quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:
People have been bickering over the title of 'astronaut' for decades. Specifically, the flight crews (pilot, flight engineer and mission commander) in the shuttle era complained that they trained for years to pilot the shuttle, so THEY were the 'real' astronauts. But, then, there were mission specialists, who also trained for years and were professional NASA types who went through the full astronaut training. THEN, there were the Payload Specialists, which caused tension among the full-time astronauts (Christa McAuliffe was a Payload Specialist).

According to Wiki:

quote:

Mission specialist (MS) was a position held by certain NASA astronauts. Mission specialists were generally assigned from the astronaut office pool to a limited field of a specific mission, such as those related to medical or engineering experiments.

Other functions on board were pilot, flight engineer and mission commander. Some Space Shuttle missions included personnel assigned as payload specialists in addition to standard mission specialists. While payload specialists were selected for a single specific mission, mission specialists were selected as astronauts first, and then subsequently assigned missions as NASA's needs dictated.

Mission specialists competed for seats with the payload specialists:

quote:

JSC director Chris Kraft and members of the NASA astronaut corps believed that mission specialists—many with doctoral degrees or other scientific background, and all with full-time astronaut training—could operate all experiments. Rick Chappell, chief scientist of MSFC, believed that the scientific community insisted on its own scientists being able to operate experiments in exchange for support of the Space Shuttle program. While mission specialists could operate most experiments, "Since we could take passengers, why not take at least a couple of passengers who had spent their whole careers doing the kind of research they were going to do in space?" he said.

Therefore, many flew on shuttles who did NOT go through the full 'astronaut' training. They were treated publicly just like the 'real' astronauts (from the perspective of the full time NASA crews) who argued that ONLY the flight crews and Mission Specialists earned tbe right to be called 'astronauts.' Few outside NASA seemed to care and lumped them all together.


So, just like there is no clearly-defined boundary of "where 'Space' begins," there won't be a universal definition of 'astronaut' anytime soon.

By the way, just like today's flight, the first Cosmonauts did not 'fly' their spacecraft, either. . .

The Mercury 7 didn't do much "flying" either, which earned them the "spam in a can" insult from the test pilots of the day, like Yeager. That wasn't entirely fair, but it wasn't entirely unfair.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

The Mercury 7 didn't do much "flying" either, which earned them the "spam in a can" insult from the test pilots of the day, like Yeager. That wasn't entirely fair, but it wasn't entirely unfair.

They still controlled the spacecraft, unlike the Sovs who did most flight control maneuvers via autopilot and/or ground control.

From Wiki:

quote:

 At 7:15 am on October 3, 1962, Schirra lifted off aboard his Mercury flight, named Sigma 7. After a minor trajectory deviation early in flight, Sigma 7 achieved orbit. Once in orbit, Schirra demonstrated manually positioning and maneuvering his spacecraft using a reaction control system. After the navigation issues during Carpenter's Aurora 7 mission, NASA and Schirra focused on the engineering and human factors in manually operating the capsule. Schirra reported rising suit temperatures, reaching a high of 32 °C (90 °F), before he was able to adjust his suit's cooling system manually. After completing his spacecraft tests, Schirra tested his ability to use controls in a zero-gravity environment without sight. Throughout his mission, Schirra demonstrated the ability to act as a backup to automatic controls and manually fly the spacecraft. After six orbits, Schirra manually aligned his spacecraft over Africa and performed retrofire. Sigma 7 landed 5 miles (8.0 km) from the recovery ship, the aircraft carrier USS Kearsarge, in the central Pacific Ocean.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Roger Ramjet ...

Oh man! I loved that show. A friend and I turned it into a drinking game!



The best thing about this whole project is it allows one to say the phrase "giant flaming space penis" in polite conversation.

If the standards of “astronauts” is having to fly the craft, then the Space X crew who went to the ISS aren’t either. Everything on the Space X Falcon is automatic, or ground controlled. All the crew does is monitor the process on screens. But they are undeniably much more astronauts than Branson or Bezos who just went up high enough to beat some arbitrary line and came right back down.

Watched it front and center. It was just a small step to bigger things.

quote:

Originally posted by snwghst:
A friends son has been working in the Blue Origin program in Huntsville for a few years now.

Cool, HSV Factory is where I work.

I wonder if the term “low bid” is applicable to these guys’ toys?

Loved the comparisons online to Dr. Evil's phallic symbol rocket. I guess this is another step forward in the space game, but it sure seems to pale alongside the accomplishments of SpaceX.

And would somebody tell Bezo's to ditch the cowboy hat. He could have placed a five gallon bucket on his head and not looked any more ridiculous.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Loved the comparisons online to Dr. Evil's phallic symbol rocket

“…that looks like an enormous…Wang! Pay attention!”

I keep reading comments about how it’s the next step. Seriously curious the next step to what? I understand the booster programs that can lift payloads into orbit. I don’t understand the pseudo airplane ride into into nothing close to functional space.

Bransons version seems to be self limiting to an arcade style ride. An expensive one at that.

Private companies sending satellites into self sustaining orbits is a money maker. Rides up to selfie height for bragging rights seems like a commercial failure $$$ wise.

I’m sure I’m not seeing the commercial value of selling “rides” into space. I also never saw the commercial advantage of the Concorde either. This seems even more likely to lose money than the Concorde. How many people are actually willing to spend 250k on a 10 minute flight? Does that rate even pay the bill?

Obviously the big plan is to have a way to put the 10k+ satellites into orbit that Amazon and whoever else has planned. Cheap multiple flights are the requirement to seed space with this carpet of satellites. Is selling a seat just a bonus or an offshoot?

The Wright Flyer was a lousy airplane. It could fly only extremely short distances, at extremely low altitudes, and served no real useful purpose other than showing powered flight was possible. Yet, its first successful flight made for one of the iconic photos of the 20th century.

It took a full ten years before aircraft were even considered useful for military purposes. WWI finally showed that aircraft had great military utility, and WWII firmly established their supremacy in 'modern' combat over the pre-existing military conventions (battleships, fixed fortifications, trench warfare, etc).

These commercial endeavours are baby steps, but important ones. Who knows if they will go anywhere? I will likely never be able to afford a trip on either one, but for me, this is not about the near-term (1-5-10 years). It is about opening up space flight for increased commercial involvement over the next several decades.

Computer technology advanced a LOT because of the consumer gaming market. I remember back in the 80s when they told us how we would use computers to organize our shopping lists and other stupid stuff I still use a pen and paper for (really, they had no idea why the average person would want/need a computer back then). Today, there are billions of dollars made in the PC/console gaming industry.

Hopefully, this is the future of space flight. So, while each spacecraft is a poor substitute for the shuttle (which itself was a bloated, inefficient money pit which killed more astronauts than all other spacecraft combined) or the Soyuz/SpaceX capsules, the fact that people are making space available to the average millionaire is a move in the right direction.

The booster landing is really amazing. The precision needed to land it on the pad and that softly, matching it's thrust perfectly, is awesome.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Roger Ramjet ...

Oh man! I loved that show. A friend and I turned it into a drinking game!

Nothing personal, Artie, but I don't think six year old kids should be drinking. Better to start at a reasonable like the rest of us, say, 11 or 12.

As for the jackass riding into space on his checkbook, well, he returned safely to Earth, so the mission is an utter failure. Those guys had their chance. They could have left Bebos in the cold, dark vacuum of space. We went over this- during training, locate and learn the proper use of the Eject button. You had one job.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

And would somebody tell Bezo's to ditch the cowboy hat. He could have placed a five gallon bucket on his head and not looked any more ridiculous.

Agreed. Seattle boy looks silly in cowboy hat, especially one that doesn't fit him.

Well, I've never before said it, but...

TTIWWOP

He's dressed appropriately to ride the giant space dick.

You're not a hot-shot pilot, you douchebag. You bought your way into space. Y'know, before, I didn't really give a shit about you, but now, I'd love to see you auger into the desert at about 1.5 times the speed of sound.

I actually think the Wright brother’s flight is a bad analogy. Flight was game changing. Space flight for commercial paying customers isn’t game changing. At all. Where are you going to go? Lift capability on the cheap is game changing. Commercial selfie flights or just private space flight changes nothing for anyone no matter how good and safe it gets. At best it’s a thrill ride for the Uber rich and a great meme event when one eventually comes back down in flames.

Flying astronauts to a space station, ok. Flying people for a thrill, not so much. If flying had stagnated at barn storming flights nobody would care anymore. There has to be a viable use for a space plane.

Next we are going to hear how manned colonies in space are the next big thing. Doubtful is an understatement.

^^