This video is completely wrong, Dream chaser hasn't launched yet because it's not ready. The Vulcan can launch it at anytime, in fact ULA had to find a new payload for the first launch of Vulcan because Dream chaser wasn't ready yet. Also, Sierra Space is not looking to launch Dream Chaser on Falcon 9, in fact they are looking into buying ULA and launching on the Vulcan. Get your story straight.
Can Dream Chaser do both crewed and uncrewed takeoff and landing? There is nothing proven that Dreamchaser is more reliable than Starliner. Dreamchaser has never ever got off the ground
While it is baffling that Sierra chose to partner with ULA, I don't see how Dream Chaser can be considered a competitor for Starliner. The version of Dream Chaser waiting to fly is an unmanned cargo ship. The crewed version has not been built yet. Right now, only Crew Dragon and Soyuz can move people to and from ISS.
Big fan of GreatSpaceX, but I'm tired of the misleading tags on so many videos! Tag says SpaceX to launch Dreamchaser. Not might launch, but To launch. This is misleading and I believe many viewers would appreciate more honesty instead of all the click bait. Until Greatspacex changes their policy misleading tags I won't be watching their videos. I can't trust them.
this is an AI driven channel and your just getting Chat GPT content from these people.... they are running YT. in another 6 months this is the only trash there will be to watch.
Starliner needs to return to Earth UN-crewed, they CANNOT risk the lives of the astronauts to try to save face for their repeated failures. This will be Boeing's last chance for redemption.
Dream chaser should have been chosen instead of Starliner to begin with. I believe Dream Chaser was designed for the Atlas 5, so take the remaining atlas 5 rockets away and give them to dream chaser to use
Good Morning, Kev. Dream Chaser has its own lane. Forget about Starliner. Like Elon says. "We don't need another capsule." Besides America doesn't need this type of embarrassment. So far as I see it. It's SpaceX and Sierra Space's Dream Chaser. I think SpaceX and Sierra Space is a good hand shake. Don't You? Sierra Space is being extra cautious. I don't have a problem with that. ULA has plenty of it own problems. Most Definitely SpaceX. So YES, YES and YES. I see SpaceX helping other space programs like Sierra Space get off of the ground. That's what makes SpaceX and Elon Musk both a company and man of integrity. We run our company the same way. We help out our competition. You know who you can trust and who you can't trust. It's not long before they become partners with us. It is very gratifying. Another Great Episode, Kev. Have a Great Sunday.
No, NASA does not want a monopoly on human/cargo with SpaceX. They want at least two providers for these services to avoid a prolonged denial of services in case of a mishap. Blue Origin would be a better second option for Dream Chaser. It should also be noted that the current Dream Chaser is not intended for crewed launches; they do have a vehicle in development for that use.
1:45 Boeing, a company with a long standing reputation for excellence. We are talking about Boeing who has door plugs falling out of planes mid flight? Boeing who has unqualified welders working on the SLS? Boeing that racked up over 70 CARs on the SLS? Boeing who deleted the autonomous software from the Starliner because there was humans on board who should be able to do the same thing? If Boeing was a SpaceX employee Musk would have sacked them 7 years ago. Clearly if Boeing can't complete contracts costing twice as much as SpaceX then they have no place in the space industry. I think it's time SpaceX puts in a 50% increase in the tenders for NASA contracts.
This was the comment I was looking for! Boeing's excellence reputation was before the merger. Post merger has been nothing but lives lost, corner cutting safety issues and increasing investor returns. NASA should have NEVER even considered Boeing as a viable option.
NASA initially turned down Dreamchaser when Boeing and Space X were finalists in the original commercial crew initiative. NASA may have some buyer's remorse by going with Boeing. The taxpayers are losing out on $4 billion for Boeing...
Common Sense provides the answer to this question. Who has been the most reliable and innovative company. Nothing has prevented other companies from copying the same methods but they still lack the innovation and motivation IMO. It comes down to the differences in 'Leadership' IMO.
YES !!! ... SpaceX is more than merely the indisputable leader in design and producing engines, boosters and spacescrafts, they're the overwhelmingly technological leader in manufacturing and implementing cost effective innovations !!!
I agree, the title is presented as a fact. The information may be ok but come on. Here is my own Headline. "Kevin has anal sex with Jeff Bezos!" "Has Great Space in rear!"
No, you earlier mentioned that NASA does not want a monopoly. SpaceX as the only source of launches is just that. If SpaceX were to have a major failure, there would not be an option to launch humans. They have a great history, but it only takes one problem to ground a launch vehicle for months.
Surprised that Boeing didn't go with the X-37 of which one is flying right now, as the tech is old and tried with a two-year fight under its belt... Maybe a weight issue as I believe the last one was on another Space-X Heavy (drives the Swamp crazy) due to issues with ULA systems. Never understood why a flying body like Dream Chaser wasn't always considered just based on the landings alone. Space-X fills the gap that was intended and far as concerned with the best for that mission. Quick launches to a system (ISS) slated for decommission with the added benefit of reusability. Face it, Elon reset the paradigm and shattered the thought process beyond what was even dreamed possible. It is that the so-called Leaders are in a state of Cognitive Dissonance that they were so wrong with the ridicule of the Space-X approach...
Yes. I think Sierra Space should plan for use of SpaceX Falcon launch vehicles. That is a no brainer, and I think Sierra Space has already said that they can work with other vehicles than Vulcan. That said, they kind of did it to themselves. They weren't ready when Vulcan was finally ready for flight. Keep in mind, Dream Chaser is only a cargo vehicle. I expect it to take at least 4-7 years to clear the strict NASA safety hurdles in finishing a man-rated version of Dream Chaser. It took SpaceX that long to transition from Cargo Dragon to Dragon 2, with a little "incident" of an explosion that totally destroyed the vehicle during testing (and parachute failures as well) along the way. (I mention that because SpaceX fanboys seem to have selective or short memories.) Further, Dream Chaser hasn't even FLOWN YET. Who knows what unknown problems they will have. The SpaceX Cargo Dragon had thruster icing during their first flight. NASA was impressed with SpaceX solutions during the flight, but the flight was not flawless. I even remember some debate for if Cargo Dragon would be cleared to approach the station on that first test flight. Say what you will about Starliner, but it had no cargo vehicle design heritage to draw from in building the man-rated Starliner, and even still, with all their valve and thruster difficulties they never BLEW UP THEIR VEHICLE DURING TESTING. As far as the debate on whether to bring Starliner home with crew, it is mainly a political decision. Some claim that the safety percentage on Starliner approaches the mid-90s % odds of success. But NASA knows that if that few percentage chance of failures occurs there will be no end of "I told you so" from the Boeing haters, and SpaceX fanboys.
Title contains the usual conflating of speculation with fact. Could work, but with Starships capabilities and cost-effectiveness, maybe all else becomes obsolete If you watch the recent Tim Dodd interview with Jeff Bezos, it’s amazing how bloated the New Glennengines look compared to SpaceX V3 raptor. And with the exception of V3, that engine would be considered state of the art
Dreamchaser is the answer to Boeing's problems. It is designed to tow a waste module behind it. It could tow Starliner back to earth. So Starliner wouldn't have to use it's Screwed up thrusters. Dreamchaser could deorbit Starliner then detach At the right time. Dreamchaser is designed to take out the trash. :)
Wanna see Dream Chaser launch on a Falon Heavy. I also think other areospace companies can learn ALOT from SpaceX. Any efforts in on-orbit activity and beyond will eventually result in tech-spinoffs not to mention, the more we learn about Space, the more we learn about Earth as well. 🙂
Just as small point; I just noticed that Dream Chaser bears an UNCANNY similar shape to the main space vehicle in an old teen sci - fi space vehicle called Space Hawk (or Space Eagle. I no longer have the books, so I cannot at this time verify the titles of those books. The major difference is that the Space Hawk (eagle?) had a FTL drive, and it was completely fictional. Another thing of note. I have seen pictures of the Space Shuttle main vehicle piggy backing on a modified 747. i also know of similar pictures which show the Buran - the Soviet era copy og the Space Shuttle piggy backing on a giant Russian transport plane. This has always made me wonder WHY a somewhat larger, modifies 747 could not have been used to ferry the space shuttle to the edge of space, then releasing it to power it's way into orbit. The Space shuttle was, after all designed to be a glider / lifting body. So, since the Dream Chaser seems to be a smaller vehicle than the Space Shuttle, why doesn't NASA try out the piggy back system again?
Dream Chaser resembles the Soviet BOR-4. Look it up, there are videos about it. Also, lifting a space plan to orbit on the back of a subsonic plane is complete fiction. It could make it past the Karman line but achieving orbit requires a tremendous amount of energy.
@@zarl5238 They used the piggyback method to test its ability to glide back in the day. I'm sure they were testing many other things as well. While you could technically launch it to hit the Karman line with rockets from a 747 or other large plane, achieving orbit would not work, too much energy needed.
Dream Chaser was designed to be able to be launched aboard Vulcan, Falcon 9 and even Ariane 6. I like Dream Chaser but it is a long way from having a manned version. No matter what happens with Starliner, a manned version of Dream Chaser should be developed to provide another option for manned access to space.
blaming 'stockholders', iow, 'capitalist free markets', for such a fail seems imho a bit far off the mark, fren. are not Boeing corruoptocracy *decades* of plundering tax dollars stolen from We The People, a far better example of how unavoidably pervasive are corruptocrats shoveling pork, in all/every/any 'government' endeavor; thereby demonstrating how veeeery useless are all things 'government', than otherwise? elon himself, as well as SierraSpace, are openly, proudly, contemptuous of all things 'government', wholly eschewing any 'government' funds, and any 'gov' contracts, but for those wholly independent of 'government' 'oversight'; which is why each have been able to leapfrog by dint of sheer hard work applied to their respective visionary goals for all mankind, all such legacy dinosaurs as Boeing, to become within one generation the most widely respected, most highly admired, frims working toward 'space'; by peers, competitors, by fans, by We, The People. that each are public, 'stockholder' owned, is the root not of such fails as Boeing, but of their former successes, as they are even now respinsible for the current successes of Spacex and of SierraSpace. imho... ;-)
The guys that built Boeing are rolling over in their graves. The 747 was designed before computers on millions of drawings (mylars) every curve a testimony to their innovation. The new Boeing like so many others is more concerned with counting their money... Good luck with that. I wonder how many people still love their jobs there and feel proud of being a part of something great?
NASA should allow SpaceX to propose missions, and then decide whether to fund them. That way we could end up being surprised by what is possible for low prices.
Dream Chaser isn't the successor to the Space Shuttle. It has no where near the capabilities the shuttle had for independent missions and payload delivery. It is primarily comparable in the fact that it should be able to land on a runway which solves the complexity of having to retrieve it from remote sites after landing and reducing refurbishing.
I work for SNC (same couple (Ozmen) that own SNC also own Sierra Space). I can tell you that the Ozmens are much less inclined to use SpaceX. Because of their partnerships with Blue Origin, they consider SpaceX a competitor. I'm pretty sure they will wait it out with ULA.
@@ecrowder9757 No. The Ozmens own SNC and Sierra Space, and are only in partnership with Blue Origin for the space station they are designing together.
I would like to hear a bit more about landing legs. I think I have the same opinion that you do. Starship is to land on different planets there is no towers. There is no drone boats. So they should be landing legs right from the get-go.
Really. Any actual published information or just hearsay.? $4.5 billion, maybe $4 billion for bonus checks for the legacy companies upper echelon management. $.5 billion for actual R&D and building.
Get Dream Chaser done and man-rated. Undock Starliner, send it back unmanned and cancel the program. Ditch Vulcan in favor of SpaceX. Why keep an Apollo-style capsule and/or a non-reusable booster like Vulcan based on archaic tech around when we have a reusable launch vehicle and lifting body in the wings (pun intended) that can be launched by SpaceX? We might actually be on track to see something like the original concepts behind the Space Shuttle - totally reusable ground-to-orbit vehicles.
Yes. NASA needs to terminate the Star "Edsel" in favor of Sierra launching the Dream Chaser on a Falcon. Even if Sierra purchases ULA, the Vulcan has years of backlog due to the slow 1960's style of building the vehicle one at a time and using it just once. Sierra also needs to drop Blue Origin as a partner in Orbital Reef and partner with Vast to add inflatables.
Looks like Boeing is doing good is bpace as they are going good with planes in these recent years... anyway, looking foward for Dream chaser: looks promising
Since the ill-fated Dyna Soar project of my childhood, I've always believed in "fly it back". As good as Dragon is, I'm still disappointed with its Apollo-era parachute return. Hoping this Starliner debacle becomes the kickstarter opportunity for spaceplanes! If the only issue with Falcon Heavy/Dream Chaser is fairing size, I wonder why Spacex hasn't hopped on this already?...btw... The X-37 has been around for a while and seems to be a sound airframe. Wondering if (and why not) it can be modified and scaled up for civilian use (then we'll have TWO spaceplanes!)... ???
Dragon was designed for propulsive landing. This is why it has Super Draco engines on four sides. NASA would not allow it's astronauts to be onboard if that was the landing approach. So, SpaceX uses the parachute water landing instead. The SD emgines only used in the event of a launch abort.
Dragon was designed for propulsive landing. It has 4 Super Dracos on it's sides for this reason. NASA would not allow it to land using them. Instead, they are now only for launch abort. SpaceX has looked into a larger fauring for Falcon and FH, but that's expensive and has a limited number of payloads requiring it. Starship will carry those payloads in the future anyhow.
Sierra Space would be foolish to not, at least, explore the potential of launching Dreamchaser on Falcon 9. ULA is in crisis (largely because of Blue Origin), Blue Origin itself does everything at a glacial pace. SpaceX is the reliable bet for orbital boosters at this point if you want your vehicle to actually launch.
SPACEX has proved its reliability and approval not only to NASA, but also to the public...thank you Elon for giving us the opportunity to explore our solar system and perhaps even space way beyond our dreams of being able to "ENGAGE", and beyond as Picard would say!!!
Elon could do them one better, to create a re-usable intermediate vehicle between Falcon Heavy and Starship. But will he... If Sierra Space buys ULA, they could be just the paired companies to make a launch vehicle to fit that profile...
SpaceX should design something similar to the shuttle so can carry large parts for new space station which SpaceX should build also where Starship can refuel
Wrong choice. It was the large size of the Shuttle that caused most of the problems with the Shuttle. A smaller crew launch vehicle would give faster turn rounds, be easier to launch, safer because you would not require so big & complicated a launch system. Cargo could be launched by a bigger vehicle, with no risk to human life. Even if you went to the trouble to make it reusable (note that sometimes expendable is cheaper) you could have the option of overloading the launcher & discarding it. Think about what is done with some Falcon launches.
The crew version of Dream Chaser would take too long to develop when you look at the remaining life of the ISS. NASA will probably stick with Boeing as an alternate to Space X.
What they could do is have the mission launching to the Polar be delayed until second quarter of 25 and have an unmanned crew dragon launch with four seats carrying the two crew members from Crew 9 and have Butch & Sunni go back on that particular dragon bring them back.
It's just another in an apparently long line of engineering failures and embarrassments for Boeing. This company needs an entirely new management suite, right from department managers on up- especially in HR, engineering and production departments. It's either that or this company is on a fast track to extinction. Had Boeing not been on financial life-support from the feds it would already be sitting down beside the Dodo bird.
considering Boeings record in the last few years I didn't think that you could use the words "Boeing , and engineering excellence" in the same sentence.
Has a decision to launch Dream Chaser on Falcon 9 actually been made? I haven't heard this. Also, Sierra Space is considering buying ULA, and doing this might significantly expedite the first launch of Dream Chaser on Vulcan Centaur. Would Dream Chaser fit inside a standard Falcon 9 fairing, and is it light enough to avoid expending the booster? Vulcan Centaur can launch a greater payload to LEO even if the Falcon 9 booster is expended. Falcon Heavy might be a better match for Dream Chaser, with the X-37B perhaps being a similar payload, but it would also be more expensive and I don't think SpaceX has any plans to human-certify it. I think the most interesting question that this issue raises is the difference in size and mass between Crew-Dragon/Starliner and Dream Chaser. Does Dream Chaser effectively require a rocket in a different payload-class than the other two? Did this factor into NASA's decision to select SpaceX and Boeing for the Commercial Crew program? Still, a very interesting video, thank you.
No it hasn't. Never mind the fact that Dreamchaser still has work needed (which is why it missed the first launch of Vulcan), and its heat shield is NOT attached to the vehicle at the moment.; the reality is that Dreamchaser is NOT designed for manned space flight. It is an unmanned drone cargo vehicle, nothing more. It's going to be 3 or more years before the manned version is even close to completion. This whole thing is utter nonsense. And yes, Falcon Heavy is the only vehicle with a fairing large enough to hold Dreamchaser and the delta V to get it into orbit.
@@wesleybeaver Yeah, this is basically what I was getting at. The video title "SpaceX to launch Dream Chaser to replace Starliner" seemed unlikely on a couple of different levels, and when I started watching the video it became obvious that it was more speculation than an actual plan.
Not sure what Starliner vs Dream Chaser has to do with SpaceX, planned to launch on Vulcan, which is sort of on schedule, that can still work but needs to get Vulcan human-rated, and it is not now, but then human occupied dream-chasers are not ready either
Go Space-X make America proud and GREAT again!
This video is completely wrong, Dream chaser hasn't launched yet because it's not ready. The Vulcan can launch it at anytime, in fact ULA had to find a new payload for the first launch of Vulcan because Dream chaser wasn't ready yet. Also, Sierra Space is not looking to launch Dream Chaser on Falcon 9, in fact they are looking into buying ULA and launching on the Vulcan. Get your story straight.
True. It must do first unmand testflights
Isn’t the Vulcan still waiting on BE4 engines?
@@bvf1420 No.
@@MrAtlantis95 All flights will be unmanned since it's only rated to carry cargo.
Can Dream Chaser do both crewed and uncrewed takeoff and landing?
There is nothing proven that Dreamchaser is more reliable than Starliner. Dreamchaser
has never ever got off the ground
While it is baffling that Sierra chose to partner with ULA, I don't see how Dream Chaser can be considered a competitor for Starliner. The version of Dream Chaser waiting to fly is an unmanned cargo ship. The crewed version has not been built yet. Right now, only Crew Dragon and Soyuz can move people to and from ISS.
Big fan of GreatSpaceX, but I'm tired of the misleading tags on so many videos! Tag says SpaceX to launch Dreamchaser. Not might launch, but To launch. This is misleading and I believe many viewers would appreciate more honesty instead of all the click bait. Until Greatspacex changes their policy misleading tags I won't be watching their videos. I can't trust them.
this is an AI driven channel and your just getting Chat GPT content from these people.... they are running YT. in another 6 months this is the only trash there will be to watch.
Couldn’t agree more. To many click bait tags.
Starliner needs to return to Earth UN-crewed, they CANNOT risk the lives of the astronauts to try to save face for their repeated failures. This will be Boeing's last chance for redemption.
Dream chaser should have been chosen instead of Starliner to begin with. I believe Dream Chaser was designed for the Atlas 5, so take the remaining atlas 5 rockets away and give them to dream chaser to use
Good Morning, Kev. Dream Chaser has its own lane. Forget about Starliner. Like Elon says. "We don't need another capsule." Besides America doesn't need this type of embarrassment. So far as I see it. It's SpaceX and Sierra Space's Dream Chaser. I think SpaceX and Sierra Space is a good hand shake. Don't You? Sierra Space is being extra cautious. I don't have a problem with that. ULA has plenty of it own problems. Most Definitely SpaceX. So YES, YES and YES. I see SpaceX helping other space programs like Sierra Space get off of the ground. That's what makes SpaceX and Elon Musk both a company and man of integrity. We run our company the same way. We help out our competition. You know who you can trust and who you can't trust. It's not long before they become partners with us. It is very gratifying. Another Great Episode, Kev. Have a Great Sunday.
Excellent
Great comment, bro👍
Does this mean that there's going to be a crew-rated Falcon Heavy?
I believe a crewed version of Dream Chaser is a few years away. The current version is a cargo ship.
No, NASA does not want a monopoly on human/cargo with SpaceX. They want at least two providers for these services to avoid a prolonged denial of services in case of a mishap. Blue Origin would be a better second option for Dream Chaser. It should also be noted that the current Dream Chaser is not intended for crewed launches; they do have a vehicle in development for that use.
1:45 Boeing, a company with a long standing reputation for excellence.
We are talking about Boeing who has door plugs falling out of planes mid flight? Boeing who has unqualified welders working on the SLS? Boeing that racked up over 70 CARs on the SLS? Boeing who deleted the autonomous software from the Starliner because there was humans on board who should be able to do the same thing?
If Boeing was a SpaceX employee Musk would have sacked them 7 years ago. Clearly if Boeing can't complete contracts costing twice as much as SpaceX then they have no place in the space industry. I think it's time SpaceX puts in a 50% increase in the tenders for NASA contracts.
This was the comment I was looking for! Boeing's excellence reputation was before the merger. Post merger has been nothing but lives lost, corner cutting safety issues and increasing investor returns. NASA should have NEVER even considered Boeing as a viable option.
4.5 Billion !!! Wow - NASA should cut their losses now. 🚀
They need to launch Dream Chaser, without the fairing.
I think it still need fairing
Starliner❎ stuckliner✅ 😂
Stuck forever
@@NexGenSpace1 Binliner. Canliner.
NASA initially turned down Dreamchaser when Boeing and Space X were finalists in the original commercial crew initiative. NASA may have some buyer's remorse by going with Boeing. The taxpayers are losing out on $4 billion for Boeing...
Common Sense provides the answer to this question.
Who has been the most reliable and innovative company.
Nothing has prevented other companies from copying the same methods but they still lack the innovation and motivation IMO.
It comes down to the differences in 'Leadership'
IMO.
Why you look for replacements when you have SpaceX right there, who is proven a solid record
YES !!! ...
SpaceX is more than merely the indisputable leader in design and producing engines, boosters and spacescrafts,
they're the overwhelmingly technological leader in manufacturing and implementing cost effective innovations !!!
Space X is killing it! From what I have observed they do it cheaper, faster and safer.
They don’t kill anyone, but no one could play in this race with SpaceX
You'd think their planes falling apart would be enough embarrassment.
Yes SpaceX along with Sierra Space purchase of ULA. Have it so it could launch on either. Would be nice if Dragon could launch on ULA also.
Isn't Sierra Space trying to buy ULA?
Thanks very interesting video, Go SpaceX‼️‼️
Love your comment ☺️
Its so obvious, put the SNC Dream Chaser Spacecraft onto a Falcon 9, launch that sucker and let's go!!!
Kevin, I am sick of these misleading titles. If you are more than a voice over then get this bull shit fixed or lose me as an observer.
I agree, the title is presented as a fact. The information may be ok but come on. Here is my own Headline. "Kevin has anal sex with Jeff Bezos!" "Has Great Space in rear!"
Could you guys be a little less click-baitey with your thumbnails? That’s be great.
Gotta game the algorithm if you want to be successful. Don't blame them just blame the algorithm.
No, you earlier mentioned that NASA does not want a monopoly. SpaceX as the only source of launches is just that. If SpaceX were to have a major failure, there would not be an option to launch humans. They have a great history, but it only takes one problem to ground a launch vehicle for months.
And Boeing is abusing that level of action.
Isn't Dream Chaser simply a non human rated cargo vehicle for at least several years? How is that supposed to replace Starliner in the short term?
Surprised that Boeing didn't go with the X-37 of which one is flying right now, as the tech is old and tried with a two-year fight under its belt... Maybe a weight issue as I believe the last one was on another Space-X Heavy (drives the Swamp crazy) due to issues with ULA systems. Never understood why a flying body like Dream Chaser wasn't always considered just based on the landings alone. Space-X fills the gap that was intended and far as concerned with the best for that mission. Quick launches to a system (ISS) slated for decommission with the added benefit of reusability. Face it, Elon reset the paradigm and shattered the thought process beyond what was even dreamed possible. It is that the so-called Leaders are in a state of Cognitive Dissonance that they were so wrong with the ridicule of the Space-X approach...
Yes i would like to see SpaceX launch Dream Chaser.
Sierra + ULA = Expensive - ValueOfNoMonopoly = Ok Value
Sierra + SpaceX = High Value
Yes. I think Sierra Space should plan for use of SpaceX Falcon launch vehicles. That is a no brainer, and I think Sierra Space has already said that they can work with other vehicles than Vulcan. That said, they kind of did it to themselves. They weren't ready when Vulcan was finally ready for flight.
Keep in mind, Dream Chaser is only a cargo vehicle. I expect it to take at least 4-7 years to clear the strict NASA safety hurdles in finishing a man-rated version of Dream Chaser. It took SpaceX that long to transition from Cargo Dragon to Dragon 2, with a little "incident" of an explosion that totally destroyed the vehicle during testing (and parachute failures as well) along the way. (I mention that because SpaceX fanboys seem to have selective or short memories.)
Further, Dream Chaser hasn't even FLOWN YET. Who knows what unknown problems they will have. The SpaceX Cargo Dragon had thruster icing during their first flight. NASA was impressed with SpaceX solutions during the flight, but the flight was not flawless. I even remember some debate for if Cargo Dragon would be cleared to approach the station on that first test flight.
Say what you will about Starliner, but it had no cargo vehicle design heritage to draw from in building the man-rated Starliner, and even still, with all their valve and thruster difficulties they never BLEW UP THEIR VEHICLE DURING TESTING.
As far as the debate on whether to bring Starliner home with crew, it is mainly a political decision. Some claim that the safety percentage on Starliner approaches the mid-90s % odds of success. But NASA knows that if that few percentage chance of failures occurs there will be no end of "I told you so" from the Boeing haters, and SpaceX fanboys.
Hello "I-love-space" thanx for your input.
Title contains the usual conflating of speculation with fact.
Could work, but with Starships capabilities and cost-effectiveness, maybe all else becomes obsolete
If you watch the recent Tim Dodd interview with Jeff Bezos, it’s amazing how bloated the New Glennengines look compared to SpaceX V3 raptor. And with the exception of V3, that engine would be considered state of the art
!t occurred to me some time ago, that this would be a very practical match.
SpaceX will need some modifications, but it will be more feasible than the other
Nasa doesn't want launch monopoly. But competition to SpaceX isn't there. They're way ahead. 😂
Dreamchaser is the answer to Boeing's problems. It is designed to tow a waste module behind it.
It could tow Starliner back to earth.
So Starliner wouldn't have to use it's
Screwed up thrusters. Dreamchaser could deorbit Starliner then detach
At the right time. Dreamchaser is designed to take out the trash. :)
Yeah
Dream Chaser launching on the top of the F9 Heavy stack harkens back to the day of the X-20 Dyna Soar blasting off on top of a Titan III.
Wanna see Dream Chaser launch on a Falon Heavy. I also think other areospace companies can learn ALOT from SpaceX. Any efforts in on-orbit activity and beyond will eventually result in tech-spinoffs not to mention, the more we learn about Space, the more we learn about Earth as well. 🙂
Just as small point; I just noticed that Dream Chaser bears an UNCANNY similar shape to the main space vehicle in an old teen sci - fi space vehicle called Space Hawk (or Space Eagle. I no longer have the books, so I cannot at this time verify the titles of those books. The major difference is that the Space Hawk (eagle?) had a FTL drive, and it was completely fictional.
Another thing of note. I have seen pictures of the Space Shuttle main vehicle piggy backing on a modified 747. i also know of similar pictures which show the Buran - the Soviet era copy og the Space Shuttle piggy backing on a giant Russian transport plane. This has always made me wonder WHY a somewhat larger, modifies 747 could not have been used to ferry the space shuttle to the edge of space, then releasing it to power it's way into orbit. The Space shuttle was, after all designed to be a glider / lifting body.
So, since the Dream Chaser seems to be a smaller vehicle than the Space Shuttle, why doesn't NASA try out the piggy back system again?
Dream Chaser resembles the Soviet BOR-4. Look it up, there are videos about it. Also, lifting a space plan to orbit on the back of a subsonic plane is complete fiction. It could make it past the Karman line but achieving orbit requires a tremendous amount of energy.
I believe this method of flying the shuttle on the back of the 747 was only used for transportation back to the cape not for launching it.
@@zarl5238 They used the piggyback method to test its ability to glide back in the day. I'm sure they were testing many other things as well. While you could technically launch it to hit the Karman line with rockets from a 747 or other large plane, achieving orbit would not work, too much energy needed.
At 4.5 billion you can point at every screw and every bracket and say that cost a million dollars and still have plenty left
Dream Chaser was designed to be able to be launched aboard Vulcan, Falcon 9 and even Ariane 6. I like Dream Chaser but it is a long way from having a manned version. No matter what happens with Starliner, a manned version of Dream Chaser should be developed to provide another option for manned access to space.
Why would spacex launch dream chaser instead of crew dragon? It's a direct competitor, isn't it?
Boeing is the perfect example of when you build a reputation being lead by engineers and turn over the helm to accountants and stockholders.
blaming 'stockholders', iow, 'capitalist free markets', for such a fail seems imho a bit far off the mark, fren.
are not Boeing corruoptocracy *decades* of plundering tax dollars stolen from We The People, a far better example of how unavoidably pervasive are corruptocrats shoveling pork, in all/every/any 'government' endeavor; thereby demonstrating how veeeery useless are all things 'government', than otherwise?
elon himself, as well as SierraSpace, are openly, proudly, contemptuous of all things 'government', wholly eschewing any 'government' funds, and any 'gov' contracts, but for those wholly independent of 'government' 'oversight'; which is why each have been able to leapfrog by dint of sheer hard work applied to their respective visionary goals for all mankind, all such legacy dinosaurs as Boeing, to become within one generation the most widely respected, most highly admired, frims working toward 'space'; by peers, competitors, by fans, by We, The People.
that each are public, 'stockholder' owned, is the root not of such fails as Boeing, but of their former successes, as they are even now respinsible for the current successes of Spacex and of SierraSpace.
imho...
;-)
When Boeing bet the company on the 707 in the 1950s and the 747 in the 1960s, the CEO was Bill Allen, a lawyer.
The guys that built Boeing are rolling over in their graves. The 747 was designed before computers on millions of drawings (mylars) every curve a testimony to their innovation. The new Boeing like so many others is more concerned with counting their money... Good luck with that. I wonder how many people still love their jobs there and feel proud of being a part of something great?
NASA should allow SpaceX to propose missions, and then decide whether to fund them. That way we could end up being surprised by what is possible for low prices.
Yes
Your recent videos have been mention Dream Chaser launching on a falcon. Is this actually something that is going to happen or is this speculation?
Speculation is what it looks like to me.
Dream Chaser isn't the successor to the Space Shuttle. It has no where near the capabilities the shuttle had for independent missions and payload delivery. It is primarily comparable in the fact that it should be able to land on a runway which solves the complexity of having to retrieve it from remote sites after landing and reducing refurbishing.
YES. Use SpaceX.
I work for SNC (same couple (Ozmen) that own SNC also own Sierra Space). I can tell you that the Ozmens are much less inclined to use SpaceX. Because of their partnerships with Blue Origin, they consider SpaceX a competitor. I'm pretty sure they will wait it out with ULA.
Is SNC owed by Blue origin?
So Bezos is running the show there? Sue your way to orbit, Jeffie-boi. Dumba$$.
@@ecrowder9757 No. The Ozmens own SNC and Sierra Space, and are only in partnership with Blue Origin for the space station they are designing together.
I would like to hear a bit more about landing legs. I think I have the same opinion that you do. Starship is to land on different planets there is no towers. There is no drone boats. So they should be landing legs right from the get-go.
Starship HLS does have landing legs. The tower catch is just for the first stage.
Really. Any actual published information or just hearsay.? $4.5 billion, maybe $4 billion for bonus checks for the legacy companies upper echelon management. $.5 billion for actual R&D and building.
Get Dream Chaser done and man-rated. Undock Starliner, send it back unmanned and cancel the program. Ditch Vulcan in favor of SpaceX. Why keep an Apollo-style capsule and/or a non-reusable booster like Vulcan based on archaic tech around when we have a reusable launch vehicle and lifting body in the wings (pun intended) that can be launched by SpaceX? We might actually be on track to see something like the original concepts behind the Space Shuttle - totally reusable ground-to-orbit vehicles.
Falcon Heavy should be modified to carry Dream Chaser
Let's wait for their next upgrades
Yes. NASA needs to terminate the Star "Edsel" in favor of Sierra launching the Dream Chaser on a Falcon. Even if Sierra purchases ULA, the Vulcan has years of backlog due to the slow 1960's style of building the vehicle one at a time and using it just once. Sierra also needs to drop Blue Origin as a partner in Orbital Reef and partner with Vast to add inflatables.
Click bait. Select "Do not reccomend chanel" done.
Looks like Boeing is doing good is bpace as they are going good with planes in these recent years...
anyway, looking foward for Dream chaser: looks promising
title is actually misleading clickbait, script is poorly written.
True. The "to" needs to be changed to could and should.
Yes, Spacex and Sierra Space would be a smart move!
The blessing that could come from this is that Falcon Heavy becomes Manned rated
👍👍👍
Please provide video interviews from SppaceX and NASA about using SpaceX to launch Dreamchaser. Thanks.
* Starliner is like flying a washing machine to space. Trash *
Yes. As others said just book a flight. It is like booking a train ticket.
Since the ill-fated Dyna Soar project of my childhood, I've always believed in "fly it back". As good as Dragon is, I'm still disappointed with its Apollo-era parachute return. Hoping this Starliner debacle becomes the kickstarter opportunity for spaceplanes! If the only issue with Falcon Heavy/Dream Chaser is fairing size, I wonder why Spacex hasn't hopped on this already?...btw... The X-37 has been around for a while and seems to be a sound airframe. Wondering if (and why not) it can be modified and scaled up for civilian use (then we'll have TWO spaceplanes!)... ???
Dragon was designed for propulsive landing. This is why it has Super Draco engines on four sides.
NASA would not allow it's astronauts to be onboard if that was the landing approach. So, SpaceX uses the parachute water landing instead. The SD emgines only used in the event of a launch abort.
Dragon was designed for propulsive landing. It has 4 Super Dracos on it's sides for this reason. NASA would not allow it to land using them. Instead, they are now only for launch abort.
SpaceX has looked into a larger fauring for Falcon and FH, but that's expensive and has a limited number of payloads requiring it. Starship will carry those payloads in the future anyhow.
Sierra Space would be foolish to not, at least, explore the potential of launching Dreamchaser on Falcon 9. ULA is in crisis (largely because of Blue Origin), Blue Origin itself does everything at a glacial pace. SpaceX is the reliable bet for orbital boosters at this point if you want your vehicle to actually launch.
We haven't even mentioned that ULA is going bankrupt.
Will it fit on Falcon?
Why are you promoting this as a done deal? You left the question mark off the end of your title?
yes. Call space x and schedule a ride.
At the moment dream chaser is only developed as cargo module. The crew module would need a few more years to develope.
They be better doing race horses expensive and easier to loose money at no competition just x now theres no other in the game
Starliner. The Jed Clampett space program.
Screw all this. Space X should buy Sierra Space and take over Dreamchaser development.
The fairing size issue prevent this from happening.
So far.
Boeing is becoming synonymous with "Lack of Quality Control". Unless they fix that rapidly, Boeing is doomed as a company overall.
Exactly! Even NASA can't control this
SPACEX has proved its reliability and approval not only to NASA, but also to the public...thank you Elon for giving us the opportunity to explore our solar system and perhaps even space way beyond our dreams of being able to "ENGAGE", and beyond as Picard would say!!!
Elon could do them one better, to create a re-usable intermediate vehicle between Falcon Heavy and Starship. But will he...
If Sierra Space buys ULA, they could be just the paired companies to make a launch vehicle to fit that profile...
I hope SpaceX takes over however I don't like that this video purposelessly uses a fake title to get people to watch the video 😢
SpaceX should design something similar to the shuttle so can carry large parts for new space station which SpaceX should build also where Starship can refuel
Wrong choice. It was the large size of the Shuttle that caused most of the problems with the Shuttle. A smaller crew launch vehicle would give faster turn rounds, be easier to launch, safer because you would not require so big & complicated a launch system. Cargo could be launched by a bigger vehicle, with no risk to human life. Even if you went to the trouble to make it reusable (note that sometimes expendable is cheaper) you could have the option of overloading the launcher & discarding it. Think about what is done with some Falcon launches.
Starliner has had way more than "a half decade of development."
Still not dreaming with a reverence. Both ideas are excellent. Go Sierra Space. Dream Chaser will launch eventually. 🤟🌎
🚀🚀🚀
Vulcan isn’t reusable at this stage and won’t be competitive against SpaceX !!
Seriously wonder why they bothered. Was offered a second tour of the vehicle at KSC, thanks no
Anyone know what flight suit are going to used on the Dream Chaser?
Yes Indeed
If something can go wrong, it will go wrong.
SpaceX is eating NASA's lunch.
The crew version of Dream Chaser would take too long to develop when you look at the remaining life of the ISS. NASA will probably stick with Boeing as an alternate to Space X.
What they could do is have the mission launching to the Polar be delayed until second quarter of 25 and have an unmanned crew dragon launch with four seats carrying the two crew members from Crew 9 and have Butch & Sunni go back on that particular dragon bring them back.
Maybe Space X can make a deal with Dreamchaser that allows both companies to make enough money.
SpaceX can help if they need
the starliner is not the worst spacecraft in history. I would look to soviet history for that tag
yes
Seems like Falcon Heavy and Dreamchaser would qualify as the elusive fully reusable stack. Why isn't that pairing a more exciting prospect?
Sending a never tested craft on a rescue mission is the worst idea I've ever heard...
Have you heard of the Boeing Starlamer its docked at the ISS.
It's just another in an apparently long line of engineering failures and embarrassments for Boeing. This company needs an entirely new management suite, right from department managers on up- especially in HR, engineering and production departments. It's either that or this company is on a fast track to extinction. Had Boeing not been on financial life-support from the feds it would already be sitting down beside the Dodo bird.
Dream Chaser is needed
Right👍
considering Boeings record in the last few years I didn't think that you could use the words "Boeing , and engineering excellence" in the same sentence.
NASA dosent want to depend on one provider, but all of its history of human flight it’s been dependent on one American provider
Best of luck SpaceX and dream chaser sounds fantastic
YES…
Has a decision to launch Dream Chaser on Falcon 9 actually been made? I haven't heard this. Also, Sierra Space is considering buying ULA, and doing this might significantly expedite the first launch of Dream Chaser on Vulcan Centaur. Would Dream Chaser fit inside a standard Falcon 9 fairing, and is it light enough to avoid expending the booster? Vulcan Centaur can launch a greater payload to LEO even if the Falcon 9 booster is expended. Falcon Heavy might be a better match for Dream Chaser, with the X-37B perhaps being a similar payload, but it would also be more expensive and I don't think SpaceX has any plans to human-certify it. I think the most interesting question that this issue raises is the difference in size and mass between Crew-Dragon/Starliner and Dream Chaser. Does Dream Chaser effectively require a rocket in a different payload-class than the other two? Did this factor into NASA's decision to select SpaceX and Boeing for the Commercial Crew program? Still, a very interesting video, thank you.
No it hasn't. Never mind the fact that Dreamchaser still has work needed (which is why it missed the first launch of Vulcan), and its heat shield is NOT attached to the vehicle at the moment.; the reality is that Dreamchaser is NOT designed for manned space flight. It is an unmanned drone cargo vehicle, nothing more. It's going to be 3 or more years before the manned version is even close to completion. This whole thing is utter nonsense. And yes, Falcon Heavy is the only vehicle with a fairing large enough to hold Dreamchaser and the delta V to get it into orbit.
@@wesleybeaver Yeah, this is basically what I was getting at. The video title "SpaceX to launch Dream Chaser to replace Starliner" seemed unlikely on a couple of different levels, and when I started watching the video it became obvious that it was more speculation than an actual plan.
Not sure what Starliner vs Dream Chaser has to do with SpaceX, planned to launch on Vulcan, which is sort of on schedule, that can still work but needs to get Vulcan human-rated, and it is not now, but then human occupied dream-chasers are not ready either
That headline is a bit misleading.