Author Topic: Dragon Roadmap: From domestic crew independence to humans on Mars  (Read 41557 times)

Online Chris Bergin

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/07/dragon-roadmap-domestic-crew-independence-humans-mars/

Technically part 1 of a series, as we're collating questions from L2 members in the SpaceX Master Section and then asking SpaceX, who are being very helpful towards us.

Next one will be about SpaceX and Mars, which is why the article was mainly an overview, heading into a Mars-related ending.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline AndyX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 602
  • Liked: 375
  • Likes Given: 594
Awesome overview of where they stand. Very exciting!

Offline happyflower

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 202
  • Earth
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 51
Mr. Bergin,

A very nice read and overview, thanks. Interesting that you say SpaceX has been very helpful towards your organization. Can you say if they communicate with you through a PAO type position, or do you have access to more of their employees as well (to get multiple views on an issue you are discussing with them)?

Offline hyper_snyper

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 728
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 22
Wouldn't be very smart for Musk to fly on an early flight.  Way too risky, too many things depend on him at the moment.

Offline brihath

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 28
Chris-  Excellent article.  I am looking forward to part 2!

Offline king1999

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
  • F-Niner Fan
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 306
  • Likes Given: 1280
Wouldn't be very smart for Musk to fly on an early flight.  Way too risky, too many things depend on him at the moment.

Musk has argued against that himself in some interviews because of his kids and other responsibilities, though he didn't totally rule it out.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
It's a nice overview, neatly sums up what is known.

The rub is this:

“SpaceX was founded to develop the technology to get humans to Mars – to make humanity multi-planetary,” added Ms. Ra. “Everything we do is an incremental step towards that goal, including Dragon developments.”

also known, but always good to see it unequivocally stated.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
“Dragon is volume-limited, meaning we always launch Dragon with its volume capacity filled,”

From the Dragon website:
  • 6,000 kg (13,228 lbs) payload up-mass to LEO; 3,000 kg (6,614 lbs) payload down-mass
  • Payload Volume: 10 m3 (350 ft3) pressurized, 14 m3  (490 ft3) unpressurized
  • CRS-1 carried 905kg, CRS-2 677kg.
    Progress has 6m^3 of pressurized volume.  The last one carried 1,360kg of supplies in the pressurized volume.

    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Online Chris Bergin

    Thanks chaps! :)

    Mr. Bergin,

    A very nice read and overview, thanks. Interesting that you say SpaceX has been very helpful towards your organization. Can you say if they communicate with you through a PAO type position, or do you have access to more of their employees as well (to get multiple views on an issue you are discussing with them)?


    When acquring official quotes, you always have to go though the PAO (be it NASA or otherwise). PAO's usually forward questions to relevant departments, get an answer back and then supply it to you. After a while, after seeing you're responsible with the content, they usually let you interview someone directly, with or without the PAO present.

    It's a nice overview, neatly sums up what is known.

    The rub is this:

    “SpaceX was founded to develop the technology to get humans to Mars – to make humanity multi-planetary,” added Ms. Ra. “Everything we do is an incremental step towards that goal, including Dragon developments.”

    also known, but always good to see it unequivocally stated.

    Yep. We're not breaking any news with this one, but it's a nice lead in (or baseline) article to more specific content. That quote is a good springboard for Mars related questions.

    There's always a method to my madness! ;D
    Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
    **Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

    Offline Jim

    • Night Gator
    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 37440
    • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
    • Liked: 21450
    • Likes Given: 428
    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Because the Progress carries water and propellant

    Offline meekGee

    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14158
    • N. California
    • Liked: 14046
    • Likes Given: 1392
    Thanks chaps! :)

    It's a nice overview, neatly sums up what is known.

    The rub is this:

    “SpaceX was founded to develop the technology to get humans to Mars – to make humanity multi-planetary,” added Ms. Ra. “Everything we do is an incremental step towards that goal, including Dragon developments.”

    also known, but always good to see it unequivocally stated.

    Yep. We're not breaking any news with this one, but it's a nice lead in (or baseline) article to more specific content. That quote is a good springboard for Mars related questions.

    There's always a method to my madness! ;D

    heh, looking forward to part 2 then.

    My question(s), if ever it becomes possible to ask:  Are there concrete plans for ground equipment/activity beyond just "transport to Mars" (I'm talking unmanned) and what do they plan to use as a power source on the ground.

    ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

    Offline PreferToLurk

    • Full Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 416
    • Liked: 388
    • Likes Given: 189
    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Because the Progress carries water and propellant

    I would also add that if you look at a hatch opening photo of Progress, it appears packed to the gills; and if you look at a photo of a Dragon hatch opening, there is a huge open space in the middle.

    Still, IMHO, "volume limited" is a technicality resulting in NASA efficiently filling the available space within their mass budget. Gwen stated that the last flight was nearly at maximum up-mass. If they know they can send up denser materials on other vehicles, why waste space by putting it on Dragon and then not filling all the available racks? 

    Online Chris Bergin

    Thanks chaps! :)

    It's a nice overview, neatly sums up what is known.

    The rub is this:

    “SpaceX was founded to develop the technology to get humans to Mars – to make humanity multi-planetary,” added Ms. Ra. “Everything we do is an incremental step towards that goal, including Dragon developments.”

    also known, but always good to see it unequivocally stated.

    Yep. We're not breaking any news with this one, but it's a nice lead in (or baseline) article to more specific content. That quote is a good springboard for Mars related questions.

    There's always a method to my madness! ;D

    heh, looking forward to part 2 then.

    My question(s), if ever it becomes possible to ask:  Are there concrete plans for ground equipment/activity beyond just "transport to Mars" (I'm talking unmanned) and what do they plan to use as a power source on the ground.



    The questions are restricted to the L2 section, otherwise we'd have about 5000 questions.
    Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
    **Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

    Offline R7

    • Propulsophile
    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 2725
      • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
    • Liked: 992
    • Likes Given: 668
    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Because the Progress carries water and propellant

    Even if we count those out Progress still beats Dragon in pressurized packing by large margin. M-19M delivered ~1580kg of spare parts etc. that's ~260kg/m3 vs CRS-1 ~91kg/m3 or CRS-2 ~68kg/m3.

    edit: is Progress just "luckier" in getting the heavier, denser equipment while Dragon packed fluffy stuff so far?
    « Last Edit: 07/05/2013 06:51 pm by R7 »
    AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

    Offline Lurker Steve

    • Full Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 1420
    • Liked: 35
    • Likes Given: 9
    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Because the Progress carries water and propellant

    That's not in the pressurized compartment, is it ?

    Offline Lee Jay

    • Elite Veteran
    • Global Moderator
    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8566
    • Liked: 3603
    • Likes Given: 327
    I can't seem to reconcile these statements.  How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    Because the Progress carries water and propellant

    Yes, but I specifically mentioned just the spares and supplies in the pressurized compartment.  Water and prop add to the cargo mass I quoted.

    Offline Rocket Science

    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10586
    • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
    • Liked: 4548
    • Likes Given: 13523
    Great read Chris! :) I'm really looking forward to that pad abort test.
    "The laws of physics are unforgiving"
    ~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

    Offline meekGee

    • Senior Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14158
    • N. California
    • Liked: 14046
    • Likes Given: 1392

    The questions are restricted to the L2 section, otherwise we'd have about 5000 questions.

    understandable...  though you could of course restrict the _answers_....  more tease value?   :)
    ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

    Offline Space Pete

    How could Dragon's cargo be this much less dense (factor of about 3) than Progress'?

    A contributing factor could be that Dragon generally gets to fly more largo cargo items than Progress (due to Dragon's large CBM hatch), and these large items generally require lots of bulky packing foam that eats up volume while adding very little to the total mass.
    NASASpaceflight ISS Editor

    Offline Aerospace Dilettante

    • Member
    • Posts: 57
    • Liked: 20
    • Likes Given: 31
    Thanks for the interesting new article Mr. Bergin!

    I'm wondering what role the mysterious Dragon 2 (propulsive landing cargo Dragon) will have in the development of the manned Dragon?

    I'd think it would make sense to design the Dragon 2 to be basically a manned Dragon without couches, instruments, life support, ect.  That way each CRS mission would also be a test of a lot of the manned systems without risking any lives.

    I've also not heard anything about the "black zone" inherent in a propulsive landing (too high to crash survivably and too low for the emergency parachutes to open, guess: 6-300m).  I can see NASA safety and/or political-types nixing it, because no one wants to see 7 people dying on HD video.

    Thanks for creating this great forum!
    « Last Edit: 07/05/2013 09:38 pm by Aerospace Dilettante »

    Tags:
     

    Advertisement NovaTech
    Advertisement Northrop Grumman
    Advertisement
    Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
    Advertisement Brady Kenniston
    Advertisement NextSpaceflight
    Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
    1