Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3  (Read 63262 times)

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8817
  • Liked: 1029
  • Likes Given: 673
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #160 on: 03/01/2017 02:16 PM »
NASA quitely announced that it bought Soyuz seats for 2017 and 2018 from Boeing last week:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/additional-crew-flights-boost-space-station-science-and-research/

Does that mean Boeing will fly that many fewer Commercial Crew missions because NASA paid them off for them?

NASA already ordered 6 post-certification missions from each provider. So that still stands.

Online rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 222
  • Liked: 116
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #161 on: 03/02/2017 12:18 AM »
Does an Atlas V/Vulcan and a Starliner have the capability to do a moon flyby as recently announced for the FH and Crew Dragon?




Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • California
  • Liked: 2033
  • Likes Given: 1141
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #162 on: 03/02/2017 01:20 AM »
Does an Atlas V/Vulcan and a Starliner have the capability to do a moon flyby as recently announced for the FH and Crew Dragon?

CST-100 seems to be a bit heavier (13-14mt?), and Atlas V with 5 boosters only has a capacity of ~9mt to GTO (TLI requires more delta-v), so I don't think so.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1435
  • Liked: 380
  • Likes Given: 452
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #163 on: 03/05/2017 01:39 PM »
IIRC, Boeing said CST is not designed for BEO missions, in particular it lacks a lunar return capable heatshield.

Related: not clear to me if CST-100 has positive power balance with the solar array "mission kit" installed. This thing is pure LEO taxi.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9696
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 1943
  • Likes Given: 271
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #164 on: 03/07/2017 07:08 AM »
IIRC, Boeing said CST is not designed for BEO missions, in particular it lacks a lunar return capable heatshield.

Given enough money, I'm sure Boeing could design a Lunar capable heat shield for CST-100.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline The man in the can

  • Member
  • Posts: 33
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 10
« Last Edit: 03/10/2017 09:07 PM by The man in the can »

Offline The man in the can

  • Member
  • Posts: 33
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #166 on: 03/10/2017 09:08 PM »

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1435
  • Liked: 380
  • Likes Given: 452
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #167 on: 03/11/2017 01:57 AM »
Really enjoyed this video, especially how they handled the audio. Much more fun to listen to the wind and hardware than some lame voice-over.

Hope the tests continue to go well.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6665
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2111
  • Likes Given: 613
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #168 on: 03/11/2017 02:45 PM »
Really enjoyed this video, especially how they handled the audio. Much more fun to listen to the wind and hardware than some lame voice-over.

Hope the tests continue to go well.
Agreed. Much more fun to enjoy this than the fancy PR stuff. Hardware being put to the test is a much better sight than some talking head.


Offline larmeyers

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #170 on: 03/13/2017 01:51 PM »
Apologies if this is an old topic, but is there any info regarding why Starliner needs to jettison its heat shield (at 4,500 ft)?  Am I correct that both Dragon 2 and Orion will land with theirs?  thanks...

Offline yokem55

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 264
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #171 on: 03/13/2017 02:30 PM »
Apologies if this is an old topic, but is there any info regarding why Starliner needs to jettison its heat shield (at 4,500 ft)?  Am I correct that both Dragon 2 and Orion will land with theirs?  thanks...
It probably has to do with being able to deploy the airbags and allow for a slower touchdown.

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Liked: 162
  • Likes Given: 967
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #172 on: 03/13/2017 03:34 PM »
Apologies if this is an old topic, but is there any info regarding why Starliner needs to jettison its heat shield (at 4,500 ft)?  Am I correct that both Dragon 2 and Orion will land with theirs?  thanks...
It probably has to do with being able to deploy the airbags and allow for a slower touchdown.
That and there are rocket nozzles for slowing down just before landing. These nozzles are blocked by the heat shield.
Orion lands in water and Dragon has their rockets on the side so they do not need to jettison their heat shields.
« Last Edit: 03/13/2017 03:42 PM by Roy_H »
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Liked: 162
  • Likes Given: 967
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #173 on: 03/13/2017 03:47 PM »
I am surprised that the Russian made RD180 engines are still an issue. All the plans for making them were delivered many years ago at the start of the contract. They have proven to be highly reliable, so what is the issue?
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7337
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1373
  • Likes Given: 4248
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #174 on: 03/13/2017 07:27 PM »
I am surprised that the Russian made RD180 engines are still an issue. All the plans for making them were delivered many years ago at the start of the contract. They have proven to be highly reliable, so what is the issue?
ITAR and the equivalent Russian laws. Any exchange requires an inquire for each set of questions. And you can get fined even from asking a question that might divulge that you know something that's not common knowledge. Besides, they had not all the data. Some things like anti corrosion treatment on the nozzle were not included. And the whole Russian system engineering is very different from the US. So asking for their paper trail to match NASA's expectations is a gruesome prospect.

Offline Prettz

  • Member
  • Posts: 96
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #175 on: 03/13/2017 11:33 PM »
I am surprised that the Russian made RD180 engines are still an issue. All the plans for making them were delivered many years ago at the start of the contract. They have proven to be highly reliable, so what is the issue?
ITAR and the equivalent Russian laws. Any exchange requires an inquire for each set of questions. And you can get fined even from asking a question that might divulge that you know something that's not common knowledge. Besides, they had not all the data. Some things like anti corrosion treatment on the nozzle were not included. And the whole Russian system engineering is very different from the US. So asking for their paper trail to match NASA's expectations is a gruesome prospect.
Why would NASA need to know such details as those in order to declare an engine man-rated? Why is what they already know not enough?

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 419
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #176 on: 03/14/2017 04:18 AM »
Article on chutes and ASAP worrying about RD-180:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/chute-tests-starliner-asap-worry-rd-180-certification/

It would be nice if there's an explanation of what "SureSep separation ring" is and what it separates...

Online brickmack

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • USA
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Boeing's CST-100 - Master Updates and Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #177 on: 03/14/2017 03:58 PM »
Article on chutes and ASAP worrying about RD-180:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/chute-tests-starliner-asap-worry-rd-180-certification/

It would be nice if there's an explanation of what "SureSep separation ring" is and what it separates...

I believe it is this https://www.google.com/patents/EP0273061A1?cl=en&dq=Vincent+Noel&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAp-Lgt9bSAhUU4mMKHew8AkoQ6AEIGjAA. McDonnel Douglas had "SureSep" trademarked around this time, and I found mention of a Vincent Noel involved in that project, he's listed as an inventor on this patent. Boeing probably acquired it with the rest of McDonnell Douglas and kept the name.

Now, on what is actually being separated. This shows what is apparently a SureSep test unit, and it looks to have a fairly large diameter, so I'd guess its the interface between Atlas and Starliner, or the CM and SM, or heat shield and CM structure. This guys LinkedIn lists him as being involved in both SureSEP testing and the Starliner-Atlas interface, so I'd wager its for that connection
« Last Edit: 03/14/2017 03:59 PM by brickmack »

Tags: