Genesis Auger - End of Manned Capsule Worship?

... there have been 129 manned capsule landings with 1-failure
(Soyuz
1) and one
partial failure (Apollo 15 - one parachute collapsed ). Both of
those
failures were over 30-years ago.


It looks like parachute/capsules probably have about the
same failure rate as winged/reusables. What I'm wondering
is whether an event on live TV similar to Genesis, but with
people inside, would be more traumatic to the public (and
the program) than the shuttle losses weve seen. If a failed
chute happened, the astronauts would know it - and would
presumably be in communication all the way down...

And consider that if it had happened with a previous US
manned capsule, the capsule probably would have simply
splashed and sunk - a bit different event than getting
extended closeup views of cracked capsule sticking out the
desert floor.

- Ed Kyle

I agree that winged spacecraft and capsules have about the same number
of flights and failure rates.

I was surprised when I counted how many capsule flights there have
been.
Since Soyuz flights are not numbered 1 through 90, I didn't think
there had been that many Soyuz flights.

On this webpage is a picture of what was left of Soyuz 1 after it
crashed. Not much.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_1


- Rusty Barton

Derek Lyons wrote:
wrote:

What I'm wondering
is whether an event on live TV similar to Genesis, but with
people inside, would be more traumatic to the public (and
the program) than the shuttle losses weve seen.

Folks with any knowledge of manned capsule systems know that they
typically have manual backups for deployment.


They would also know that such backup systems have failed.
As in Soyuz 1, with the failed main parachute, the manual
reserve chute tangling with the drag chute, and the descent
module smashing to earth with Komarov.

Folks with intelligence know that we *don't* know why the parachutes
failed

They also know *that* it failed, which is sufficiently
relevant to my question.

and that any such speculation as you write is nothing but drug
addled fantasies.

Perhaps you should take a pill.

- Ed Kyle

Derek Lyons wrote:
Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:

:

It is not hard to imagine a similar result with a manned
capsule. Perhaps Constellation will have wings after all.

I would not agree, the first thought that went thru my mind as I saw
the
video of the Genesis tumbling down was 'Why did they not use a shape
that was
self aligning?'.

It was supposed to be self aligning. Self alignment is a function of
the relationship between CP and CG, it's only indirectly related to
shape. I suspect in this case that CP was too close to CG, and when
perturbed there was insufficient righting moment. (?, not sure what
the term is in aerodynamics, but that the term used in naval
architecture.)

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

Not exactley. While self-alignment maybe a function of the relationship
between CP and CG, it is generally based on models that have been
tested. That is, once the configuration is defined it is tested to see
if the results match the model developed.

So this question is, did they use a new untested configuration that
they mathematically defined, or did they use an existing design already
known to be stable in reentry.

I cant find any capsule that has a similar design, so I suspect the
former, but this may be a question for the aerodynamicists among us.

Christopher M. Jones wrote:
Christian Ramos wrote:
15 apollos ?

I only make 11 missions.

Apollo 7 - Earth Orbital
Apollo 8 - Lunar Orbital
Apollo 9 - Earth Orbital
Apollo 10 - Lunar Orbital
Apollo 11/12/13/14/15/16/17 - Lunar Landing

What am I missing???

A: skylab
B: Apollo 13 is in the wrong category

DOH!

Skylab always disappears of my mental radar for some reason. And it
shouldnt the number of fragments that landed on the Aussies. Good shot
that

Kim Keller wrote:
... The Constellation mission requirements will set the
design, not the failure of a Discovery-class low-budget unmanned
probe.


Agreed. But political forces can shape (and alter) the
mission requirements. I seem to recall that many in
Congress weren't initially happy with the idea of the space
shuttle, which in the minds of many serves as a symbol
of U.S. technological prowess and power, being replaced
by an "old-fashioned" capsule that seems derived from the
ideas of international competitors Russia and China.
Note that funding for the Constellation effort has not
flowed as freely as many would like. I'm just wondering
if the Genesis smashdown could provide leverage to those who
would rather not see U.S. astronauts returning to Earth in
an "undigified" "can" suspended beneath parachutes (that may
or may not open they can now say while playing back the
Genesis "splashdown" videos).

- Ed Kyle