Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonknee | Hacker News Reader

To be fair, there were people in NASA's crafts. National heroes even. They sent out pretty lean teams to capture the SRBs for the Shuttle (which are much larger than the Dragon capsule):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWR_MHkuBMU

Also, carriers weren't used. Destroyers were (they're a lot more nimble) and we have a bunch chugging around doing exercises at any given point so that's probably a fairly cost effective method.

View on HN

Those HN'ers in the SF Bay area may want to visit the USS Hornet (CVS-12), the aircraft carrier that recovered Apollo 11 and 12. In the hangar bay, they have an isolation unit used to hold the astronauts (basically just a modified Airstream trailer).

This page has a photo of the command module being hoisted aboard the carrier: http://www.uss-hornet.org/history/apollo/

Also, don't forget that the USA was in the middle of a space race (which was an extension of a broader arms race [1]) with the Soviet Union. I wouldn't be surprised if the US government considered recovering the space craft and crew to be an issue of national security. The stakes for SpaceX are much lower, so comparing their expenditures isn't fair.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race

"I wouldn't be surprised if the US government considered recovering the space craft and crew to be an issue of national security."

To add to your point, with regard to Apollo 11, both ships and aircraft (Boeing EC-135) played a critical mission role (in addition to security) by extending the mission capability of ground-based tracking stations and satellites in the areas of telemetry acquisition, communications and contingency planning.

Some examples (non-exhaustive):

1. The USNS Vanguard was positioned in the Atlantic to provide communication and telemetry acquisition during the launch of Saturn V. In addition, it was also strategically positioned to serve in a post-launch contingency posture, if necessary.

2. Both USNS Huntsville and USNS Redstone acted as sea-based tracking stations, positioned in the Pacific. In addition to tracking the CSM (Command Service Module), they supported a communication link to the aforementioned aircraft that were being utilized to ensure that there was 100% communication coverage.

A note regarding the USS Hornet, since it has been mentioned in other posts: this aircraft carrier was selected to serve as the recovery ship. After all, this was an epic, history-making mission and event. This ship is now a National Historic Landmark.

>To be fair, there were people in NASA's crafts.

The Dragon capsule is designed to hold people, so SpaceX wouldn't need a bigger ship or crane to haul them in.

Designed to hold and have real life people inside are two very different things. NASA didn't want to have a successful mission and then lose their hero astronauts because they couldn't find them at sea in time.

Also remember that NASA was doing this in the age before GPS...

The crew capsule will probably never land in the ocean as they plan to land on a pad with thrusters.

I was all, like, "Really?"

Google went all, like, "Really..."

http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120530

> In the future, Dragon will use SuperDraco thrusters to land on a landing pad on ground.

This then led to looking up SuperDraco, which is on this Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco_(rocket_engine_family)

And then we all know how wikipedia is. I'll be following links for the rest of the afternoon and probably shake myself out of it when I realize that I've been looking at Wikpedia articles for Marvel superheroes for 20 minutes.

[edit ooh, this is worth seeing too] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUUnYgo1-lI

Musk said during the press conference today that they're targeting thruster landings (in any atmosphere!) within 3 years, or more like 4-5 if they encounter difficulties.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com