ATV "Jules Verne" burning up in orbit (re-entry video)

DocArnie, thanks for the video. I imagine when they do modify the ATV to carry astronauts they will have to do something about that destructive re-entry! It's a shame so beautiful a vehicle couldn't be returned intact.

Jules Verne in Orbit http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080405.html

A (Russian) Supply Ship Docks with the International Space Station http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080514.html

The International Space Station Expands Again http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080623.html​
 
Thanks, Doc. That was awesome.

IF that was completely hand-held, then at that range and speed I am surprised he got it at all. Even with mechanicals to stabilize, getting that would be tough.
 
That was really something!
I'm wondering, since it was in the Pacific, if the "cameraman" was on a boat/ship?
That would ass to the vibration I'm sure.

The only thing I would worry about in that situation is the parts that quit glowing.
Dark falling objects are much harder to see. :D

mike
 
Esav Benyamin said:
DocArnie, thanks for the video. I imagine when they do modify the ATV to carry astronauts they will have to do something about that destructive re-entry!
Click to expand...

Luckily, it's not just a downgraded soyuz, but a platform for all kinds of space vehicles. Unfortunately the ESA has such a low budget, that it will take them years (or a decade) to turn it into a spaceship with life-support and a heat shield for safe re-entry. This was just a prototype to test the automated docking and to resupply the ISS.
I'm glad I could still watch a Jules Verne flyby with my own eyes, only a few days before it burned up!

Glad you liked the video!
 
DocArnie said:
Unfortunately the ESA has such a low budget, that it will take them years (or a decade) to turn it into a spaceship with life-support and a heat shield for safe re-entry.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't understand how we can work with the Russians so closely, as effective as their operational support has been, but not with ESA to develop a next-generation transport and exploration vehicle.

We don't over-budget NASA, either, but I bet we pay the Russians enough to make cooperation worth their while. Where would the US, Europe, and the Japanese be with an integrated space program? We do it with fighter planes all the time.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
Personally, I don't understand how we can work with the Russians so closely, as effective as their operational support has been, but not with ESA to develop a next-generation transport and exploration vehicle.
Click to expand...

The russians are very experienced and they trained some of ESA's astronauts - even took them to MIR. Their soyuz capsules just work and they're affordable. They're nowhere near NASA technologically, but without them the ISS wouldn't be where it is today.
We don't over-budget NASA, either
Click to expand...
It's still very high in comparison. ESA isn't even trying catch up, they rather use their ressources to fill the gaps (Mars express) or to go where NASA has no big interest (Venus express), or they use opportunities like cassini-huygens. I wouldn't count on ESA turning the ATV into a spacecraft for astronauts anytime soon. I'd rather hope NASA gives their shuttles a few years more than planned.
 
The shuttles eat too much money. The amount of rebuilding for each mission is just too extensive. New vehicles properly designed for reuse would allow us to finance actual missions.

I think we need some technology from other-oriented allies. Just the fact that ESA looks to boutique missions means they may have expertise that could shortcut some of our "big-budget mentality" product development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top