwulfe]

No he doesn't.

Spacecraft is already on descend trajectory. He is clearly using thrusters to move capsule away from the service module. Notice how short is the burn.

You're seeing things that are not there.

My bad, you could be correct, though it doesn't look that way from first blush. From the camera's perspective, it very much looks like they sorta glossed over that part of the flight and went "eh, put a burn in there!" -- Not knowing the orbit, I suppose it's difficult to say for sure.

BTW: That video got by far more realistic reentry than KSP.

And you're correct. The rest of the video is _amazing_. Ofcourse, they are also not rendering any of it in real time, so it's easier to have much better graphics.

You know, if the Pe is low enough and you do this at the right point in the orbit, you can actually re-enter.

But I still cringed, hard.

It's possible, yes, but probably not with a short burn and RCS like that.

You, Sir, should stay away from the movie "Gravity."

Gods, I know. That movie had amazing visuals, but made me twitch.

[Geneborg]

Yea...that was an "unfortunate" camera angle, but the RCS thrust was of course to get distance between the 2 objects.

Now, on the point of you thinking that the normal american can't space, you just made the exact same mistake. Don't judge ppl, its not their fault for not knowing in a society that decided that "dumbing down" everything is the way to go. KSP is not without its own fault in that regard btw...i just name "deadly reentry" as beeing "too difficult"...

[Sky_walker]

My bad, you could be correct, though it doesn't look that way from first blush. From the camera's perspective, it very much looks like they sorta glossed over that part of the flight and went "eh, put a burn in there!" -- Not knowing the orbit, I suppose it's difficult to say for sure.

For me it looks like you really want to make NASA look silly while there's no reason to.

And you're correct. The rest of the video is _amazing_. Ofcourse, they are also not rendering any of it in real time, so it's easier to have much better graphics.

No, it's not about graphics, and not just a "rest" of a video but rather: whole of it.

That video is whole magnitude more realistic and physically accurate than anything you ever seen in stock KSP. Heck: in some ways it's more realistic than modded KSP.

[Renegrade]

BTW: That video got by far more realistic reentry than KSP.

Well, it's re-entering an RSS-scaled system. In the stock system, it would only be re-entering at 13,829,635 furlongs/fortnight instead of 48,103,078 furlongs/fortnight. At those speeds, the hull would only reach a temperature of about -750 Delisle, which is only a bit hotter than the inside of an oven, and can be cooled with simple heat pipes.

Also there wouldn't be any corona of annoying plasma to cut off transmissions.

(Why did that video give me Apollo flashbacks?)

[Sky_walker]

Well, it's re-entering an RSS-scaled system. In the stock system, it would only be re-entering at 13,829,635 furlongs/fortnight instead of 48,103,078 furlongs/fortnight. At those speeds, the hull would only reach a temperature of about -750 Delisle, which is only a bit hotter than the inside of an oven, and can be cooled with simple heat pipes.

All I see is babbling nonsense.

(Why did that video give me Apollo flashbacks?)

Erm... capsule... looks like... capsule?

[JayKay]

Furlongs per fortnight? Lol.

[Sirrobert]

So you cringe at all that, and forget the fact that a rocket scientists uses miles per hour?

I know this is made for the avarage stupid american, and they don't understand kilometers, but COME ON

[rdwulfe]

For me it looks like you really want to make NASA look silly while there's no reason to.

No, it's not about graphics, and not just a "rest" of a video but rather: whole of it.

That video is whole magnitude more realistic and physically accurate than anything you ever seen in stock KSP. Heck: in some ways it's more realistic than modded KSP.

No, I'm not trying to make NASA look silly, Sky_walker. I'm a huge fan of NASA and what they do, and you're rather trying to put words in my mouth there. I more ment "hey, I saw this, and it tweeked me!". Not, 'HEy NASA Suckz0rzx!' or anything of that nature.

[FleetAdmiralJ]

Heh there was someone on gawker (I think) complaining about how it showed how much space junk NASA was leaving behind, and I had to explain to him that there was likely little - if no - space junk left behind because most of it either de-orbited before the ship got a full orbit or came in with the capsule. Either they gave up arguing or they finally got it . But yeah, there are a lot of misconceptions about stuff like this.

[Renegrade]

All I see is babbling nonsense.

I'm not the one who started with the bizarro units, NASA did. Blame them. Miles my foot! If they can use silly obsolescent units, I can too (What is a 'fare-in-height' anyways? Are they planning on setting up those toll roads in space?)

Earth re-entry speed is somewhere in the neighborhood of 7.8km/sec. At that speed, you get plasma coronas and thousands of Kelvins of temperature. In stock KSP, you're hitting the air at Mach 6 (2.3km/sec), only slightly faster than a high speed missile. You could cool that with a simple semi-passive system (like the heat pipes used in modern systems), and most certainly don't get plasma effects or require ablative shielding.

In that respect, there's nothing wrong with KSP re-entries. It's the stock air and silly-putty infinite-G Kerbals that are fake.

Erm... capsule... looks like... capsule?

Capsule looks almost exactly like Apollo capsule with a new coat of paint. Very similar SM detachment, capsule profile (compare say Soyuz or Dragon profiles), chute sequence/number, splashdown landing system.

Only thing that seems different there is that separation RCS burn; I believe the Apollo SM pulled away from the CM, not the other way around.

[DSM20T]

Well, it's re-entering an RSS-scaled system. In the stock system, it would only be re-entering at 13,829,635 furlongs/fortnight instead of 48,103,078 furlongs/fortnight. At those speeds, the hull would only reach a temperature of about -750 Delisle, which is only a bit hotter than the inside of an oven, and can be cooled with simple heat pipes.

Also there wouldn't be any corona of annoying plasma to cut off transmissions.

(Why did that video give me Apollo flashbacks?)

Those numbers depend greatly on how many firkins of water of mass the capsule has. Just for accuracy's sake.

[Jovus]

Firkins are used to measure volume, not mass. Stop confusing your units. You're looking for slugs, or perhaps stones or gauge if you can forgive the confusion of mass and weight (which should be fine for these purposes.)

[Aethon]

Hope this isn't considered a cross post, but there's a thread about this mission in the Science Lab, as well as many other cool, interesting discussions. If you've never visited the Sci. Lab, you're missing out. See : Orion. It's not just a constellation anymore.

You can even send your name to space on Orions' first mission.

http://mars.nasa.gov/participate/send-your-name/orion-first-flight/

http://www.universetoday.com/115123/nasa-invites-public-to-send-your-name-to-mars-starting-on-orions-first-flight/#more-115123

[Nathair]

I'm a huge fan of NASA and what they do

Ditto. Excellent video but, seriously, if they can't abandon their "miles" and "American football fields" shouldn't their spokesman at least be instructed on the correct pronunciation of words like temp-a-chur and cumf-ter-bull?

"Cut! Kelly? The word is 'temperature', OK dude? Right, let's try that again." How hard is that?

[Renegrade]

Firkins are used to measure volume, not mass. Stop confusing your units. You're looking for slugs, or perhaps stones or gauge if you can forgive the confusion of mass and weight (which should be fine for these purposes.)

Hey, firkins of water IS a mass, just in a roundabout way.