Posted 08.29.2012 at 3:00 pm
9 Comments
Orion Parachute Test
A dart-shaped test vehicle that is used to simulate Orion’s parachute compartment descends above the skies of the U.S. Yuma Army Proving Ground in Arizona.
NASA
Even the space shuttle, which glided through the atmosphere and landed like an airplane, had parachutes to help slow it down — they’re the most effective drag-inducers out there. But you’d better be sure they work. NASA is testing the giant heavyweight parachutes being developed for the next space capsule that will ferry humans into orbit, Orion.
Flying at 25,000 feet above the U.S. Yuma Army Proving Ground Tuesday, a C-130 Hercules dropped the little dart thing you see at the bottom, which simulates Orion’s parachute compartment. At 20,000 feet, the drogue chutes deployed, followed by small pilot chutes that ultimately deployed the three huge parachutes seen here. Each of the main chutes is 116 feet in diameter and weighs more than 300 pounds, according to NASA.
The test proved these chutes can withstand the fastest possible speeds at which Orion capsules will scream into the atmosphere on re-entry. The Apollo-esque capsule won’t have any other means of slowing down — no sky crane or delta wings to create an upward force.
The beleaguered Orion program is scheduled to launch its first test flight in two years, in which an unmanned Orion capsule will travel 3,600 miles into space. That’s about 15 times farther away from Earth than the orbit of the International Space Station (and that of the shuttles), but still a far cry from the moon, an asteroid or Mars, where you would also need a very large and powerful high-speed parachute. Still, at least this is a sign it will come down safely.
In the Blue: NASA
9 Comments
To comment, please Login.
Popular Tags
Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 2013: American Energy Independence
Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.
Popular on Popsci
Most Commented
Technology
- Defense Distributed's Cody Wilson On Being Told To Remove 3-D Printed Gun Plans: "We Win"
- Thieves Stole $45 Million From ATMs Because The U.S. Uses Absurd 40-Year-Old Technology
- A California State Senator Is Trying To Outlaw 3-D Printed Guns
- 2013 Invention Awards: Family Flier
- Autonomous X-47B Jet Fighter Makes Historic First Launch From An Aircraft Carrier
- U.S. Navy Spends $37 Billion On A Ship That Barely Works
- Time-Lapse GIFs Show Earth Transforming Over 25 Years
- How To Turn An AK-47 Into A Soup Ladle
- How The World's First 3-D Printed Gun Works
- Iran Unveils Absurd New Stealth Drone
Most Emailed
Technology
- 7 Reasons Why 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Is A Beginner's Guide To Star Trek [Spoiler Alert]
- America's Road To Energy Independence, Part 1
- Video: MIT's Cheetah Robot Trots, Then Gallops
- Mapping The Simpsons' Slow Descent Into Suckitude
- Google Bets $10.7 Million On Drone Intelligence
- Concept Skyscraper Generates Its Own Energy, Looks Like A Toilet Brush
- Robot Plane Flies Humans 500 Miles
- Google And NASA Team Up In Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab
- How NASA Could Save Kepler
- Inside The Army's Sunshine Simulator
Most Viewed
Technology
- 7 Reasons Why 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Is A Beginner's Guide To Star Trek [Spoiler Alert]
- America's Road To Energy Independence, Part 1
- Video: MIT's Cheetah Robot Trots, Then Gallops
- Mapping The Simpsons' Slow Descent Into Suckitude
- Google Bets $10.7 Million On Drone Intelligence
- Concept Skyscraper Generates Its Own Energy, Looks Like A Toilet Brush
- Robot Plane Flies Humans 500 Miles
- Google And NASA Team Up In Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab
- How NASA Could Save Kepler
- Inside The Army's Sunshine Simulator
Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
Today on PopSci.com
Copyright © 2012 Popular Science
A Bonnier Corporation Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
QUESTION: why is one of the shuts have different color patern like chess?
---
bored? lets go mine the stars... ^^
I find it sad that our manned space program has gone back 50 years in time. I remember the day when we had reusable space planes that could make multiple trips into space again and again! Can anyone tell me why NASA couldn't have just designed a newer smaller more efficient version of the space shuttle?
The capsule will quickly slow down to near its terminal velocity. Larger heat shields are required for more energetic entries not larger parachutes.
Why is NASA wasting money on things SpaceX has already solved?
Orion isn't a step backward from the STS to Apollo program tech. The main reason for the return to a capsule from a plane design is the Shuttle was far too large for use outside of, and wasn't even capable of leaving Earth orbit. The Orion Program specifically calls for a spacecraft capable of leaving orbit, so it can be used to go to the Moon and beyond, hence the return to the type of vehicle we used to go to the Moon before.
The other reason is safety. The Shuttle sat right next to the rockets, so if one failed it would likely take out the crew vehicle. The Orion capsule sits on top of the rocket where it has a better chance of surviving a failure. Also in case of a failure, the Orion capsule is less likely to be damaged by aerodynamic forces and more likely to land safely, whereas, in the Challenger disaster, the spacecraft was torn apart and disintegrated. Even if it hadn't disintegrated, it probably couldn't have landed safely anyway. The Orion capsule also allows for the heat shield to not be exposed during launch. This prevents damage such as what occurred during the launch of the Columbia mission that failed during re-entry.
As for the parachutes, the Orion capsule is more than 3 times heavier than the Dragon capsule. You're going to want some bigger parachutes for that.
Why is everyone always upset that multiple companies are working on similar products? I think this just shows how spaceflight is becoming more mainstream like cellphones and cars.
im sad because i have no reply... :(
---
bored? lets go mine the stars... ^^
The parachutes have different patterns so that each one is unique. This is helpful when doing video analysis to distinguish which parachute(s) you are looking at. You can also see that some of the crown panels were dyed black to facilitate this as well.
@rmento
thx m8 ^^
---
bored? lets go mine the stars... ^^
JRS ONE,
The Shuttle actually has a set of drag chutes that are almost as large as those on the Orion. The ribbon drag chutes on the Shuttle are deployed just after touchdown in order to provide longitudinal directional stability, especially if there are crosswinds. The Shuttle drag chutes are necessary because the Shuttle lands at very high speeds, and the nose landing gear tires are very highly stressed and have very little margin for steering.
The blunt body and parachutes used for Orion are actually a wise choice. While parachutes may not seem high tech, they are lightweight, compact, efficient, and super reliable.