Spacesuits are not merely uniforms

Boeing (left) and SpaceX flight suits - a question of compatability?

IN THE realm of space exploration, where innovation is often celebrated as much as discovery, one might expect that companies would prioritise the pursuit of standardisation, especially in safety-critical systems. 

Yet recent events have highlighted a glaring oversight: a lack of compatibility between spacesuits designed for different spacecraft.  

This summer, the issue came into focus when NASA encountered an unexpected challenge during the first crewed test flight of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft. 

Helium leaks and the failure of several thrusters during the docking phase marred the mission, which transported astronauts ‘Butch’ Wilmore and Suni Williams to the International Space Station (ISS). 

The resulting uncertainty surrounding Starliner’s ability to return safely raised a critical question: what if they had to return to Earth on a different spacecraft? Could the astronauts use their Boeing-designed spacesuits in a SpaceX Dragon capsule?

The answer, unfortunately, was no. SpaceX and Boeing, two of NASA’s primary commercial partners, developed spacesuits that are incompatible with each other’s spacecraft. 

This is not merely a matter of corporate identity or aesthetic preference; it represents a significant and potentially life-threatening oversight.

In a broader context, users in the consumer electronics industry have long been frustrated by a lack of standardisation. An ongoing debate over charging cables for smartphones is one example. 

Apple and Android devices operate on different systems, and while this is accepted as a technological difference, many people criticise the incompatibility of charging cables. 

The EU has even intervened to push for a standardised charging port, recognising that such differences create unnecessary waste too.

However, unlike the inconvenience of incompatible phone chargers, spacesuit incompatibility could have dire consequences. Astronauts depend on their equipment so the lack of a standardised spacesuit for use across different spacecraft complicates emergency procedures and increases error margins.

On this occasion time was on NASA’s side, but in an actual emergency astronauts finding themselves with the wrong suit for a spacecraft they need urgently to board could prove critical. 

NASA’s management of its commercial crew programme provided the perfect opportunity to enforce compatibility standards. 

The root of the problem lies in the space industry’s fragmented approach. Commercial entities often develop technologies and systems with little regard for interoperability, seemingly at odds with the spirit of international cooperation that the space industry often prides itself on.

Spacesuits are not merely uniforms; they are critical safety systems and an astronaut’s last line of defence, particularly during launch and re-entry when the risk of cabin depressurisation is highest. 

Is it not imperative, therefore, that the industry moves towards a standardised design that can be connected across different spacecraft?

Such arguments are not about stifling innovation or competition, they are about prioritising astronaut safety. 

By establishing common standards, similar to those developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in other industries, the space sector can ensure that astronauts, regardless of the spacecraft they board, have the best possible protection.

The Starliner mission has perhaps unwittingly exposed a critical gap in the industry’s approach. Non-standardised spacesuits are not just a logistical oversight; they are a risk that could jeopardise astronauts’ lives. 

As the space industry continues to develop, it is crucial that cooperation extends to the standardisation of safety systems. The small price of compatibility could very well be the difference between life and death in the unforgiving environment of space.

*          *          *

Editor's note: This commentary by Clive Simpson on spacesuit incompatbility was first published as the Editorial in ROOM Space Journal, issue #35, September 2024. It is republished here with permission.

Traffic lights in the night sky

Starlink satellites leave diagonal lines as they pass through a telescope’s field of view.

UNITL relatively recently in human history the night sky remained one of the last unspoilt vestiges of our natural world. From the time of Galileo to the present day, astronomical observations from Earth’s surface have led to exceptional progress in the scientific understanding of the world around us.

Now, just as we enter the third decade of the 21st Century and a dynamic new phase in space exploration and exploitation begins, some of the current capability of astronomical instrumentation from the ground is potentially being endangered by the rapid development of micro-satellite fleets in low Earth orbits (LEO).

In the interests of preserving the ability to make meaningful visual and radio ground-based observations, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) is sounding a clarion call for greater protection and international safeguards.

The IAU claims that if the deployment of mega constellations remains unchecked the view of the night sky will be increasingly impeded by artificial satellites, not only visible to the naked eye but also crossing and scarring professional and amateur time-lapse observations alike with parallel streaks at all latitudes.

SpaceX has already embarked on its ambitious Starlink project to populate the sky with some 42,000 satellites which, together with planned constellations such as those from OneWeb, Amazon and others, means there could one day be more than 50,000 small satellites encircling the Earth at different low altitudes.

These small, mass-produced satellites orbit very close to Earth with the intent to provide speedy internet connections via low-latency signals. But that proximity also makes them more visible and brighter in the night sky. Astronomers argue that such constellations will severely diminish our view of the universe, create more space debris and deprive humanity of an unblemished view of the night sky. If these networks come to fruition, they suggest that every square degree of the sky will eventually have a satellite crawling across it throughout the whole observing night.

As space becomes ever more commercialised the speed of such development is quickly overtaking the existing, globally agreed rules governing space activities. Mega constellations are just one area where new rules of governance are urgently needed. Others include the exploitation of resources on the Moon and elsewhere, preserving peace and resolving disputes, and rules for everyday living in space.

Recognising the urgent need for coordinated action, next year the space nation Asgardia is organising a second congress in its ‘Paving the Road to Living in Space’ series. It will focus on discussing key aspects of space law needed to ensure the success of future space exploits.

Of course, ROOM fully supports the growth and advancement of space technologies and the ensuing benefits they bring to everyday life, business and commerce across the globe.

But it would be ironic indeed if, by exploiting LEO without due responsibility, we neglect to consider the resultant damage to scientific research and a previously unblemished part of our natural environment that deployment of such new technologies could unwittingly deliver.

The urgent question is, do we continue to rush headlong into deploying massive new orbital networks without checks and balances, and with scant regard for the heavens above - or can the global space community approach this kind of thing in a more mature and responsible manner that is fair to everyone?

Editorial (originally published under the title 'Mega-constellations raise awkward questions for space community') 
by Clive Simpson in the Spring 2020 edition of ROOM Space Journal

Paving the road to living in space

A MINDSET anchored within endeavours of the past and established ways of doing things is one of the most significant obstacles to humanity’s space-faring future.

Five decades after the first Moon landing, most major space agencies and all but a handful of private launch companies remain focused on the on-going development of expendable launchers or, at best, only partly reusable launchers.

Undoubtedly today’s rockets are more efficient than their predecessors. But are their inherent inefficiencies truly the way to herald a new golden age of space exploration?

The expendable rocket mindset is one of the biggest remaining barriers to a new Space Age and, if the new US Moon programme is to lead to a ‘permanent’ lunar endeavour, economic and environmental sustainability are paramount. This means leaning towards low-cost, practical and private-sector driven solutions which have the potential to create profitable and sustainable new business opportunities.

NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), for example, is hardly ground-breaking or inventive - more a product of linear, stop-start development. Of course, it benefits from advanced technology and engineering but, five decades after Saturn V, it lacks true innovation and the spark of commercial endeavour.

The agency has spent about US$14 billion on its super rocket and related development costs since 2010 but SLS is not expected to fly before at least mid- to late 2021. In contrast, SpaceX privately developed its mostly reusable Falcon Heavy rocket on the back of its Falcon 9 for about US$500 million, and has flown three successful missions since February 2018.

Likewise, Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser is the only existing commercial spaceplane in the world that is both fully reusable and capable of a runway landing. Despite this NASA still only wants to use it for the transfer of cargo to the International Space Station.

At a time when reusability, in every sense of the word, should be at the forefront, agencies such as NASA (SLS), ESA (Ariane 6), Roscomsos (Soyuz), JAXA (H-IIB) and ISRO (GSLV) seem intent on pursuing the expendability route to orbit, albeit with a modern technical twist.

Do projects like SLS cast us far enough into the future or, in some perverse way, do they limit our future ambitions? The future of space and human exploration is intrinsically intertwined with our future on Earth itself. It should not be owned by politics and politicians but by risk-takers and the visionary.

*        *        *

ROOM Space Journal is delighted to be a media sponsor of this October’s International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Washington DC, one of the biggest and most important annual gatherings of space people.

Autumn also sees the first ever Asgardia Science & Investment Congress (14-16 October, Darmstadt, Germany), ‘Paving the Road to Living in Space’.

ASIC’s goal is to offer an alternative pathway to the future, eschewing the establishment mindset as it homes in on the parallel and interconnected themes of the extraordinary science and technology required to support permanent space habitats and the first humans born in space.

Specialist speakers will also assess how the vital investment and commercial returns needed to support these bold endeavours can be created.

If you want to join like-minded visionaries in planning the practical first steps to our future in space, there is still time to register via the ASIC website

My editorial in the autumn issue of ROOM Space Journal
Image: Envisioning a space-faring future by James Vaughan

Spy satellite buzzes ISS

AMATEUR satellite observers are keeping a close eye on a US National Reconnaissance Office classified satellite (USA 276) to see whether it returns to the vicinity of the International Space Station (ISS).

After its launch into orbit from Cape Canaveral by SpaceX on 1 May 2017 analysts around the world quickly realised it was doing something more unusual.

Its orbit was similar to that of the Space Station and so could theoretically make close approaches to the orbiting outpost.

Then, just over a month after launch on 3 June, that is exactly what happened. "USA 276 made a close approach and effectively circled the ISS," reported satellite bserver Marco Langbroek of Leiden, The Netherlands. 

Amateur satellite watchers have been tracking USA 276 since late May and their observations have resulted in ever-improving estimates of the satellite's orbit. 

"With the latest data included, we can establish the moment of closest approach as 3 June 2017, 14:01:52 UT. It happened in daylight over the southern Atlantic north of the Falklands, near 43.75 S, 45.45 W, with a miss distance of only 6.4 ± 2 km,” says Langbroek.

In the accompanying chart (prepared by Langbroek) showing the circumstances of the encounter, the brick-coloured box has dimensions of  4 x 4 x 10 km and normally, whenever an object looks like it is going to pass through the box, ISS mission controllers evaluate the possibility of a collision avoidance manoeuvre.

"USA 276 remained just outside the 4 x 4 x 10 km box at closest approach and as a result collision avoidance manoeuvres were not required,” adds Langbroek.

Diagram prepared by Marco Langbroek showing encounter.

The question arises as to why a US spy satellite buzzed the ISS and senior satellite analyst Ted Molczan has published arguments for and against that possibility. "I am inclined to believe that the close conjunctions between USA 276 and the ISS are intentional," he says.

Molczan points out that USA 276 might be visiting the ISS to test Raven - a technology demonstration project on the ISS researchers are using to develop spacecraft autopilot systems.  Raven has visible, infrared and lidar sensors that can track incoming spacecraft, feeding the data to an onboard processor for decision-making about rendezvous and docking.

"I imagine that USA 276 could add to the Raven data set as follows," speculates Molczan. "If it can rendezvous, then it could keep station for long periods, during which it could change its attitude to present the sensors with a variety of views, under a variety of lighting conditions. The total data collected could potentially far exceed that from the other visiting spacecraft."

Another way of looking at the problem, is to ask why, if the ISS is not a target of USA 276, would the highly secretive NRO have permitted a launch so close to its plane, let alone one that yielded such close conjunctions not long after launch, which could only have increased public interest in the mission?

USA 276 looped around the ISS, according to an analysis.

Langbroek says he does not believe for a moment that the NRO was not aware that the launch on 1 May would lead to the ISS close approach a month later. “It would be extremely sloppy of them - from a Space Situational Awareness (SSA) viewpoint - if they were not aware, especially given how close the orbital parameters are to that of the ISS.”

He adds: “This event was sure to attract attention which harms the classified character of the mission. USA 276 is relatively bright and the approach was bound to be noted by independent observers.

“Indeed, some space enthusiasts in Europe unaware of the issue who were out to spot Dragon CRS-11 and Cygnus OA-7 close to the ISS on 4 June, did accidentally see USA 276 passing some three minutes in front of it.

At the time of the launch - and at the request of the NRO -SpaceX cut off launch coverage two minutes and 48 seconds after liftoff, some 30 seconds after the booster’s first-stage separated from the upper-stage. The NRO has declined to provide further details about the satellite or its orbit.

Langbroek also speculates that such a close approach of a high profile object like the ISS is politically risky too.

“As the ISS is an international cooperation which includes two parties (the United States and the Russian Federation) that are currently geopolitically on an uneasy footing, sending your military payload so close to the ISS as one party is eyebrow raising,” he says.

SpaceX on target

Delegates at the 63rd International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Naples, Italy, were treated to a first-hand update on the latest news from commercial space company SpaceX on Friday, 5 October - just two days before the planned launch of its latest mission to the International Space Station (ISS).

Introducing the third ‘breaking news' session of the week Barry Matsumori, Senior Vice-President of Commercial Sales and Business Development at SpaceX, quipped that he and his colleague Robert Feierbach, Vice-President of Business Development, were the only two employees not working on Sunday's launch.

On the heels of a successful debut flight to the Space Station in May of this year, SpaceX launches its first commercial Dragon resupply mission to the Space Station under a contract that will see 12 such missions.

Launch of the SpaceX CRS-1 flight was set for 20:35 EDT on 7 October from Launch Complex 40 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.

After arrival at the ISS on 10 October, Dragon, grappled and berthed to the complex for an expected two-week visit, is scheduled to return to Earth on October 28 for a parachute-assisted splashdown off the coast of southern California.

Dragon is currently the only Space Station cargo craft capable of returning a significant amount of supplies back to Earth, including experiments.

For this mission, it is filled with about 1,000 pounds of supplies, including critical materials to support the 166 investigations planned for the Station's Expedition 33 crew.

Dragon will return with about 734 pounds of scientific materials, including results from human research, biotechnology, materials and education experiments, as well as about 504 pounds of Space Station hardware.

Matsumori explained that SpaceX had been in existence for just a decade, making it a young company in aerospace terms. "We have come a long way in that time and now have 1800 employees which are growing at around 200 per year," he said.

SpaceX currently launches from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida and Vandenberg Air Force Base in California but Matsumori said the company is looking at the possibility of an additional commercial launch site.

"We want to ensure we have plenty of capacity and a new launch site would be used particularly for sending payloads into geostationary orbits," he said.

Potential sites under evaluation are in South Texas, where the company also has an engine test range, Florida, and "other locations" on mainland USA.

Matsumori wasn't able to provide further details but said that the timing of any new site coming on stream would be largely dependent on the length of time required for environmental approvals.

He described SpaceX as an ‘internet' company and said that it had a reputation in the industry for being very competitive, and was driven by the goals of achieving high reliability and lost cost production.

The company's current product line comprises the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon capsule, the Falcon 9 with a 5.2 metre fairing, and the upcoming Falcon Heavy - essentially made from three Falcon 9's strapped together - which is under development.

"The Falcon 9 - so-called because it has nine engines and after the Millennium Falcon spacecraft of Star War's fame - is a two-stage vehicle for reliability and simplicity," he explained.

During the session, Matsumori also gave a technical overview of the summer's COTS 2 (Commercial Orbital Transportation Service) mission carrying cargo to the ISS for the first time and showed a short film of mission footage.

Afterwards, he said the simplicity of the film wasn't able to convey the true complexity of the flight in all its detail. "It was our first mission to the ISS and we didn't want to make any mistakes," he told delegates.


The above is one of a series of daily reports from the International Astronautical Congress 2012 held in Naples, Italy, written by Clive Simpson for the Paris-based International Astronautical Association (IAF) and first appearing on the IAF website

Dragon's historic test flight

SpaceX is due to begin regular cargo flights to the International Space Station at the end of the summer - and its Dragon spacecraft will be the only craft on the lab's roster of servicing vehicles able to return significant hardware to Earth.

Formal reviews this month after a flawless nine day test flight in May are expected to clear the way for SpaceX's first operational cargo mission sometime in September.

SpaceX's commercial Dragon spaceship made an automated pinpoint splashdown in the Pacific Ocean, completing a feat never before achieved by private industry.

The gumdrop-shaped capsule, blackened by the heat of a high-speed re-entry, splashed down in the Pacific Ocean about 560 miles west of Baja, California, at 1542 GMT.

The Dragon spacecraft became the first privately-owned vehicle to fly to the Space Station, notching that triumph May 25 at the end of a cautious laser-guided approach to the complex.

The capsule also became the first US spacecraft to reach the Space Station since the last Space Shuttle flight departed in July 2011.

With splashdown on 31 May, Dragon proved it could fill a void left after the Shuttle's retirement in returning experiment samples, broken components and other excess hardware to Earth.

The Dragon test flight launched from Florida on May 22 aboard a Falcon 9 rocket. Three days later, after a flyby to demonstrate rendezvous techniques, the spacecraft precisely flew within 30 feet of the Station, close enough for the crew inside the complex to grapple Dragon with a robotic arm.

The astronauts unloaded more than 1,000 pounds of cargo from Dragon's pressurised compartment, including food, clothing, student experiments, and computer gear. The crew installed more than 1,300 pounds of equipment back inside Dragon for return to Earth.

After six days attached to the complex, Dragon was released from the lab's robotic arm at 0935.

SpaceX flight controllers at the company's headquarters in Hawthorne, Calif., commanded the ship's thrusters to five for nearly 10 minutes a few hours later. The thrust slowed Dragon's speed by more than 200 mph, enough for its orbit to drop into the atmosphere for re-entry.

The successful conclusion of the test flight capped a triumphant mission for SpaceX, which intends to outfit the Dragon spacecraft for crewed launches and landings within three or four years. SpaceX is competing for funding from NASA to finance the effort.

Back to basics for US

A private space company attempting to make history today by firing its Dragon space capsule into orbit en route to a rendezvous with International Space Station had its launch aborted in the final seconds of liftoff.

The launch of the Falcon 9 and Dragon has been strictly downplayed as a ‘test flight’ by SpaceX officials and NASA observers. But a lot rests on its successful outcome which could buoy or blunt future political support for a private US space race in human spaceflight.

A year ago the iconic buildings and launch pads at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, were still a hive of activity and excitement as NASA and the US remained enraptured by the final launches of the Space Shuttle programme.

This morning’s dawn launch preparations took place far away on a dedicated launch pad and SpaceX preparation area at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. A new launch attempt is now likely to be made on Tuesday.

Pre-dawn view of Falcon F9 and Dragon on launch pad.                       

I visited the SpaceX site last summer when the company was keen to show off its facilities and give us a close up view of the launch pad as it was preparing for an end of the year Falcon 9 launch.

Up-close view of a Falcon F9 rocket for the Lighthouse Keeper.             

If fully successful, this new mission will be a big confidence boost for SpaceX and NASA, which are partners for at least 12 unmanned cargo delivery flights to the Space Station over the next few years.

It will also edge the US a little closer to regaining its ability to launch humans into space - a capability it had maintained for five decades until the final launch of the Space Shuttle last summer.

NASA has paid SpaceX $381 million in an agreement to help pay for the design, development, and testing of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft. SpaceX has spent $1.2 billion to date, including public and private capital.

NASA and SpaceX are also jointly funding the design of a crewed version of the Dragon spacecraft to transport astronauts to the Space Station later this decade.

Upper part of SpaceX rocket in assembly hanger.           Clive Simpson

Flown Dragon capsule on display in Florida.                Clive Simpson

But SpaceX still has to compete with other aerospace companies for further NASA financing to support development of rockets and spacecraft for human occupants.

"We know this has been touted as a huge mission," said Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX's president. "We keep trying to say it's a test. Nonetheless, it's a big job. Success is not going to mean success of the commercial space industry, and failure is not going to mean failure of the commercial space industry."

Shotwell told a press conference at KSC the day before the flight that the most important outcome of the Dragon test flight was to learn from it - as the spacecraft's solar arrays, navigation and rendezvous sensors, and flight computer were all new.

Politically the flight comes at a crucial juncture just as budget decisions are about to be made in Washington.

Success will prove it is possible for SpaceX and other commercial operators to do the work NASA has advanced since the 1960s.

The mission is crucial for International Space Station operations. Assuming all goes well, SpaceX intends to launch its first, fully loaded cargo resupply mission to the station in mid-August.

Another company - Orbital Sciences Corp - has a $1.9 billion contract to launch its Antares rocket and Cygnus spacecraft on eight cargo missions.

Orbital plans to launch a test flight of its Antares rocket in July. Then in September, an Antares rocket is scheduled to launch a Cygnus cargo carrier on a demonstration mission before its first cargo resupply mission to the Space Station in early 2013.

With the US pace Shuttle fleet firmly retired, the Dragon is the only means to return scientific experiments and equipment from the Space Station. All other robotic cargo carriers servicing the orbiting outpost double as rubbish trucks and burn up in the atmosphere.


Artist's impression of Dragon approaching the Space Station.                

"Since we no longer fly shuttles, we can’t take anything sizeable back down from the Space Station and this is absolutely critical to Space Station," Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for Human Exploration and Operations, said.

The commercial space race in the US may be hotting up but it can’t disguise the fact that the country and NASA will remain without the ability to put people into orbit for at least another five years or perhaps longer.

Close encounters

For some time NASA has been working hard to counter the notion that the end of the Space Shuttle era means the end of US human spaceflight. And there are commercial companies waiting in the wings.

At Kennedy Space Center just before the launch of Atlantis in July several companies were taking advantage of the large media presence to showcase their proposed spacecraft and rockets of the future.

In one air conditioned ‘tent’ Lockheed Martin displayed a test model of its Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle that may one day take Americans to destinations beyond the Space Station – like the asteroids and Mars.

Next door, Boeing showcased its CST-100 capsule concept, one of the ‘crew taxis' NASA eventually hopes to hire to get its astronauts to and from orbit by mid-decade.

And Elon Musk's SpaceX company threw open its doors on the nearby Cape Canaveral Air Force Station where it has a rocket integration hanger and launch pad. From here it flies its Falcon rocket – the next test flight is planned for this autumn – and ‘Dragon Rider' capsule, another commercial answer to America's astronaut taxi dilemma.

Whilst these companies are all pursuing the more ‘traditional’ route into orbit others, like the US Air Force and the Colorado-based Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), are convinced the future is still in winged reusable spacecraft. SNC's mini-shuttle called Dream Chaser could be launched for the first time in 2015.

Many argue that these new spacecraft represent a more affordable, commercial and even more exciting approach to future human spaceflight.

Not surprisingly NASA administrator, Charlie Bolden, himself a former Shuttle astronaut, is convinced that human spaceflight has a bright future. "You'll hear me say that over and over and over again. The future is incredible and you're witnessing the first steps NASA is taking to create that future right now," he told the gathered media.

As a clear signal of its intention to crank up the momentum wherever possible NASA this week gave SpaceX approval to launch its next Falcon 9 on 30 November — followed nine days later by the Dragon capsule berthing at the International Space Station (ISS).

During the tour of its facilities in July, SpaceX was keen to show us that its has been hard at work preparing for this next flight — a mission designed to demonstrate that a privately-developed space transportation system can deliver cargo to and from the Space Station.

NASA has now agreed in principle to allow SpaceX to combine all of the tests and demonstration activities originally proposed as two separate missions into one time-saving flight.

After catching the ISS and coming alongside, the capsule will be grappled by the Station's Canadian-built robot arm and transferred to a docking port. It will likely stay at the ISS for a few weeks, delivering some non-essential cargo in its pressurised cabin before returning to Earth via a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean.

This next mission represents a huge milestone — not only for SpaceX but also for NASA and the US space programme. When the astronauts stationed on the ISS open the hatch and enter the Dragon spacecraft for the first time, it will mark the beginning of a new era in space travel.

SpaceX was keen to show us the workings of the launch pad where it has made significant upgrades over the summer to streamline the countdown. New liquid oxygen (LOX) pumps, for example, will reduce previous loading time from 90 minutes to under 30, inching the company closer to its long term goal of Falcon 9 going from hangar to liftoff in under an hour.

We also saw the first stage of the 15-story Falcon 9 — the rocket that is now due to blast off 30 November — lying on its side in the integration hanger at Cape Canaveral's Complex 40. It had arrived in April, followed by the launcher's second stage in July.

Company officials, however, were nervous when it came to photography, particularly where the rocket engines were concerned. We were forbidden to take close-ups that showed the engines in detail, though no objections were raised to the ‘space paparazi’ scrambling on their backs underneath the first stage to capture shots of the SpaceX logo!

Also proudly on show, this time in a tent in the grounds of the SpaceX launch control centre close to Port Canaveral, was the burnt and battered Dragon capsule that was successfully flown into orbit and parachuted back to Earth last December. Here you could closely inspect and almost touch something that had orbited Earth less than a year before.