7 ms·

Soyuz takes people to the space station every few months, has done for years. Why is this specific mission new?

by isostatic 8y ago

Sabrosas 8y ago
Because in a world lacking traditional religious figures to worship, Elon Musk fits the bill.
- jjuhl 8y ago
  Why are "figures to worship" (religious or not - preferably not) needed at all?
grey-area 8y ago
Reusable rockets is new. Rather than ditching in the sea, the rocket landed back on earth and could in theory take up another payload a few days later, which is much cheaper and more efficient. It opens up space to a lot of other uses. Compared to the cost and use of the shuttle (nominally reusable but not so much in practice), or other disposable rockets, this is a large step forward in reliability and efficiency, which will enable things like travel to Mars at low cost (by refuelling in orbit with multiple reusable vehicle launches for one mission).
gdpgreg 8y ago
It's the first new crew vehicle launch from the US since the end of the space shuttle program in 2011. It's also in theory a lot cheaper than the Soyuz.
Klathmon 8y ago
It costs about $81 million USD per seat round-trip to go to ISS on Soyuz. SpaceX is doing the same for around $58 million per person (last I read). That alone is a HUGE deal. And that cost is expected to drop as SpaceX gets more comfortable with launching humans, whereas Soyuz has been raising prices. Not to mention that it's increasing the number of countries and rocket designs that can send people to and from the ISS. Without alternate launch providers, if some flaw were to be found in Soyuz or political issues begin to get in the way of launches, then the US could find itself unable to get astronauts to and from the ISS safely. Boeing is also in this race, and will be sending up humans to space in their Starliner soon as well, it's still up in the air which will get to the with humans on board ISS first.
- rayiner 8y ago
  A cost reduction of less than 50% for something that the Russians have been doing routinely with 1960s technology is akin to Magellan setting sail? I like SpaceX but man the spin is blinding.
  - Klathmon 8y ago
    I'm not saying it is, i'm just explaining what is new about this mission and why I'm excited for it. I think people are making it larger than it is because doing something and commercializing something are completely different things. The first flight in a plane was awesome, but not if we just stopped there. Currently SpaceX is somewhere along the line between the Wright Brothers and the Boeing 707. It may be "only price reductions", but once those price reductions hit a critical mass, it enables a whole world of possibilities. SpaceX is already talking about using their next rocket in a similar way to airlines now. Launching a bunch of people from one place into orbit, then landing in another place on the same planet for extremely fast flights across the world. They are talking about creating Moon and Mars bases. Those are things that won't ever happen if we keep spending hundreds of millions of dollars per launch, because the economics of it just won't ever work out. They still aren't done, and it's no guarantee that they will be able to ever get prices down low enough, but at least they are trying, and making good headway toward it.
  - oldgradstudent 8y ago
    The cost reduction is relative to the price Russia charges, not compared to their costs. Supposedly[1], it was $23 million in 2007. but Russia raised the prices since then. The cost of the Soyuz to the Russians could well be lower than SpaceX still. https://web.archive.org/web/20090604111935/http://www.kommersant.com/t795701/r_3/n_25/Space_Rocket_Launch/ https://web.archive.org/web/20090604111935/http://www.kommer...
  - avmich 8y ago
    Hopefully Crew Dragon will not only provide alternative to Soyuz, but also allow bigger crews and payloads both to and from space, nicer atmospheric returns in terms of accelerations and ability to fly on a shorter notice - it takes 2 years to make a Soyuz today.
ncallaway 8y ago
The commercial crew missions by both Boeing and SpaceX are new and interesting for a number of reasons: - This will be one of the first vehicles developed by a private entity to launch people into space, rather than a nation. That represents a huge step "down" the ladder of who has access to space. First, it's only nations. Later, it's large companies and entities. Down the line a little bit medium-sized companies will have access to space and wealthy individuals. Then we'll get down to small companies and fairly well-off individuals. Finally, we'll reach a point where everyone can afford to make trips to or through space. This is a huge first step on the ladder. - The first stage of this vehicle was a booster that autonomously landed itself on a drone-ship, allowing it to be recovered and refurbished quickly and cheaply. Re-use of this first stage has the potential to drastically lower the cost to get humans (and stuff) into space. SpaceX has already pretty radically altered the launch provider scene by causing all players to lower costs across the board. And they can do that while maintaining very healthy margins if they get re-use right. Eventually, as other competitors (like Blue Origin) enter the market with re-usable launchers the price will fall further toward the new marginal cost, which is drastically lower. Both of these things have the power to be the first steps into a world where there's a radically expanded access to space for people and companies. All this is happening at the same time that there are a number of other exciting developments in the space industry (NASA planning to start the Lunar Gateway; SpaceX thinking about how to plan to colonize mars; Bigelow planning to launch commercial space stations; Blue Origin about to enter the scene with a very exciting new launch vehicle), it feels (to me, anyway) like we're on the cusp of another big leap forward.
- baxtr 8y ago
  Isn't your first point the natural development of things? As example: Which tank or fighter jet is NOT produced by a private entity today?
  - ncallaway 8y ago
    I think it is the natural development of things! Just because something is a natural development doesn't mean we don't get to be excited when it happens. I think airplanes becoming a mode of mass transit were a natural development. It probably seemed like a pretty exciting development as that transition was happening. Similarly, once you have computers it seems natural to develop a global interconnected network of them. I was pretty excited when that was taking off! Also, just because the ordering is natural doesn't mean the timing is natural. We've expected these kinds of developments to happen in space for a long time. But we didn't know when they would happen. It was thought that this change might happen in the 70's or 80's. Others thought it might be as far off as 2040 or 2050. The fact that we're seeing some real tangible evidence of progress _now_ is super exciting.
InclinedPlane 8y ago
Well, for one, the Soyuz can only carry a crew of 3, whereas Crew Dragon can potentially carry up to 7, and is designed specifically (for NASA's purposes) for carrying 4. This alone adds significant flexibility to the crew levels of the station. Since the end of the Shuttle era the ISS has been stuck at only 6 crew, precisely the number that can come up and return on 2 soyuz capsules. With the addition of Crew Dragon in the mix it'll be possible to support 7 crew members on the station with just 1 Dragon and 1 Soyuz capsule. The ISS requires a lot of maintenance and routine tasks, even adding one crew member would significantly increase the amount of science they're able to do on the station. Also, increasing the diversity of crew transfer vehicles is very helpful. Right now there are 4 different varieties of cargo vehicles that visit the station (Progress, HTV, Cargo Dragon, and Cygnus). This diversity means that delays or periods of downtime with any one of the cargo delivery systems can be made up for via the others, as has happened in the past. The same resiliency has not existed for some time in regards to crew transfer vehicles. Given that there was a failure during an attempt to launch a Soyuz capsule last year which put a serious strain on the station (potentially putting it in jeopardy of being left uncrewed for some time) you can see that this is a serious issue. Additionally, Crew Dragon is the first new crewed spacecraft to visit the station that was designed within the last decade, or, indeed that was designed this century. Soyuz is reliable but it has a great many constraints and shortcomings, many of which can't be alleviated without moving to a new design. It's refreshing to see that we as a species still have the capability to build new crewed vehicles with new capabilities and new designs rather than simply shuffling about as custodians of legacy vehicles designed and built by previous generations. Even more excitingly, the Crew Dragon was launched by a vehicle which landed the first stage, and will have its first stage be reused on a future flight. The Soyuz rocket/capsule is a remarkably inexpensive way for crew to get to orbit, but those low costs are due mainly to sticking with an old design (all the R&D has long been amortized) and reliance on inexpensive Russian labor. Falcon 9 is already cost competitive with the Soyuz and has the potential to be even cheaper as Falcon 9 first stage reuse becomes more common. As reusable rockets become more common and familiar, and as their design improves with increasing use and follow-on generations (Blue Origin's New Glenn, SpaceX's BFR/Starship, etc.) costs will continue to fall and access to space will open up. Which will bring about a new space age where many more people visit orbit per year, space stations become much larger and more advanced, and our capabilities in spaceflight are in general much greater than they are today.
warp_factor 8y ago
Because spaceX Marketing and PR departments want you to feel this is new. There is also some American pride to be able to send people to space again without the need of the Russians. All of this creates this overblown achievement feeling. This has been done 40 years ago!
- adventured 8y ago
  > This has been done 40 years ago! What private company was sending people into space on reusable rockets 40 years ago?
  - grkvlt 8y ago
    Rockwell, I guess, at a stretch? Over 30 years ago they built the Space Shuttle...
shirro 8y ago
Soyuz is a remarkable vehicle and the people who make and fly it should be very proud. The DM-1 mission is significant for several reasons. A return of manned space launch capability for the USA which will bring a lot of national pride. The commercialisation aspect with SpaceX and Boeing not just building a NASA vehicle like SLS/Orion but providing a launch service which could help open up space exploration to more sustainable development. And the story of SpaceX themselves from improbable tech founder vision 17 years ago to industry disruption and market leadership today. This is clearly a very important milestone for them as they ultimately want to send people to the Moon and Mars.

Soyuz takes people to the space station every few months, has done for years. Why is this specific mission new?

Sabrosas 8y ago

Because in a world lacking traditional religious figures to worship, Elon Musk fits the bill.

jjuhl 8y ago
Why are "figures to worship" (religious or not - preferably not) needed at all?

grey-area 8y ago

Reusable rockets is new. Rather than ditching in the sea, the rocket landed back on earth and could in theory take up another payload a few days later, which is much cheaper and more efficient. It opens up space to a lot of other uses. Compared to the cost and use of the shuttle (nominally reusable but not so much in practice), or other disposable rockets, this is a large step forward in reliability and efficiency, which will enable things like travel to Mars at low cost (by refuelling in orbit with multiple reusable vehicle launches for one mission).

gdpgreg 8y ago

It's the first new crew vehicle launch from the US since the end of the space shuttle program in 2011. It's also in theory a lot cheaper than the Soyuz.

Klathmon 8y ago

It costs about $81 million USD per seat round-trip to go to ISS on Soyuz. SpaceX is doing the same for around $58 million per person (last I read). That alone is a HUGE deal. And that cost is expected to drop as SpaceX gets more comfortable with launching humans, whereas Soyuz has been raising prices. Not to mention that it's increasing the number of countries and rocket designs that can send people to and from the ISS. Without alternate launch providers, if some flaw were to be found in Soyuz or political issues begin to get in the way of launches, then the US could find itself unable to get astronauts to and from the ISS safely. Boeing is also in this race, and will be sending up humans to space in their Starliner soon as well, it's still up in the air which will get to the with humans on board ISS first.

rayiner 8y ago
A cost reduction of less than 50% for something that the Russians have been doing routinely with 1960s technology is akin to Magellan setting sail? I like SpaceX but man the spin is blinding.
- Klathmon 8y ago
  I'm not saying it is, i'm just explaining what is new about this mission and why I'm excited for it. I think people are making it larger than it is because doing something and commercializing something are completely different things. The first flight in a plane was awesome, but not if we just stopped there. Currently SpaceX is somewhere along the line between the Wright Brothers and the Boeing 707. It may be "only price reductions", but once those price reductions hit a critical mass, it enables a whole world of possibilities. SpaceX is already talking about using their next rocket in a similar way to airlines now. Launching a bunch of people from one place into orbit, then landing in another place on the same planet for extremely fast flights across the world. They are talking about creating Moon and Mars bases. Those are things that won't ever happen if we keep spending hundreds of millions of dollars per launch, because the economics of it just won't ever work out. They still aren't done, and it's no guarantee that they will be able to ever get prices down low enough, but at least they are trying, and making good headway toward it.
- oldgradstudent 8y ago
  The cost reduction is relative to the price Russia charges, not compared to their costs. Supposedly[1], it was $23 million in 2007. but Russia raised the prices since then. The cost of the Soyuz to the Russians could well be lower than SpaceX still. https://web.archive.org/web/20090604111935/http://www.kommersant.com/t795701/r_3/n_25/Space_Rocket_Launch/ https://web.archive.org/web/20090604111935/http://www.kommer...
- avmich 8y ago
  Hopefully Crew Dragon will not only provide alternative to Soyuz, but also allow bigger crews and payloads both to and from space, nicer atmospheric returns in terms of accelerations and ability to fly on a shorter notice - it takes 2 years to make a Soyuz today.

ncallaway 8y ago

The commercial crew missions by both Boeing and SpaceX are new and interesting for a number of reasons: - This will be one of the first vehicles developed by a private entity to launch people into space, rather than a nation. That represents a huge step "down" the ladder of who has access to space. First, it's only nations. Later, it's large companies and entities. Down the line a little bit medium-sized companies will have access to space and wealthy individuals. Then we'll get down to small companies and fairly well-off individuals. Finally, we'll reach a point where everyone can afford to make trips to or through space. This is a huge first step on the ladder. - The first stage of this vehicle was a booster that autonomously landed itself on a drone-ship, allowing it to be recovered and refurbished quickly and cheaply. Re-use of this first stage has the potential to drastically lower the cost to get humans (and stuff) into space. SpaceX has already pretty radically altered the launch provider scene by causing all players to lower costs across the board. And they can do that while maintaining very healthy margins if they get re-use right. Eventually, as other competitors (like Blue Origin) enter the market with re-usable launchers the price will fall further toward the new marginal cost, which is drastically lower. Both of these things have the power to be the first steps into a world where there's a radically expanded access to space for people and companies. All this is happening at the same time that there are a number of other exciting developments in the space industry (NASA planning to start the Lunar Gateway; SpaceX thinking about how to plan to colonize mars; Bigelow planning to launch commercial space stations; Blue Origin about to enter the scene with a very exciting new launch vehicle), it feels (to me, anyway) like we're on the cusp of another big leap forward.

baxtr 8y ago
Isn't your first point the natural development of things? As example: Which tank or fighter jet is NOT produced by a private entity today?
- ncallaway 8y ago
  I think it is the natural development of things! Just because something is a natural development doesn't mean we don't get to be excited when it happens. I think airplanes becoming a mode of mass transit were a natural development. It probably seemed like a pretty exciting development as that transition was happening. Similarly, once you have computers it seems natural to develop a global interconnected network of them. I was pretty excited when that was taking off! Also, just because the ordering is natural doesn't mean the timing is natural. We've expected these kinds of developments to happen in space for a long time. But we didn't know when they would happen. It was thought that this change might happen in the 70's or 80's. Others thought it might be as far off as 2040 or 2050. The fact that we're seeing some real tangible evidence of progress _now_ is super exciting.

InclinedPlane 8y ago

Well, for one, the Soyuz can only carry a crew of 3, whereas Crew Dragon can potentially carry up to 7, and is designed specifically (for NASA's purposes) for carrying 4. This alone adds significant flexibility to the crew levels of the station. Since the end of the Shuttle era the ISS has been stuck at only 6 crew, precisely the number that can come up and return on 2 soyuz capsules. With the addition of Crew Dragon in the mix it'll be possible to support 7 crew members on the station with just 1 Dragon and 1 Soyuz capsule. The ISS requires a lot of maintenance and routine tasks, even adding one crew member would significantly increase the amount of science they're able to do on the station. Also, increasing the diversity of crew transfer vehicles is very helpful. Right now there are 4 different varieties of cargo vehicles that visit the station (Progress, HTV, Cargo Dragon, and Cygnus). This diversity means that delays or periods of downtime with any one of the cargo delivery systems can be made up for via the others, as has happened in the past. The same resiliency has not existed for some time in regards to crew transfer vehicles. Given that there was a failure during an attempt to launch a Soyuz capsule last year which put a serious strain on the station (potentially putting it in jeopardy of being left uncrewed for some time) you can see that this is a serious issue. Additionally, Crew Dragon is the first new crewed spacecraft to visit the station that was designed within the last decade, or, indeed that was designed this century. Soyuz is reliable but it has a great many constraints and shortcomings, many of which can't be alleviated without moving to a new design. It's refreshing to see that we as a species still have the capability to build new crewed vehicles with new capabilities and new designs rather than simply shuffling about as custodians of legacy vehicles designed and built by previous generations. Even more excitingly, the Crew Dragon was launched by a vehicle which landed the first stage, and will have its first stage be reused on a future flight. The Soyuz rocket/capsule is a remarkably inexpensive way for crew to get to orbit, but those low costs are due mainly to sticking with an old design (all the R&D has long been amortized) and reliance on inexpensive Russian labor. Falcon 9 is already cost competitive with the Soyuz and has the potential to be even cheaper as Falcon 9 first stage reuse becomes more common. As reusable rockets become more common and familiar, and as their design improves with increasing use and follow-on generations (Blue Origin's New Glenn, SpaceX's BFR/Starship, etc.) costs will continue to fall and access to space will open up. Which will bring about a new space age where many more people visit orbit per year, space stations become much larger and more advanced, and our capabilities in spaceflight are in general much greater than they are today.

warp_factor 8y ago

Because spaceX Marketing and PR departments want you to feel this is new. There is also some American pride to be able to send people to space again without the need of the Russians. All of this creates this overblown achievement feeling. This has been done 40 years ago!

adventured 8y ago
> This has been done 40 years ago! What private company was sending people into space on reusable rockets 40 years ago?
- grkvlt 8y ago
  Rockwell, I guess, at a stretch? Over 30 years ago they built the Space Shuttle...

shirro 8y ago

Soyuz is a remarkable vehicle and the people who make and fly it should be very proud. The DM-1 mission is significant for several reasons. A return of manned space launch capability for the USA which will bring a lot of national pride. The commercialisation aspect with SpaceX and Boeing not just building a NASA vehicle like SLS/Orion but providing a launch service which could help open up space exploration to more sustainable development. And the story of SpaceX themselves from improbable tech founder vision 17 years ago to industry disruption and market leadership today. This is clearly a very important milestone for them as they ultimately want to send people to the Moon and Mars.