Author Topic: SpaceX / NASA Collaboration - Red Dragon - Goddard Teleconference. (Read 30584 times)

Marslauncher · « **Reply #20 on:** 09/21/2016 07:40 PM »

Enhances NASA's EDL capability - every opportunity makes us smarter.

Performance - Large mass - Large ballistic coefficient.
Entry Guidance - Powered flight - Supersonic retro propulsion.
Ground Guidance - How landing, rocket plumes interaction.

Will be the Dragon 2 for Commercial Crew - Stresses will not be a craft that can send humans to Mars. (too small).

SpaceX have been very good at listening to updates and suggestions (sensors on the Dragon), trades for mission success / what they want to accomplish.

Likelihood of success - High level top down - Reasonable likelihood, increased with NASA support. Both NASA and SpaceX understand it could fail, NASA felt it was a good chance of success. Aggressive timeline, worthwhile for participation.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #21 on:** 09/21/2016 07:48 PM »

Slide 8 - Summary of NASA participation

6 technical agreements.

1) Deep space comm, Data Relay Tracking, MRN Service.
2) Deep space nav, cruise trajectories, inflight nav support. Trajectory correction maneuvers.
3) EDL - Review and advice - JPL - JSC. - Positive collaboration.
4) Aero sciences activities - takes the information and plugs in to future NASA missions.
5) Flight Systems Technical review - capture flight systems activities, help with radios and tranceivers.
6) Planetary Protection. - Govt approvals.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #22 on:** 09/21/2016 07:53 PM »

Daily / Weekly updates - NASA - SpaceX on a technical level.

Quarterly reviews also - just to make sure on the same page with partners. (2 already) way to gauge SpaceX progress. NASA has milestones SpaceX has to meet.

No concerns so far.

Q - What risk NASA is exposed to.
A - Mostly financial and getting the data they expect.

Is SpaceX looking at taking payloads even on the 2018 mission, not sure the payload interfaces of mass available yet.

NASA has a list of payloads from the initial submission.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #23 on:** 09/21/2016 07:55 PM »

Here are the slides

Edit: added PDF version

2nd Edit: audio now available too, see this post

Marslauncher · « **Reply #24 on:** 09/21/2016 07:55 PM »

Potentially some cost if SpaceX will be going anyway (who pays for the payload?) unclear yet.

Q) If SpaceX are able to propose this cheaper and faster, is there any thought on if NASA would make this an agency mission?

A) No, it would have had to have been thought of and proposed many years ago.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #25 on:** 09/21/2016 07:55 PM »

Excellent! Thanks for the slides

Bynaus · « **Reply #26 on:** 09/21/2016 07:57 PM »

Quote from: rdale on 09/21/2016 07:08 PM

Quote from: Micahgtb on 09/21/2016 07:04 PM
Is there a way to listen in?

Only if invited, the telecon is not public until the archive is posted later.

http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/archivelist.htm

The file is online, direct link to pptx: http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/%7Efiso/telecon/McAlister_9-21-16/McAlister_9-21-16.pptx

Marslauncher · « **Reply #27 on:** 09/21/2016 08:01 PM »

Q) Will the EDL data be shared to ANY company NASA collaborates with?

A) NO! Tech is all SpaceX, DATA has the ability to use the EDL internally only.

Q) Will other companies have to develop their own EDL or will they get the benefit of the partnership through NASA.

A) Lawyer states IP provisions should be public. All the terms and conditions are available online.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #28 on:** 09/21/2016 08:02 PM »

Flight data will not be disseminated, only some of the EDL.

Q / A time!

Marslauncher · « **Reply #29 on:** 09/21/2016 08:06 PM »

Planetary Protection question - (Taking forever to get to a point....)

What kind of benefit to NASA is SLS if SpaceX able to do it without it.

Plan to convert EM1 to be around Mars instead and then test re-entry to Earth? (one persons suggestion at least)

... this question has gone all weird...

Robotbeat · « **Reply #30 on:** 09/21/2016 08:06 PM »

Holy cow, someone is making an epically long speech right now under guise of a "question." (Mostly complaining about duplication and reinventing the wheel or something?)

Marslauncher · « **Reply #31 on:** 09/21/2016 08:08 PM »

Putting a large mass into Mars atmosphere has never been done before.. multiple capabilities allows for greater chance of success. ISS COTS as an example.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #32 on:** 09/21/2016 08:09 PM »

Well that was it for Q/A ! :/ Everyone excited to see Elon's talk next week!

DOCinCT · « **Reply #33 on:** 09/21/2016 08:11 PM »

Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/21/2016 07:55 PM

Here are the slides

Edit: added PDF version

Thanks as spirit.as.utexas.edu site blocked for some reason

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #34 on:** 09/21/2016 08:13 PM »

Quote from: Marslauncher on 09/21/2016 08:09 PM

Well that was it for Q/A ! :/ Everyone excited to see Elon's talk next week!

If that's the end of the event, thanks very much for the excellent notes (I know from experience that's not easy and you did great). Everyone drop him a like or three.

Marslauncher · « **Reply #35 on:** 09/21/2016 08:15 PM »

Yep! That concluded the teleconference

The slides certainly help!

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #36 on:** 09/21/2016 08:29 PM »

Audio is now on-line too, copy attached.

vaporcobra · « **Reply #37 on:** 09/21/2016 08:49 PM »

Quote from: Marslauncher on 09/21/2016 07:55 PM

Potentially some cost if SpaceX will be going anyway (who pays for the payload?) unclear yet.

Q) If SpaceX are able to propose this cheaper and faster, is there any thought on if NASA would make this an agency mission?

A) No, it would have had to have been thought of and proposed many years ago.

Wow, maybe I'm misinterpreting but this response seems extraordinarily arrogant.

rockets4life97 · « **Reply #38 on:** 09/21/2016 08:58 PM »

Quote from: vaporcobra on 09/21/2016 08:49 PM

Quote from: Marslauncher on 09/21/2016 07:55 PM
Potentially some cost if SpaceX will be going anyway (who pays for the payload?) unclear yet.

Q) If SpaceX are able to propose this cheaper and faster, is there any thought on if NASA would make this an agency mission?

A) No, it would have had to have been thought of and proposed many years ago.

Wow, maybe I'm misinterpreting but this response seems extraordinarily arrogant.

I think the correct interpretation here is that for Red Dragon to become a NASA mission would require a much longer process proposal and review process. As a private SpaceX mission that isn't required.

Lar · « **Reply #39 on:** 09/21/2016 09:07 PM »

Quote from: Chris Bergin on 09/21/2016 08:13 PM

Quote from: Marslauncher on 09/21/2016 08:09 PM
Well that was it for Q/A ! :/ Everyone excited to see Elon's talk next week!

If that's the end of the event, thanks very much for the excellent notes (I know from experience that's not easy and you did great). Everyone drop him a link or three.

(emphasis mine because I like to tease Chris)...
Or a like or 17.

Marslauncher thank you very much for this. I was caught by surprise, didn't know this talk was coming up. Much appreciated!