A History Of Reused Spacecraft
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 тра 2017
- SpaceX are getting to reuse a Dragon Capsule for their latest delivery to the ISS, this is the latest in a small number of spacecraft which have visited space on more than one occasion.
- Наука та технологія
Возвращаемый Аппарат(voz-vra-shcha-ye-miy apparat) - it basically translates to "returnable device"
and yes, i was really offended by Scott's pronunciation
+Соловьёв Денис and I apologise
Apology accepted
was it bad?
It was very bad pronunciation. But unlike Denis, I find it rather funny:)
"They need a hatch through the heat shield" must one of the scariest sentences an astronaut has ever heard.
Shuttle pilot Joe Engle came from that program, iirc.
I'm also willing to bet that setence made some engineers very nervous.
my favorite reused space hardware:
john glenn
Damn right
oof holy shit
And john young
@@rocketnerd7763 dude joke was funny
you ruined every fucking aspect of it
aasquared lol I wouldn’t take it that far. I mean it wasn’t really that funny anyway.
Weird. Just 4 years ago, SpaceX reusing parts of their spacecraft was *news.* Now it's news when they *fail* to recover something.
Next video should be Rocket designs that only flew once
Hmmm... Buran?
Yep)
RocketLab's Electron... for now
There are a handful that never flew at all (unless you count getting about 2 meters up then crashing back down).
Gordon Lawrence - SLS will probably either fly once or not at all. Three times, tops.
If Falcon Heavy works, and real progress is being made on the construction of BFR, it may become politically untenable to continue blowing literally tens of billions of dollars on SLS.
Pulling my hair out waiting for Falcon Heavy to run it’s static fire test! 😬🤭
Sadly, Buran can't be in this list.
Sadly the Earth won't be on that list either after we are done with it.
I don't think an honorary mention would have been too bad, seeing how close it got.
Oof
F
Sadness
Hey Scott, What rocket had the most stages in history?
It'd be fun to see Scott do a video on some of the weirdest rocket designs in history.
Stellar Labs one of my failed kerbal projects
Chocolate Milk, ikr
There was a plane... I think it was Matt Lowne who made a replica KSP version of it. It was invented by the USA and it would land a plane in a football stadium and take off in it!
Stellar Labs Minotaur V had 5 stages, maybe 6 with extra upper stage 😂
I wonder what is in Scott Manley's rather impressive vinyl collection.
NASA : "You can't use reuseable spacecraft! That wasn't part of the deal!"
Space X: "I'm altering the deal, pray I don't alter it again!"
Jimmy Danger Gonzalez Good, very good...
Beautiful. :D
Elon to NASA "You're not paying me enough to keep throwing my toys away."
Next on SpaceX: Reusable Reusable Spacecraft
4:06 "they were flown on top of the other" that's the most kerbal thing i've ever heard
*reusability intensifies*
This deserves more likes :))))
Oh yes. You did butcher the Russian word.
And fun fact:
This word actually means "Return Vehicle". Essintially this classification was used for anything that was supposed to survive reentry and landing. And it didn't have any connotation for being reusable.
Also Soyuz (which was only ever used as Return Vehicle) got into a different classification - Space Ship, because it was intended to be used on Lunar missions...
The A5 was a scaled-down test model of the A4 which replaced the former unsuccessful A3 in this role. It was flown from 1938 to 1942, and played a vital role in testing the aerodynamics and technology of the A4. Its rocket engine was identical to the A3, with a new control system and a shape similar to the A4. 25 were launched, some several times; it was fitted with a parachute recovery system and could float for up to two hours before sinking to allow recovery by boat. Variants were constructed both with no propulsion system and monopropellant engines for air drop testing.
171st
last time i was this early, the Space Shuttle was still being used.
Learn something every day. Thanks scott :)
"...But whilst they were still experimenting with landing..." *carnage*
SO interesting to look back
X15... I like that name!
I name all my prototypes X-somenumber
@@NerdyNEET man of culture
Your Russian is as Scottish as Russian ever gonna get xD
What an awesome summary, thanks Scott!
Thank you Scott Manley. Very well done. 🎩
This was full of information I didn't think I needed to know untill now thanks for sharing!!
3:45
It was so bad, that involuntary clenching of my teeth destroyed my coffee mug.
Awesome videos with great info Scott! I would love to suggest a video about the X-37 and your speculations about its missions.
Shout out to oshkosh air museum for our space ship one model, wife and I went there for our anniversary. Always fun and intresting.
Where else do you get to listen to a brilliant Scottsman cramming so much interesting info in 10 minutes? Brilliant mate! Keep it up!
Yes, the double t is on purpose.
i think one of the big differences between the space shuttle/space X and the other program in this video, is spaceX and the space shuttle where designed with reusabiliy in mind where as the other programs sound more like "oh this is in a good state lets use it again".
Closed caption writes SpaceX as "space eggs" 😄
It's onto something that we're not yet privy to...
That's just a consequence of Scott Manley's lovely voice.
Nanu, Nanu!
Interesting Video, an you have got a nice vinyl collection behind you 👍👌
That astronaut holding up the for sale sign made me laugh way too hard.
I just was wondering if shuttle could land with a payload on board, and post a video answering my question a couple of days late! Thank you Mr. Manley, good timing
7:20 it was indeed expensive but this cost was necesary for missions like building the ISS or getting satellites back down to earth intact
Nice rundown Scott
Astronaut wings won't due you much in the vaccuumm of space.
What does this mean now?
Space Shuttle's engineers don't like your comment.
The Westar episode happened in 1984, not 1986 (very few Shuttle flights in 86 due to Challenger).
Most youtubers would have titled this video something like "10 AMAZING spacecraft you won't believe were reused!!"
Always very interesting
Scott that Lav mic sounds better than the snowball, much better in fact.
My kindergarten teacher thought the space shuttle landed in the ocean. She was teaching the class this, when I said wait a minute. They land on runways, don't they? After arguing a bit, i persuaded her to search a video of a space shuttle landing. In the video, the space shuttle landed at a runway, at cape canveral. What a stupid teacher.
@Not a leopard
Not and stay reusable, at any rate!
Dumbest majors in any university are generally education majors.
Dat Crypt of the Necrodancer record tho
+TrevorJr26 gifted to me by Danny Baranowsky
Very nice!
lucky you !
The Westar and Palapa B satellites were launched in 1984, not 1986. They were recovered a few months later.
There was only one successful Shuttle mission in 1986. That was STS-41C launched on 12 January. The next launch was 51L, Cjallenger, and that, of course, failed to achieve orbit. There were no more Shuttle missions until 1988.
My god how much has changed in three years (a split second in space travel) - we have now reused a HUMAN-rated capsule vehicle, powered by a reused launch vehicle (multiple times) and made it look boring in the process. Oh yeah, and by a completely privately owned commercial entity. 😳
When you plot that out on a graph, space-x getting selected for the lunar lander isnt so ridiculous in the slightest.
Nice LP collection, when you going to show us your turntable?
I'm really curious about that album that is showing up in the middle left. any idea what is it called ?
ya im wondering too, maybe its a zelda poster
Scott, that's quite the impressive vinyl collection you've got there behind your couch would you please do a video about your awesome vinyl-collection please.
how can i get those rad landing skids from the x15 on my ssto :) great video scott, you're the man!
The Gemini 2 capsule is on display at the Air Force Space & Missile Museum, on the grounds of Canaveral Air Force Base. Well worth doing the Historical tour if ever visiting Kennedy Space Center.
Didn't know about the Soviets stacking spacecraft. Would love to find a picture of that. I knew the Proton was a monster rocket -that kinda proves it!
By the way, spaceship 1 was piloted by South African pilot Mike Melville! :) He is our only true astronaut (Shuttleworth merely had the net worth necessary to fly on a shuttle).
Quick correction I only caught on this rewatch:
Both Westar 6 shuttle missions were in 1984, not 1986.
Do CRS-11 reuse all hardware such as including the Draco engines, computers and heatshield or its just the main hardware like the pressure vessels only?
CRS-11 is only reusing the pressure vessel and some minor parts. They plan on reusing more parts on later missions. The Dragon 2 will be reused entirely without being disassembled after each flight.
Hey Scott, huge fan of the channel!
Would you consider putting together a Parker Solar Probe mission in KSP? I'd love to see that!
ignoreheating.png
hi scott, I think you should put some cool props in the background, im sure you have some cool stuff just laying around.
e.g. that new Lego Saturn V
What a time to be alive! :D
On 30 March 2017 SpaceX launched a previously flown booster for the first time. On the seventh anniversary of that flight, SpaceX launched the 260th previously flown booster.
We often talk of the Space Shuttle having been extremely expensive to fly but somehow it was still the cheapest way to get people to and from the ISS, or indeed into any orbit. Currently it is costing the US some 90 million dollars for a trip on the Soyuz whilst the shuttle would carry seven people for less than $500 million, that is less than 80 million per person. Not only that, but in addition to the 7 people it would also carry some twenty or so tons of cargo.
Also worth noting that despite deciding that the Space Shuttle was to expensive to operate they are still paying ULA almost as much as a shuttle flight for putting 25 tons into LEO, something which will hopefully end if/when the Falcon Heavy goes into service.
Don't look to gov'ts. for reliably sound & practical decisions. To most elected officials, the only things that will get them brownie points with voters are military contracts &/ social programs. Space programs are neither.
(Or are they both?!)
@@HuntingTarg They are both, but it has never ever been to the programs benefit.
Nice! Are you going to do a video on the Stratolaunch plane anytime soon?
great vid
Hey past Scott Manley, SpaceX just reused a fairing.
Scott, can you do a video explaining the challenges of second stage re-useability?
VA stands for return capsule, it's just the name of the part of the spacecraft. The name of the spacecraft is TKS. It's like calling Apollo the CM.
That's a lot of records
Hey scott, not on topic but would you mind doing a thing an RocketLabs recent launch?
Please do an update on this!
Good vid
Hey Scott Manley. How do u throttle a rocket engine?? Plzz elaborate
We need a space elevator...
Ain't gonna happen.
NICE VID :)
INDEED THE VIDEO WAS VERY GOOD AND COMPELLING LOL
Aye, Palapa B2 relaunch as B2R! There's where the famous astronaut with For Sale picture come from 😂 and Anna Fischer spaceflight
And I believe Palapa B2-R is the first relaunched with Delta II rocket
Aryasatya Laksita Yep 😜, where are you come from?
You know its a good channel when the video is 9:57 long
only 4 years ago, wow
Scott, I love your videos and I have for the last few years.... BUT..... You look like you want to catch Heisenberg.
It’s hard for me to decide what my favorite cap-shewl is
3:03 ye they messed up the staging just like in ksp
Pretty exited to comment Scott's videos.
It's not very true to assume that Almaz and Salyut were concurrent projects. Initially manned orbital station was a military project by Chelomei. But concurrency between Chelomei and Korolev while Korolev was greatly supported by USSR government leads to transfer of some amount of hulls of Almaz stations to Korolev's design bureau. So, stations are pretty the same except poor configuration of Salyut stations in comparison to Almaz stations.
So Joel walker was the first astronaut to fly a space plane with horizontal take off
6:00 Westar 6 was launched in 1984, not 1986. There were very few space shuttle launches in 1986... 😔
When you buy a used space shuttle how many miles are on the odometer?
Between 148,221,675 miles (Discovery) and 122,883,151 miles (Endeavour).
Price? The miles are nothing compared to the ISS
You won't believe number 4!
Hey Scott. Love your videos and this one put me in mind of an episode of cowboy bebop which got me thinking. In said episode a couple of mechanics in the future rebuild a space shuttle and launch it. My question is two fold. First how viable would refurbishing an old shuttle for takeoff. And second they use an unconventional launch system of running down a runway before pulling up then into a steep climb using angled boosters. How viable is this as a launch system.
Can you make a video about Nasa JetPacks ?
Wasn't the first piece of space hardware to be reused flown on the first manned Gemini flight?
I have watched the entire 10 minute video before it even loaded.
...
What?
Thomas PlaysTheGames Only once? Those are rookie numbers!!
Thomas PlaysTheGames he is the camera...
It's not just letters that are backwards in Russia, it's also time. That's how. He's Russian. Rushin to the past from our perspective, you know what I mean?
I read the thumbnail as something about witchcraft used in space
I know I'm two years late, but weren't the MMUs reused? I guess they could qualify as spacecraft too.
Lou Çhinal Scott , Two Mercury capsules were reused. production # 14 flew on two Little Joe test flights. Production # 8 was launched on broad MA 3. The flight was aborted. The capsule was reused again on MA 4 Which did go into orbit.. Both were unmanned. So I guess they really don't count.
Yeah, the criteria was that it had to get to space twice.
LOL for a second I thought the Gemini capsule deployed the drogue while it was still re-entering.
I know it was never re-used, but I think Buran should have gotten an honorable mention. It was designed to be re-used and almost certainly could have been, it just wasn't.
The fact that it flew exactly one time is a pretty good indicator that they couldn't get it up again.
so that's Thunderbird one that x15, isn't it?
you forgotto mention the SRBs of the Space Shuttles :O
Never made it above the Karman line.
3:47 you tried =D
You are normally really good at citing stuff. Is that all in the public domain then or did you just get lazy? I have a feeling that a lot of those videos clips would be in the public domain.
why does the iss's altitude change a lot?
Even at ~400 km up, there's some residual atmospheric drag that progressively slows it down, making it spiral towards lower altitudes. So every once in a while, a spacecraft docked to it (like the Cygnus, the ATVs or the HTVs) will perform a burn to push the station back into a higher orbit.
I was gonna say something abt Buran, but then I remembered it only flew once despite its reuse capability.
Well, Westar 6 is surely the first reused privately owned spacecraft. Hats off to SpaceX and all, still.
Basically, they're more expensive to make, but you only have to make them once, and you can use them again.
While single use rockets are a little less expensive, but can only be used, well, once. And you have to buy everything again.
Reusable stuff is more expensive but it's an investment in the long run.
Aye?
Basically, yeah.
The goal is cheaper spaceflight. Reusability is a strategy towards that goal.
The problem with the space shuttle was the amount of added mass needed to make it reusable per tonne of payload vs a normal rocket wasn't that great. That of cause combined with ditching the SRB's in salt water
That is the premise... So far the only partially reuseable spacecraft that has flown on a significant number of missions turned out to be alot more expensive in the long run, due to the cost of refurbishment in between and significant cost of development.
falcon 9 first stages are only little more expensive because of the reuse. And the extra weight (performance loss) is not terribly big. And they are modular in the sense that you can be easily converted into a non-reusable configuration for very high payloads (which is quite rare for Falcon 9 FT, the market is small for payloads that big).
But the cost of the _first_ refurbishment was speculated to be bigger than building a new one, because they have taken it apart and inspected every little part to ensure they are up to the specs. Later on as they iterate on the technology they are expected to achieve significant cost savings by reusing.
Reusing the second stage might never be economical for Falcon 9, or Falcon Heavy. The added extra weight is just too much for a space vehicle that small. For a much bigger one, like BFR it is feasible, but the BFR is a long way off, and SpaceX might need to invent some new composite materials for building it.
>falcon 9 first stages are only little more expensive because of the reuse.
Do you have a cite for that?
>And the extra weight (performance loss) is not terribly big.
Didn't SpaceX say the loss in payload to LEO is about 30%?
thoughts about take two taking over ksp?
+1 for crypt of the necrodancer
I believe you'll find that one of the Mercury spacecraft used in the Able/Baker or Ham tests was also recycled, but don't have my Encyclopedia of Manned Space Flight close to hand ...
Did any reach space more than once? I know some were used for recovery training and drop tests.
That wasn't a Mercury capsule. The Baker capsule is on display at the US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville and its totally different. Some kind of ICBM reentry vehicle if I remember correctly.
Do you think this is a cost reduction exercise for SpaceX on this one occasion, or are they trying a proof of concept? The Dragon 2 is on its way so I don't see why they would want to test reusability on an older model.
more data to improve the dragon2 even more before it's completely set in stone.
reusability is a bit of a golden goose in space travel, so it seems like this is right up Elon Musk's alley. and yeah, more data points to shed light on what their current manufacturing processes are achieving.
Apparently, reusing a Dragon capsule was faster than building a new one. And that's helping them spend more time on building the Dragon 2 & Red Dragon.
from what i know, the first reuse of 1st stage did cost less than a new one, and that will only go down with time.