Author Topic: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements  (Read 63232 times)

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 854
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 380
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #160 on: 07/13/2012 10:27 AM »
I don't know, but I don't think it's the latter - I've heard mention "three-day ISS approach" several times, which sounds specific.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8908
  • Liked: 1066
  • Likes Given: 708
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #161 on: 07/13/2012 02:02 PM »
For the CCCiCap optional milestones, the first crewed test flight must be 3 days in-orbit:

Quote
Final milestone of an orbital crewed demonstration flight
Mission Duration: Minimum of 3 days on-orbit
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/649836main_4_Mango_NACPresentation_4-24-12_508.pdf

I noticed in this document the following requirements. I don't know if they are new:

Quote
The chosen spacecraft must demonstrate it can serve as a 24-hour safe haven during an emergency in space and be able to stay docked to the station for at least 210 days.

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/660622main_2012.06.18_CCP.pdf
« Last Edit: 07/13/2012 02:35 PM by yg1968 »

Offline BrightLight

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1283
  • Northern New Mexico
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #162 on: 07/13/2012 02:39 PM »
I don't recall the "safe haven" but the 210 days has been consistent with previous documents.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10315
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 700
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #163 on: 07/13/2012 02:52 PM »

Window space might hurt the Dragon in the downselect.  Both the Libery, Boeing and DC have a ton of window space.

You seem to be confused about where DreamChaser's windows are.

Not confused, just forgot....but you have a point. 
« Last Edit: 07/13/2012 02:53 PM by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8908
  • Liked: 1066
  • Likes Given: 708
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #164 on: 03/29/2013 05:13 PM »
Quote
ASAP member Mr. Bryan O‟Connor observed that there were a couple of interesting briefings, including one on how they dealt with a problematic technical requirement—manual flight control. Human rating requirements specify that manual control be available wherever it is appropriate. They had to examine this requirement carefully to see if it made sense to keep manual
control as a capability for the commercial vehicles. As a result, this particular requirement may be modified significantly for this program. Orion is looking at the same requirement.

See page 3 of this document:
http://oiir.hq.nasa.gov/asap/documents/ASAP_Public_Meeting_Minutes_1st-Qtr-2013.pdf

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 988
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 89
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #165 on: 04/03/2013 06:23 PM »
The Shuttle would have been safer to land on autopilot - but what pilot would give up the chance to hand fly it? This requirement, like the one that the NASA personnel wear suits, is irrational and increases cost.

Offline Wayne Hale

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 191
  • Liked: 274
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #166 on: 04/03/2013 06:59 PM »
Interesting that people think it would have been safer to land on autopilot.  We studied that extensively and there were several issues with the implementation of the shuttle autopilot and the supporting ground navigation aids.  Every shuttle landing was manually controlled and they were all successful . . .

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7430
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1422
  • Likes Given: 4416
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #167 on: 04/04/2013 03:20 PM »
Interesting that people think it would have been safer to land on autopilot.  We studied that extensively and there were several issues with the implementation of the shuttle autopilot and the supporting ground navigation aids.  Every shuttle landing was manually controlled and they were all successful . . .
Buran's autonomous landing was extremely accurate, but made use of significant help from some extremely powerful radio beacons. This basically meant that it could land in just two places in the world autonomously.
But autonomous landing was a fundamental requirement of developing the system. They didn't expected to launch or land with crew until the fifth of so fight. The second flight was supposed to autonomously dock with Mir (that's why Shuttle got the APAS, it was already there). And the third would get an APAS capable Soyuz to dock with it in space to simulate a crew rescue mission.
Besides, I guess they calculated that actually taking a crew for all missions was more dangerous than necessary and more expensive for the payload, since you'd have to man rate it.
And seeing how Dream Chaser/Dragon/CST-100/Orion are designed to do the first missions autonomously, I think that it is a very reasonable requirement.
I'm not stating that autonomous landing is safer than piloted one. Just that having it is a necessity for a safe development program. And a plus if you don't actually need a crew (like cargo runs).

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7917
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2632
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #168 on: 04/04/2013 10:09 PM »
Buran's autonomous landing was extremely accurate, but made use of significant help from some extremely powerful radio beacons.

Not to get into a whole semantic thing... but that's not what we used to call autonomous. :)
Non-commercial spaceflight and filicide  http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=185

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26080
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6089
  • Likes Given: 4506
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #169 on: 04/04/2013 10:15 PM »
The control is autonomous, the sensing isn't. Better?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7430
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1422
  • Likes Given: 4416
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #170 on: 04/04/2013 11:44 PM »
Buran's autonomous landing was extremely accurate, but made use of significant help from some extremely powerful radio beacons.

Not to get into a whole semantic thing... but that's not what we used to call autonomous. :)

Radio beacons are just that. Beacons.  Those beacons were used from just after atmospheric interface. Not even like an ILS implementation. Remember that they couldn't count on GLONASS yet. What would it take for you to consider it autonomous? That it read a map and look at the terrain features to get its bearings?
Even Wayne Hale said that the issue was the ground navigational aids.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8908
  • Liked: 1066
  • Likes Given: 708
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #171 on: 03/06/2017 02:02 PM »
This post is also relevant to this thread:

FWIW, a revision of CCT-REQ-1130, "ISS Crew Transportation and Services Requirements Document" showed up on NTRS recently:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20170001943

(Attached here, as well.)

Here is the attached document (i.e., version 2016 of CCT-REQ-1130):
« Last Edit: 03/07/2017 12:09 AM by yg1968 »

Tags: