If you look at all other rocket players who've been in the field for so many decades now none of them had the combination of capability and drive that SpaceX does.
In Elon's mind F9 and Dragon are ancient history by now, and he is deep into the next steps I'm sure. I have no doubt that they dabble already in anything from propellant stores, BEO propulsion, and Mars EDL. It will be interesting to know who they hired from these fields.This is part of the reason I am rooting for them so much. If you look at all other rocket players who've been in the field for so many decades now none of them had the combination of capability and drive that SpaceX does.
I can see them making a trunkless version with enhanced batteries for specific use for LEO station ferry missions using a two to three orbit rendezvous.Sorta like the solar wingless ferry Soyuz.
I can also see a propulsion module for lunar missions.Other lunar modifications deletion of three to four seats adding a full WCS,improved galley,and various modifications for the deep space thermo environment.
(Reposting this, as it got swallowed up in the flame war)Quote from: Patchouli on 01/21/2011 07:16 pmI can see them making a trunkless version with enhanced batteries for specific use for LEO station ferry missions using a two to three orbit rendezvous.Sorta like the solar wingless ferry Soyuz.Would there really be that much mass advantage to a solar-less version?
More of a cost savings than a weight savings, I would guess. Reduce the cost of the Trunk which is expended. Batteries are possibly even a mass disadvantage, but would certainly be a hit to the down-mass.Also, Dragon would probably have to be able to take power from the "LEO station" to avoid having the docking turn into a "Fire Drill" like teens at a traffic light. The Shuttles can do this at the ISS, so the facility must exist there.
The trunk provides cooling as well. Without it you would probably need more fluid for the flash evaporator. So this extra mass would have to be taken into account.Also, I seem to remember in another thread that fast rendezvous results in unacceptably high rates of approach to the station and the consumption of more propellant. I wouldn't be surprised if that alone negated the mass advantage that a "trunkless" Dragon would have.
>The Dragon spacecraft is comprised of 3 main elements: >....and the Trunk, which provides for the stowage of unpressurized cargo and will support Dragon’s solar arrays and thermal radiators.>
Quote from: douglas100 on 01/24/2011 03:03 pmThe trunk provides cooling as well. Without it you would probably need more fluid for the flash evaporator. So this extra mass would have to be taken into account.Also, I seem to remember in another thread that fast rendezvous results in unacceptably high rates of approach to the station and the consumption of more propellant. I wouldn't be surprised if that alone negated the mass advantage that a "trunkless" Dragon would have.Does the trunk really "provide cooling"? Is it really known?
Quote from: Comga on 01/25/2011 03:19 amQuote from: douglas100 on 01/24/2011 03:03 pmThe trunk provides cooling as well. Without it you would probably need more fluid for the flash evaporator. So this extra mass would have to be taken into account.Also, I seem to remember in another thread that fast rendezvous results in unacceptably high rates of approach to the station and the consumption of more propellant. I wouldn't be surprised if that alone negated the mass advantage that a "trunkless" Dragon would have.Does the trunk really "provide cooling"? Is it really known?Yes.