Author Topic: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements  (Read 66982 times)

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3830
  • Liked: 1196
  • Likes Given: 1019
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #40 on: 08/21/2011 11:50 PM »
This will be a big problem.

On an engineering effort for a system that would have ridden in Orion, part of the requirements was JSC-62550, Strength Design and Verification Criteria for Glass, Ceramics and Windows in Human Space Flight Applications (I just found this through a Google Search.)  It goes on and on, including paragraphs telling you how to apply the document when the document does not apply.   This is based on their extensive track record of having designed a successful manned spaceflight vehicle in the 1970's.

Eventually a group from NASA tested one of the widows in a standardized manner completely consistent with the document but wholly inappropriate.

So you start with the astronauts demanding a window for eyes-on piloting. Then you add things like testing the window by driving a metal spike into it, ostensibly to be sure an astronaut can't break it with his spacesuited foot.  It goes on and on from there.

I agree with docmordrid and disagree with arnezami: The requirement is for a view of the target vehicle , and anything else the astronauts decide they need to see.

I agree with Lars_J: A pair of stereo cameras would be more than adequate.  In fact, a series of <1cm HD cameras, as described years ago in these forums, would allow for selectable hyper-stereo, better than naked eye.

And Robotbeat: "Does NASA want an affordable commercial crew program, or not?"   NASA is not monolithic.  Some groups within NASA do.  Others have other agendas, and they are not all bad agendas.  The sad part is that any number of groups will have effective veto power by injecting requirements, well intended or not.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Tony Ostinato

  • Member
  • Posts: 64
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #41 on: 08/21/2011 11:54 PM »
kinda like how on the star trek enterprise you had to leave the bridge and walk down a hall to get to a window.




Offline apace

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 810
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #42 on: 08/21/2011 11:58 PM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #43 on: 08/22/2011 12:00 AM »
And to switch a docking collar instead of a berthing one, most of the top of the pressure vessel will be different.
I believe the docking collar would be attached to the berthing collar, at least that's what SpaceX's website seems to infer.

« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 04:51 AM by manboy »
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3830
  • Liked: 1196
  • Likes Given: 1019
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #44 on: 08/22/2011 12:43 AM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...

And NASA will say that they have Orion, which meets all of their requirements including a wide field-of-view navigation widow tested to withstand boot kicks. And it will be ready to fly at about the $10B mark. 
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6177
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #45 on: 08/22/2011 01:15 AM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...

SpaceX might, anyway.

You won't hear any complaints from Boeing. The CST-100 design has a forward window that meets the requirement.

You probably won't hear anything from SNC, either. Dreamchaser can accommodate an aft flight station with window.
JRF

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2774
  • Liked: 525
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #46 on: 08/22/2011 01:18 AM »
kinda like how on the star trek enterprise you had to leave the bridge and walk down a hall to get to a window.

Or maybe like the shuttle... Is ISS docking nominally controlled from the forward or aft flight deck controls?

At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...

Something of a prisoner's dilemma there.  Only takes one to say "yes" and if the requirement stands as-is, CST-100 (or Orion) would appear to have the advantage.

At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...
And NASA will say that they have Orion, which meets all of their requirements including a wide field-of-view navigation widow tested to withstand boot kicks. And it will be ready to fly at about the $10B mark. 

That's a rather depressing thought.  But it's not over and no conclusive evidence that SpaceX or SNC can't come up with a solution.


edit: And per Jorge's post above, sounds like SNC has a solution.
« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 01:19 AM by joek »

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #47 on: 08/22/2011 01:18 AM »
Why the heck would they exclude a hatch window?

Does NASA want an affordable commercial crew program, or not?

They don't - not sure where you think they do.  Hatch window might meant the intent depending.

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #48 on: 08/22/2011 01:23 AM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...
You probably won't hear anything from SNC, either. Dreamchaser can accommodate an aft flight station with window.
Have you seen Dream Chaser's rear tunnel?
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6177
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #49 on: 08/22/2011 01:41 AM »
kinda like how on the star trek enterprise you had to leave the bridge and walk down a hall to get to a window.

Or maybe like the shuttle... Is ISS docking nominally controlled from the forward or aft flight deck controls?

The aft.

Quote
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...

Something of a prisoner's dilemma there.  Only takes one to say "yes" and if the requirement stands as-is, CST-100 (or Orion) would appear to have the advantage.

Especially when one, and possibly two, of them have a technical solution in-hand.
JRF

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6177
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #50 on: 08/22/2011 01:42 AM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...
You probably won't hear anything from SNC, either. Dreamchaser can accommodate an aft flight station with window.
Have you seen Dream Chaser's rear tunnel?

Not personally.
JRF

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 664
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #51 on: 08/22/2011 03:21 AM »
At the end, Boeing, SNC and SpaceX can go to NASA and tell them, change your rules or you will have no crewed vehicles from us...
You probably won't hear anything from SNC, either. Dreamchaser can accommodate an aft flight station with window.
Have you seen Dream Chaser's rear tunnel?

Not personally.

This seems to be the public image that so far best lets us estimate the Dreamchaser rear tunnel dimensions. (see attached) I'm not sure how tall Ms. Garver is (she is the one exiting the tunnel), but is someone willing to take a stab at seeing if there is room for a docking ring and a work station window next to each other? (but we should also note that the rear opening flares open in a way that may not be done on a flight article - note how the top mold line is straight until it expands at the exit)

Even better, does anyone know the exact diameter if the rear section of the tunnel?
« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 03:24 AM by Lars_J »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26451
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6373
  • Likes Given: 4636
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #52 on: 08/22/2011 03:29 AM »
SpaceX isn't the only one that is likely quite far in finalizing their initial crewed vehicle design. The others, especially SNC and Boeing, must be far enough along that this is going to increase their costs.

And this is exactly why changing the contracting structure to give NASA more ability to change requirements halfway is a bad idea, IMO.

Then won't get a contract from NASA. 

NASA isn't changing requirements halfway.  NASA hasn't even started the procurement for CCP.
I understand that. NASA has the stronger negotiating position, clearly. I just don't think they need anything to strengthen their hand further, that's all. In my opinion, there must be push-back from the people actually directly designing and building (etc) the vehicle, or it won't be cost-effective. If the negotiating position is too strong for one of the parties, a considerably-non-optimal solution results.

I understand also that NASA hasn't made up their mind yet on all the details for CCP.

I think I jumped to the conclusion that this specific requirement is really not vital to the capability (one of my assumptions was that Soyuz doesn't have anything like this requirement/capability... is that correct?), and thus represents an area where the cost/benefit analysis can be skewed. I still feel like it isn't a vital requirement, but there's not a heck of a lot of basis for that. Is this a really vital requirement or not? Does the standard vehicle for ISS (i.e. Soyuz) have this requirement/capability?



I guess the reason this frustrates me so much is that requirements like this can punish those who have tried to get a head start and do a lot of work on their own (at company expense) toward pursuing commercial crew capability. I feel like such behavior should be encouraged, not punished. Of course, you can end up with a few dead-ends like this, but I just think that it'd be better for everyone if NASA were able to work with this and adapt their requirements for the sake of expediency and budget, especially if Soyuz is no better in this respect.
« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 03:34 AM by Robotbeat »
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 Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22249
  • Liked: 505
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #53 on: 08/22/2011 03:46 AM »
In my opinion, there must be push-back from the people actually directly designing and building (etc) the vehicle, or it won't be cost-effective. If the negotiating position is too strong for one of the parties, a considerably-non-optimal solution results.

Have you ever heard the rule of commerce, that the customer is always right? 

Indeed NASA has every right to request a requirement that they deem necessary, as they have had a decade of ISS experience plus more with Mir.  If you deem that overly conservative, think of how expensive ISS is and how much of a stake NASA has in the program.  So if a couple of vehicles cannot meet the requirement, then NASA has every right to exclude them to protect its investment. 

However, it will be interesting to see whether or not a periscope could be defined as a "window" since it is basically light reflected from a window. Seems like an easy solution. 

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26451
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6373
  • Likes Given: 4636
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #54 on: 08/22/2011 04:00 AM »
In my opinion, there must be push-back from the people actually directly designing and building (etc) the vehicle, or it won't be cost-effective. If the negotiating position is too strong for one of the parties, a considerably-non-optimal solution results.

Have you ever heard the rule of commerce, that the customer is always right? 

Indeed NASA has every right to request a requirement that they deem necessary, as they have had a decade of ISS experience plus more with Mir.  If you deem that overly conservative, think of how expensive ISS is and how much of a stake NASA has in the program.  So if a couple of vehicles cannot meet the requirement, then NASA has every right to exclude them to protect its investment. 

However, it will be interesting to see whether or not a periscope could be defined as a "window" since it is basically light reflected from a window. Seems like an easy solution. 
Have you ever worked with over-demanding customers with stupid requirements which come only from their preferred solution and are not really needed for their given application? I have. Multiple times.

They usually end up with something that is multiple times more expensive but no more superior than the alternatives (and often times inferior in areas which really matter). I know, I know, it's anecdote, but that's reality. The customer has every legal right to shoot themselves in the foot if they want to.

EDIT:For clarification: I'm still seeking confirmation or denial about whether or not this window thing is an actually important requirement. My statement above is in the case that it is a burdensome but unnecessary requirement.
« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 04:02 AM by Robotbeat »
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 HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1359
  • Liked: 831
  • Likes Given: 249
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #55 on: 08/22/2011 04:08 AM »
The "problem" is easy to resolve.

You use a hand-held controller and float over to the window that is in the forward facing hatch.  Soyuz already has a small hand-held controller. 

(I couldn't find an on-line photo, but essentially we're talking about a wired device the size of a paperback book.)

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 664
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #56 on: 08/22/2011 04:09 AM »
The great irony in all of this is of course that in the vehicle that NASA has the most docking experience in - Shuttle - the person who pilots the docking is *not* looking out the window - he/she is looking at computer monitors, where the center-line video feed also is displayed.

(unless I am mistaken)

Dockings just aren't performed with the unaided Mark 0 eyeball.
« Last Edit: 08/22/2011 04:10 AM by Lars_J »

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22249
  • Liked: 505
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #57 on: 08/22/2011 04:19 AM »
Have you ever worked with over-demanding customers with stupid requirements which come only from their preferred solution and are not really needed for their given application? I have. Multiple times.

They usually end up with something that is multiple times more expensive but no more superior than the alternatives (and often times inferior in areas which really matter). I know, I know, it's anecdote, but that's reality. The customer has every legal right to shoot themselves in the foot if they want to

How many of these companies have experience with docking?  Answer is none with the exception of Boeing, who is including windows.  The logic of the window seems to be the use of a HHL like shuttle, which requires a two man crew (ie HHL operator and the person manning the stick) and would imagine the hatch window will be used as the centerline camera.  Both are just like shuttle operation, and therefore the requirements are just like shuttle.

Soyuz uses the autonomous Kurs system, as well as the manual mode through the periscope and forward docking camera as well as laser range finder.  Seems just like the commercial requirements.  Commercial also had input, but dont dismiss the experience of NASA as "frivolous"

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6177
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Commercial Crew Program (CCP-CTS-CCT) Requirements
« Reply #58 on: 08/22/2011 04:24 AM »
The great irony in all of this is of course that in the vehicle that NASA has the most docking experience in - Shuttle - the person who pilots the docking is *not* looking out the window - he/she is looking at computer monitors, where the center-line video feed also is displayed.

(unless I am mistaken)

Dockings just aren't performed with the unaided Mark 0 eyeball.

You're not mistaken, but you are missing the point that if the camera fails, the pilot can fly a backout using the window view.
JRF

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 #59 on: 08/22/2011 04:26 AM »
The great irony in all of this is of course that in the vehicle that NASA has the most docking experience in - Shuttle - the person who pilots the docking is *not* looking out the window - he/she is looking at computer monitors, where the center-line video feed also is displayed.

(unless I am mistaken)

Dockings just aren't performed with the unaided Mark 0 eyeball.

No the real irony is that you might be able to stick a fork in Commercial Crew.  Commercial Crew = Ares 1
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

Tags: