Slashdot Mirror


SpaceX's Helipad-Equipped Boat Will Bring Astronauts Safely Home

Next year when SpaceX starts shuttling astronauts to and from the ISS, the company will be using its Go Searcher ocean vessel to recover SpaceX's crewed Dragon capsules that splash down in the Atlantic Ocean. "The ship is now equipped for a worst-case-scenario with medical treatment facilities and a helipad, in case returning astronauts need to be evacuated quickly to a hospital," reports The Verge. From the report: Go Searcher is part of a fleet of ocean vessels that SpaceX has acquired over the years to aid in its spaceflight efforts. The most famous of these are SpaceX's autonomous drone ships, which are used as landing pads when the company's Falcon 9 rockets are recovered in the ocean after launches. Go Searcher used to accompany these drone ships when they were tugged back to shore as a support vessel. But at the end of summer, SpaceX gave Go Searcher a suite of upgrades -- including the addition of a helipad and a radar dome -- to make sure the boat can swiftly recover Dragon capsules that carry astronauts back to Earth.

As part of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, SpaceX has been developing the Crew Dragon capsule to take astronauts to the ISS. And the company is also responsible for getting these crews safely back to Earth. When astronauts need to return home, the plan is for the Crew Dragon to splash down in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Florida. During an ideal mission, Go Searcher will lift the Crew Dragon out of the water with a crane, attached to the end of the boat, according to NASA. The capsule will then be hauled onto the deck of Go Searcher, and the astronauts will be evaluated by doctors from SpaceX and NASA. But if something goes awry during the landing, astronauts can be airlifted directly off the boat via helicopter and taken to a hospital. The helicopter will also carry medical emergency personnel.

29 comments

  1. A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    If any physicists are around, I have some thought experiments for you. I'm going to post them on slashdot science articles likely to viewed by physicists.
    They are a series of postulates and their justifications.

    Please humour me. Read them, argue against them, call me a moron if you like, but *read* them.
    Lets start with postulate A, mass isn't real.

    Postulate A: Mass isn't real
    Postulate B:
    Postulate C:
    Postulate D:
    Postulate E:
    Postulate E2:
    POSTULATE F: The speed of light is obvious
    POSTULATE G:
    POSTULATE H:
    Postulate I:
    Postulate J:
    Postulate J2:
    Postulate K:
    Postulate L:

    ----------
    Postulate A: Mass isn't real

    You have matter, which is {'stuff' with wave like properties plus energy}
    And you have light, electro magnetic waves which are { 'stuff' with wave like properties plus energy}

    And the two are interchangable, you can convert matter to light, light to matter.

    And energy comes in two forms.
    1) Kinetic, a velocity based energy (heat etc all related to this).
    2) Electro Magnetic, some form of energy plus some form of wave like property conflated together.

    And the two are not interchangeable. Unlike other energies, e.g. potential, heat, that are interchangeable.
    Kinetic energy doesn't turn into electromagnetic, it misses this extra 'wave' like property.

    You *can* convert matter to light (with the extra wave property) but not to kinetic (which is pure energy based on velocity).

    Since light and matter are both wave like, and since light and matter are interchangable.... ...whatever gives matter its wave like property, also gives light its wave light property.

    And this underlying 'wave' stuff must have zero mass, because when its in light it has no mass.

    i.e. mass cannot form part of the fundamental model.

    In light form, this wave stuff, is moving fast.
    In matter form, it is stationary.
    So the energy must be similar to kinetic when in light form.
    And similar to bonds, binding it in place, when in matter form.

    So all that's happened is that the stuff that makes up matter and light, has gone from being bound *tightly*
    to being bound *loosely*. The energy has gone from *binding* energy to *velocity* energy.

    So mass isn't a thing. It doesn't disappear and get replaced by energy, its simply a measure of how strong the binding
    force is. Kinetic energy isn't related to mass, its related to the changes in binding force.

    i.e. Mass isn't real, it's simply a measure of binding force potential. Postulate A .

    1. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      OK... Waiting for you to tie this into the Time Cube.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    2. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean I'm not fat????

    3. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I'm just speculating, but would you have described inertia in quite a different way?

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    4. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Matter isn't a wave like anything and how do you convert light into matter?

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    5. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for commenting.

      Yes momentum, inertia, things derived from mass, these need to change. But I need to take you through some postulates first.
      Spoilers.

      Sorry, The first few postulates are about tearing down the existing model. It doesn't get good until later on.

      Also I have a 10 comment a day limit as an AC on slashdot, I must preserve it. So it will take a few days and lots of science related articles to do it. Forgive me if I don't respond to a lot of comments.

    6. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      If any physicists are around, I have some thought experiments for you.

      If I took the time to read this, I wouldn't know where I was now, would I?

    7. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can convert matter into kinetic energy, e.g. hiroshima. plenty of stuff was accelerated. is this going to end in the electric universe theory? or ancient aliens?

    8. Re:A thought experiment, a) mass isn't real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IAAP.

      Here's my line of thought: FUCK YOU!! Do your own god damned homework.

      Don't forget to vote Democrat today..

  2. Re:Ha by DanDD · · Score: 1

    Yes, the Russians have been putting people in space since the 1960's.

    For a country that has a gross domestic product that falls just behind the US state of Texas, the Russian resolve to stay the course is admirable.

    While recent developments in the US launch market will likely make Russian launches too expensive to be competitive once Boeing and SpaceX begin carrying humans in less than a year, I have no doubt that Russian engineers are up to the challenge of creating newer and more competitive systems. I sincerely hope that Russia can come up with something faster, cheaper, and better than SpaceX, or anyone, as this would be competitive progress that would benefit all of humanity.

    Good luck in all your peaceful endeavors.

    --
    "Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells
  3. Remember the Hornet by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

    I remember watching TV of the astronauts being recovered by the Hornet. A ship which housed some 3000 crew, and got about 18 feet per gallon of oil burned. It's in Alameda now (where they keep the naval wessels :-) and you can walk around a lot of it unsupervised, and get a tour of the rest.

    It was overkill then, but I am not aware of a smaller helicopter carrier in service back then.

    And now, we have a lot better idea of where the capsule is coming down.

    1. Re:Remember the Hornet by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      It was overkill then, but I am not aware of a smaller helicopter carrier in service back then.

      They had the Iwo Jima class LPH's, two of which (USS Guadalcanal (Gemini 10) and USS Guam (Gemini 11)) were used as Gemini recovery vessels. USS Guadalcanal also recovered Apollo 9, USS USS Iwo Jima recovered Apollo 13, USS New Orleans recovered Apollo 14, and USS Okinawa recovered Apollo 15. USS New Orleans also recovered Skylab 3, Skylab 4, and ASTP.

      Looking at the Gemini/Apollo missions that were recovered by a full size carrier... One thing immediately leapt out at me - they were all older carriers, WW II leftovers of the Essex class. That's probably because they constituted over half the active carriers at the time more than anything else.

      And now, we have a lot better idea of where the capsule is coming down.

      According to Apollo By The Numbers the largest miss distance was 3 nautical miles. Most missions missed by no more than 2 nautical miles. The largest distance to the recovery vessel was 13 nautical miles on Apollo 11, the rest were under 4 nautical miles. I can't find any similar compilation for Gemini, but IIRC the numbers were generally similar. (Mercury was all over the place.)

    2. Re:Remember the Hornet by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      A ship which housed some 3000 crew, and got about 18 feet per gallon of oil burned.

      That sounds in the scale for an aircraft carrier? Sounds rather overkill. I can think of around a half-dozen "floatels" ("floating hotels") which include their own medical suites, helipads and hangers, craneage, marine and stewarding personnel (and medical too), which can take complements of 200 to 500. OK, most are on medium- to long-term lease alongside various fixed oil installations and the like to support (re-)construction. But it's a mature market, with assets being shipped between corners of the globe in response to tenders for hire. Certainly worth considering on cost.

      BUT, it's not "shiny" - more likely rusty - so it's quite unlikely that the idea would get past the PR department.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. Re:Ha by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

    Do please tell Mr. Rogozin that we have the trampoline he ordered.

  5. Re:Ha by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    For a country that has a gross domestic product that falls just behind the US state of Texas
    You should have realized meanwhile that GDP is not really a meaningful number.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... population: 325 million.
    https://www.reuters.com/articl... population: 145 million

    A meaningful number is how much goods and services are produced by worker/citizen. I live in Thailand, if I'm not working, and work in Germany. The GPD is very different ... the quality of life and even some prices are higher in Thailand ... don't even know how big the difference on GDP is ...

    In other words: if a country like Greece doubles its prices for everything (which they stupidly did after joining the Euro zone), they double their GDP ... without doubeling anything.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  6. Ha ha, right back at ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's funny because I think physics became a religion with physicists worshiping Einstein and Bohr and ignoring the basic flaws in the model they are presented.....

    But we have to wait till enough people see Postulate A, because the later postulates stem from each other. I promise a DUH moment at F, a plot twist at G, a holy f...k at K, and a happy ending at L.

    Thrills and rides, and some backstory at J2.

    But I need a few physicists and science articles to come along over the next days to post it.

    1. Re: Ha ha, right back at ya by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      It's funny because I think physics became a religion with physicists worshiping Einstein and Bohr and ignoring the basic flaws in the model they are presented.....

      It's funny because that's exactly what Gene Ray said ....

  7. Re: Ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go back to hammering sensors, Ivan'o'square.

  8. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yawn. This company is so BORING!!!1
    What a yawn fest. Unbelievably BORING!
    haha
    C wot eye did thar?

  9. That's a good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. All particles are wave like, all exhibit wave properties.
    2. Matter to photon is easier:
    e.g. particle + anti-particle to photon.
    e.g. Turn on a torch.

    3. Photon to matter is even easier:
    To convert light to matter, shine it onto an absoption body and get it absorbed.
    Both the wave and the energy are absorbed.

    If it doesn't affect the binding of the matter then it doesn't change the 'mass', but it does become part of the body that absorbed it.
    It does become part of the matter. Both mass and wave are absorbed.

    Thank you for that.

  10. Remember Gus by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    Seems rather pollyannaish to be looking at capsule and personnel recovery with a skeleton crew. These things don't always go swimmingly, e.g.,

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/11/with-every-splashdown-nasa-embraces-the-legacy-of-gus-grissom/

  11. Re: Ha by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    I sincerely hope that Russia can come up with something faster, cheaper, and better than SpaceX, or anyone

    "Russian Physics - Now with fewer moving parts!"

  12. Yet you took the time to comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the speed of light?

  13. Re: Ha by necro81 · · Score: 1

    "Russian Physics - Now with fewer moving parts!"

    American components, Russian components; all made in Taiwan!

  14. great signs, even fire from heaven come down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the second beast performed great signs to cause even fire from heaven to come down to earth in the sight of men.

    What is Winter Sunlight?

    For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.

  15. Back to the future ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

    ... we picked up the Gemini capsules back in the day.

    Astronauts Eugene Cernan (left), and Thomas Stafford receive a warm welcome as they arrive aboard the prime recovery ship, the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Wasp. [June 6, 1966]

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.