Talk:Comparison of crewed space vehicles
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
The X-15 was never an orbital craft. The production model (B) mentioned in the article was never assembled or used in an orbital capacity. The X-15 in it's 3 variations was only a sub-orbital craft. The flight plans for all 200 of the X-15 flights included manuvers that deviated from a "streight line (balistic)" sub-orbital trajectory, unlike the first two Mercury Flights, which were "balistic arcs" without planned deviation from trajectory. I advise changing the "Yes" in the "orbital" column to read "Sub" Supporting documentation can be accquired/confirmed from the NASA PAO at Dryden FRC, Edwards Ca. and the additional X-15 specific flight articles found here in Wikipedia. 141.107.8.64 (talk) 17:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC) Darren L. Hensley
CST-100 edit
Shouldn't the Boeing vehicle be added as well?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CST-100Boeing CST-100
- Concur, If Dragon V2 made the list then include CST-100 as well as Dream Chaser. Doyna Yar (talk) 17:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed. And I'd also include Blue Origin's New Shepard and Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser. I can add them later on today when I have a moment to dig up the appropriate references, etc. aremisasling (talk) 18:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- I added all three, though I got Blue Origin's vehicle name wrong in my comment above. New Shepard was a planned suborbital craft, but it never flew to suborbital space and so far as I know it is indefinitely delayed, if not cancelled, so I didn't include it. Their orbital system in the works is the Biconic Space Vehicle, though the name varies from source to source with the only commonality being "biconic". Given Blue Origin is very secretive, I have next to no information from sources to add. But since they were part of the ccdev program briefly they were required to publish enough information to know that it exists and is in development. aremisasling (talk) 14:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
SpaceX's Interplanetary Spaceship edit
I've added it, given the recent presentation at IAC206 and the announcement that the spacecraft is officially in development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.13.165 (talk) 13:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Space Shuttle edit
How can United Space Alliance be the manufacturer while it's been founded 1995 and Shuttle's first flight was 1981? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:560:42F5:A000:51DB:C6F7:FB01:D395 (talk) 00:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
- According to the article, it was the combination of most of the shuttle work into one prime contractor. If not United Space Alliance, who would you suggest? Grey Wanderer (talk) 01:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Chinese Winged Rocket edit
Why does this entry into the suborbital vehicle section exist? It offers no information, no sources, nothing of real value. It should be removed unless something concrete can be included. Rmcmullin (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)