|
mr. mark
|
|
« Reply #15 on: 04/01/2012 04:43 PM » |
|
We will have to keep an eye on this. The schedule could shift. There is a final review coming mid April.
|
|
|
|
JayP
|
|
« Reply #16 on: 04/01/2012 04:49 PM » |
|
From the image of Dragon's interior linked below, I think I have figured out what the hardware shown in the attached image might be - a camera, to provide internal views of the Dragon hatch opening.
I just can't think of anything else that it might be, other than a lens. Anyone got any other ideas? I hope it is a camera! 
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/634899main_mm-dragon.jpg
Hi Pete, enlarged the image to see behind the clear bubble, which appears to be a cover, and behind in the middle is a circular object between two round edged rectangular shapes, the circular object has a blue chromatic reflection, and I am going to go out on a limb and say it is a lens of some sort; whether for a camera or a sensor that is up for grabs;
Gramps
Isn't the Dragon's hatch reversed compared to all of the other USOS hatches (and the ones on HTV and Cygnus) in that the latching mechanism is on the inside to protect it durring reentry? If so, I would assume thay want something more than just the position of a pointer viewd thru the window to confirm the latches are engaged before undocking.
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
« Reply #17 on: 04/01/2012 04:56 PM » |
|
I'll go out on a limb, a biological cargo container for mice, rats ect? I know...I know...
NASA supplies those, and they look like shuttle lockers.
|
|
|
|
mr. mark
|
|
« Reply #18 on: 04/01/2012 05:44 PM » |
|
Sorry Jim, actually axed that comment but, yes knowing Elon Musk who knows....Last time it was cheese, who would have thought. I am now curious though about the schedule omission... we shall see. This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch. I still think that overall the mission will be successful but, any waiver from the flight plan even small will be considered a possible failure. Look at the remarks from COTS 1 about a suspect Dragon thruster.
|
|
|
|
peter-b
|
|
« Reply #19 on: 04/01/2012 06:16 PM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
|
|
|
|
Paul Howard
|
|
« Reply #20 on: 04/01/2012 09:37 PM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
Can I ask why? Headlines are better than no interest.
|
|
|
|
peter-b
|
|
« Reply #21 on: 04/01/2012 09:43 PM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
Can I ask why? Headlines are better than no interest.
Because if anything goes wrong, or is perceived to have gone wrong, or can be misinterpreted in a way that allows others to represent it as having gone wrong, it'll be used as yet another stick to finish beating CCDev funding to death in Congress. This is no longer a mission that will be judged on its technical merits.
|
|
|
|
Space Pete
|
|
« Reply #22 on: 04/01/2012 09:47 PM » |
|
Isn't the Dragon's hatch reversed compared to all of the other USOS hatches (and the ones on HTV and Cygnus) in that the latching mechanism is on the inside to protect it durring reentry? If so, I would assume thay want something more than just the position of a pointer viewd thru the window to confirm the latches are engaged before undocking. Good thoughts! I too noticed that the tension rod assemblies are on the inside rather than the outside, and I too thought this might be re-entry related (although I think the outside of the hatch may have a white heat-proof covering like the CBM bulkhead does), but I hadn't considered that the camera (if that's what it is) might be to record correct operation of the tension rods.
|
|
|
|
Robotbeat
|
|
« Reply #23 on: 04/01/2012 10:15 PM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
Can I ask why? Headlines are better than no interest.
Because if anything goes wrong, or is perceived to have gone wrong, or can be misinterpreted in a way that allows others to represent it as having gone wrong, it'll be used as yet another stick to finish beating CCDev funding to death in Congress.
...
Schadenfreude seems to be a disease killing the future of our country, these days.
|
|
|
|
RDoc
|
|
« Reply #24 on: 04/01/2012 10:38 PM » |
|
+1
|
|
|
|
SpacexULA
|
|
« Reply #25 on: 04/01/2012 10:44 PM » |
|
So what are the next big milestones headed up to the launch?
Final integration
Wet Dress Rehearsal
Test Fire on pad?
|
|
|
|
Robotbeat
|
|
« Reply #26 on: 04/01/2012 10:58 PM » |
|
So what are the next big milestones headed up to the launch?
Final integration
Wet Dress Rehearsal
Test Fire on pad?
SORR (Stage Operations Readiness Review) on April 5th, FRR (Flight Readiness Review) on April 16th.
|
|
|
|
Lurker Steve
|
|
« Reply #27 on: 04/02/2012 01:11 AM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
Can I ask why? Headlines are better than no interest.
Because if anything goes wrong, or is perceived to have gone wrong, or can be misinterpreted in a way that allows others to represent it as having gone wrong, it'll be used as yet another stick to finish beating CCDev funding to death in Congress.
This is no longer a mission that will be judged on its technical merits.
This is just the beginning. Forget about being judged on technical merits. They are being judged on their ability to fulfill their portion of the CRS contract. Every flight after this will be ever more critical. One failure on a real mission, and they end up in the same penalty box as Taurus XL, not to mention the delays affect the ISS logistics planning.
|
|
|
|
Robotbeat
|
|
« Reply #28 on: 04/02/2012 03:01 AM » |
|
This test is becoming headline news and that bothers me a little. The expectations are just too high for a test launch.
Yes. It bothers me too.
Can I ask why? Headlines are better than no interest.
Because if anything goes wrong, or is perceived to have gone wrong, or can be misinterpreted in a way that allows others to represent it as having gone wrong, it'll be used as yet another stick to finish beating CCDev funding to death in Congress.
This is no longer a mission that will be judged on its technical merits.
This is just the beginning. Forget about being judged on technical merits. They are being judged on their ability to fulfill their portion of the CRS contract. Every flight after this will be ever more critical. One failure on a real mission, and they end up in the same penalty box as Taurus XL, not to mention the delays affect the ISS logistics planning.
That's totally unfair. The other contestants are not cargo providers, thus there's no risk of them being put in a "penalty box" anymore than any other launch anomaly, unless you're going to count any EELV problem. Come on, your bias is showing, here.
|
|
|
|
Antares
|
|
« Reply #29 on: 04/02/2012 03:13 AM » |
|
It may be unfair, but that's the irrational nature of the political realm.
|
|
|
|
