Author Topic: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion  (Read 443751 times)

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9067
  • Liked: 1113
  • Likes Given: 755
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #60 on: 08/28/2014 01:25 AM »
A few other interesting points mentionned by Reisman during the presentation:
-Milestones 13B of CCiCap (Ground Systems and Mission Operations Critical Design Review (CDR)) has just been completed by SpaceX.
-The NASA version of Dragon V2 will not have 7 seats. NASA is not interested in that many seats, they prefer to have cargo instead. 
-Dragon V2 heatshield can return from lunar missions or cislunar orbit (slide 16).
-Dragon V2 will not be reused for NASA flights because it would complicate the certification process. But Dragon is intended to be reused for at least 10 flights. (at the 22 minute mark of the audio)
-SpaceX is building its own docking system which will respect NASA requirements. NDS would not have been a good fit for Dragon V2 (slide 16).
-Raptor is doing component testing (e.g., injector) at Stennis.
« Last Edit: 08/28/2014 02:06 AM by yg1968 »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2585
  • Likes Given: 860
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #61 on: 08/28/2014 06:29 AM »
I wonder how accurate the parachute landings with propulsive assist will be? Presumably a bigger landing area is needed.

Online Chris Bergin

Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #62 on: 08/28/2014 09:28 AM »
Thanks ClayJar and Yves! OK, I think I'll write this up today and then the battle of the HLVs for Friday/weekend.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #63 on: 08/28/2014 10:22 AM »
Thanks ClayJay for the link to Garrett's presentation.

It's a pity people wasted his time repeatedly asking FH questions that he was not in a position to answer, instead of questions on his area of expertise ie commercial crew.

Some questions I would have liked answered.
1)  How much cheaper would ISS missions be if 10 x reuse of Dragon was allowed.
2) What will they do with the used Dragon's.
3) I assuming the CST100 is not being reused for ISS missions, which would explain their expendable propulsion system. But what about the Dream Chaser. I doubt Garrett could answer these questions, but an answer in regards DC would be interesting.
4) How soon before an unmanned flight?.

Strange that NASA is happy to fly their reusable vehicle multiply times, but don't trust a private company's reusable vehicle. NB Orion is also planned to be reused a few times.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2562
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3098
  • Likes Given: 218
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #64 on: 08/28/2014 11:25 AM »
Thanks ClayJay for the link to Garrett's presentation.

It's a pity people wasted his time repeatedly asking FH questions that he was not in a position to answer, instead of questions on his area of expertise ie commercial crew.

Some questions I would have liked answered.
1)  How much cheaper would ISS missions be if 10 x reuse of Dragon was allowed.
2) What will they do with the used Dragon's.
3) I assuming the CST100 is not being reused for ISS missions, which would explain their expendable propulsion system. But what about the Dream Chaser. I doubt Garrett could answer these questions, but an answer in regards DC would be interesting.
4) How soon before an unmanned flight?.

Strange that NASA is happy to fly their reusable vehicle multiply times, but don't trust a private company's reusable vehicle. NB Orion is also planned to be reused a few times.
Why would it be any cheaper? The provider bids what they think will win the contract. If costs to them were zero, they wouldn't have any incentive to lower the price if there was no competition.
 And, as said about a hundred times, NASA didn't have a problem with reusing capsules. They just required the bids for CRS be based on new ones so they wouldn't be based on future technology that may or may not pan out. (Do Brits use that term?)
« Last Edit: 08/28/2014 11:26 AM by Nomadd »


Offline Garrett

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • France
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #66 on: 08/28/2014 02:54 PM »
Strange that NASA is happy to fly their reusable vehicle multiply times, but don't trust a private company's reusable vehicle. NB Orion is also planned to be reused a few times.
Garrett (Reisman, not me; I always find it weird talking about namesakes) said it would complicate the certification process. So the decision not to offer reused Dragons was made by SpaceX, not NASA. Now, whether NASA's certification process deserves criticism is another story ...
- "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." - Indiana Jones

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #67 on: 08/28/2014 03:00 PM »
Thanks ClayJay for the link to Garrett's presentation.

It's a pity people wasted his time repeatedly asking FH questions that he was not in a position to answer, instead of questions on his area of expertise ie commercial crew.

Some questions I would have liked answered.
1)  How much cheaper would ISS missions be if 10 x reuse of Dragon was allowed.
2) What will they do with the used Dragon's.
3) I assuming the CST100 is not being reused for ISS missions, which would explain their expendable propulsion system. But what about the Dream Chaser. I doubt Garrett could answer these questions, but an answer in regards DC would be interesting.
4) How soon before an unmanned flight?.

Strange that NASA is happy to fly their reusable vehicle multiply times, but don't trust a private company's reusable vehicle. NB Orion is also planned to be reused a few times.

I don't think it has anything to do with trusting a re-used spacecraft, but rather the certification of the actual refurbishment process. They aren't going to settle with a previously used spacecraft showing up at the pad and no documentation or formal review as to how it got back there.

Could happen later on but for now they have stated, as they have with cargo Dragon no thanks, we will take a new one.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26875
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6778
  • Likes Given: 4808
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #68 on: 08/28/2014 03:14 PM »
Kind of sucks, hopefully this process changes.
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 yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9067
  • Liked: 1113
  • Likes Given: 755
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #69 on: 08/28/2014 03:21 PM »
Strange that NASA is happy to fly their reusable vehicle multiply times, but don't trust a private company's reusable vehicle. NB Orion is also planned to be reused a few times.
Garrett (Reisman, not me; I always find it weird talking about namesakes) said it would complicate the certification process. So the decision not to offer reused Dragons was made by SpaceX, not NASA. Now, whether NASA's certification process deserves criticism is another story ...

Just to be clear, Reisman made it seem like it was SpaceX's decision not to certify reused capsules. SpaceX didn't want to take on more than they can chew. In other words, he made it seem like it may have been possible to certify reused capsules but that it would have been overly complicated to do so. His answer is at the 22 minute mark. 
« Last Edit: 08/28/2014 06:26 PM by yg1968 »

Offline dglow

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 713
  • California
  • Liked: 523
  • Likes Given: 1248
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #70 on: 08/28/2014 03:55 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Perfect article, Chris – it summarized his comments well. Glad you included the pad abort arc image from his deck as it's nicely illustrative.

And, "his name remains a secret"? ... heheh, well-done.  ;D

Online Chris Bergin

Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #71 on: 08/28/2014 05:14 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Perfect article, Chris – it summarized his comments well. Glad you included the pad abort arc image from his deck as it's nicely illustrative.

And, "his name remains a secret"? ... heheh, well-done.  ;D


Thanks very much. Glad someone noticed that line ;D

Offline OSE

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 281
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #72 on: 08/28/2014 05:18 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Perfect article, Chris – it summarized his comments well. Glad you included the pad abort arc image from his deck as it's nicely illustrative.

And, "his name remains a secret"? ... heheh, well-done.  ;D


Thanks very much. Glad someone noticed that line ;D

I read that line and spent about 5 minutes thinking about who would be crazy enough to intentionally ride on an abort...then I saw that it's going to be a crash test dummy.  :-[

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7184
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2795
  • Likes Given: 837
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #73 on: 08/28/2014 06:52 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Fine article Chris (as always)  :)

spell-check:

Quote from: Chris Bergin
“We’ll have a very flight-like propulsion system per what goes into the abort, including the avionics, which will be identical to the avionics were are planning for the flight vehicle.
« Last Edit: 08/28/2014 06:54 PM by woods170 »

Offline kerlc

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Slovenia
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #74 on: 08/28/2014 07:05 PM »
Sure, asking for reuse would most certainly bring several heaps of new paperwork from NASA, but I doubt it's the primary reason behind no reuse.

Personally, I believe the lack of reuse is mostly so that SpaceX gets some data on Dragon V2 after re-entry.
Quote from: wannamoonbase
Be patient people, rockets are hard.

Offline AS-503

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
  • Orion Fab Team
  • Colorado USA
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #75 on: 08/28/2014 07:05 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Perfect article, Chris – it summarized his comments well. Glad you included the pad abort arc image from his deck as it's nicely illustrative.

And, "his name remains a secret"? ... heheh, well-done.  ;D


Thanks very much. Glad someone noticed that line ;D

I think we all know who it *might* be..........

Offline R.Simko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #76 on: 08/28/2014 07:10 PM »
Ok, first article covering chutes and aborts:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/dragon-v2-rely-parachutes-landing/

Hi Chris, in your article, you say that Dragon "V2 is a major leap forward from her cargo lofting cousin."  I certainly agree with you there.  But could you or some other knowledgeable person here on NSF outline some of the major improvements that Dragon V2 has over cargo Dragon?

Thanks,
Bob

Offline nadreck

Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #77 on: 08/28/2014 07:12 PM »
While I think the idea of reusing both the Dragon capsule and the first stage in manned flights is going to revolutionize manned spaceflight in the period 2017 - 2025, I would expect that all flights on behalf of NASA in that time frame will use 4 seat, first use Dragons and that will produce a 'stable' of 8 to 15 craft that will be used by others at a fraction of the cost. In fact I am convinced that the economics of that will create a much expanded orbital tourism industry as well as a reason to create a real commercial orbital station dedicated to supporting several different businesses.  In the conference call the contract specified was for 2 flights a year. If two contracts are awarded it would be 1 flight a year I imagine.

However, while ISS is the only destination currently in orbit. A reused F9 first stage with a reused Dragon V2 capsule should  cost in the order of $40M - $50M to put up to 7 people in orbit. Less than $10M a seat, add a cargo flight that also uses a reused F9 first stage that lofts a Bigalow style station and you could put easily put up a combined commercial and tourism excursion for $15M a person.  And do it by 2018. If you charged $20M per seat for the first group, and presuming that you are keeping at least one person on the station permanently you can afford to do what they do with the ISS and keep the last craft to have docked there as a 'lifeboat'.
It is all well and good to quote those things that made it past your confirmation bias that other people wrote, but this is a discussion board damnit! Let us know what you think! And why!

Offline kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
  • Dublin/London
  • Liked: 230
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #78 on: 08/28/2014 07:26 PM »
I think this would be great and would expand space immensely ... but it needs a heck of a lot of things to go right between now and 2017/25. There's great potential in what SpaceX and others are doing but there are no "givens" yet. We will keep our fingers crossed.

While I think the idea of reusing both the Dragon capsule and the first stage in manned flights is going to revolutionize manned spaceflight in the period 2017 - 2025, I would expect that all flights on behalf of NASA in that time frame will use 4 seat, first use Dragons and that will produce a 'stable' of 8 to 15 craft that will be used by others at a fraction of the cost. In fact I am convinced that the economics of that will create a much expanded orbital tourism industry as well as a reason to create a real commercial orbital station dedicated to supporting several different businesses.  In the conference call the contract specified was for 2 flights a year. If two contracts are awarded it would be 1 flight a year I imagine.

However, while ISS is the only destination currently in orbit. A reused F9 first stage with a reused Dragon V2 capsule should  cost in the order of $40M - $50M to put up to 7 people in orbit. Less than $10M a seat, add a cargo flight that also uses a reused F9 first stage that lofts a Bigalow style station and you could put easily put up a combined commercial and tourism excursion for $15M a person.  And do it by 2018. If you charged $20M per seat for the first group, and presuming that you are keeping at least one person on the station permanently you can afford to do what they do with the ISS and keep the last craft to have docked there as a 'lifeboat'.

Offline MP99

Re: SpaceX Dragon V2 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #79 on: 08/28/2014 07:27 PM »


While I think the idea of reusing both the Dragon capsule and the first stage in manned flights is going to revolutionize manned spaceflight in the period 2017 - 2025, I would expect that all flights on behalf of NASA in that time frame will use 4 seat, first use Dragons and that will produce a 'stable' of 8 to 15 craft that will be used by others at a fraction of the cost.

CCtCap includes 2 to 6 flights to help recover development costs.

I wonder if the "no reuse" only applies to that initial 2-6 flights? They'll have more info once they've had a couple of capsules back and given them the once-over.

Cheers, Martin

Tags: