We can load the prop then load the astronauts.
You meant you want to load the dragon 2 with astronauts propulsively on the rocket!?
Quote from: gongora on 05/10/2018 07:32 pmTweets from Brendan Byrne:QuoteMusk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5Nothing like a good old NSF forum "tempest in a teapot" based on incomplete information...
Tweets from Brendan Byrne:QuoteMusk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5
Musk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5
Elon Musk: “Yeah, yeah, absolutely, yeah. I think that issue's been somewhat overblown. We certainly could load the propellant and then have the astronauts board Dragon. That's certainly something we could do.”So not to start another tempest, someone could perhaps ask Elon if the propellants have to be sub cooled? Or just extra chilly is enough.
Quote from: jak Kennedy on 05/11/2018 07:30 amElon Musk: “Yeah, yeah, absolutely, yeah. I think that issue's been somewhat overblown. We certainly could load the propellant and then have the astronauts board Dragon. That's certainly something we could do.”So not to start another tempest, someone could perhaps ask Elon if the propellants have to be sub cooled? Or just extra chilly is enough.Sub-cooling is tied-in hard to the propellant loading GSE. By the time the crew has finally been loaded, and the rocket is ready to go, most, if not all, of the density advantage is gone. Which is probably fine for CCP missions given that the payload is only going to LEO. Propellant sub-cooling, followed by immediate launch, is primarily beneficial for heavy lift to GTO/GEO.Reading between the lines of Elon's comment it is clear that 'Load-n-go' is still his preferred way of launching CCP missions. Note his use of the words "could" in stead of "will".
Stephen Clark, Spaceflight Now: Hi Elon. Thanks for chatting with us before the launch. We know astronauts will one day be launching on the Block 5, and I understand NASA is still studying whether they're going to be comfortable with the Load and Go fueling process. And I know you and SpaceX have a different view of the risk in that operation. So do you think you can convince NASA of the safety of the Load and Go fueling process? And would you be willing to change or adjust that procedure for Commercial Crew if NASA requests it. Thanks.Elon Musk: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, yeah. I think that issue's been somewhat overblown. We certainly could load the propellant and then have the astronauts board Dragon. That's certainly something we could do. But I don't think it's going to be necessary, anymore than passengers on an aircraft need to wait until the aircraft is fully fueled before boarding. I mean, that would be a crazy delay if everyone off of the aircraft and until it gets fueled, now you can't board. But no, it's normal to load propellant, to load fuel on an aircraft while boarding, or have the fuel fully loaded before boarding. It's not a fundamental risk. You know, we need to make sure about things like the COPVs. I'd say like, the only material risk I'm aware of is the COPV, and the amount of testing and research that's gone into COPV safety is gigantic. This is by far the most advanced pressure vessel ever developed by humanity. It's nuts. And I've personally gone over the test design, I've lost count how many times. But the top engineering minds at SpaceX have agonized over this. We've tested the living daylights out of it. We've been in deep, deep discussions with NASA about this. And I think we're in a good situation. We do have a contingency plan for the COPV, which I'd say would really be the only thing that represents a risk of any materiality. Which would be a switch from high-strength carbon fiber with aluminum liner to a, sort of like, an Inconel sphere. We have a contingency plan for that, if need be. But I think that is unlikely to be necessary. But that's really the only thing that I'd consider to be the most [legitimate?] of the risks. But yeah, this is really not something that should be needed. I mean, we obviously have competitors that are willing to make hay out of it, but I really do not see this as a risk representing any materiality. And worst case scenario, we've already demonstrated that Dragon is fully capable of a safe abort from zero velocity, zero altitude, and escaping whatever fireball that may occur on the pad, even in a worst case situation. So I really do not think this represents a safety issue for astronauts. But if, for any reason, NASA felt different, we can adjust our operational procedures to load propellant before the astronauts board. But I really think this is an overblown issue.
Quote from: gongora on 05/10/2018 07:32 pmTweets from Brendan Byrne:QuoteMusk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5Here's the whole transcript of that question and answerQuoteStephen Clark, Spaceflight Now: Hi Elon. Thanks for chatting with us before the launch. We know astronauts will one day be launching on the Block 5, and I understand NASA is still studying whether they're going to be comfortable with the Load and Go fueling process. And I know you and SpaceX have a different view of the risk in that operation. So do you think you can convince NASA of the safety of the Load and Go fueling process? And would you be willing to change or adjust that procedure for Commercial Crew if NASA requests it. Thanks.Elon Musk: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, yeah. I think that issue's been somewhat overblown. We certainly could load the propellant and then have the astronauts board Dragon. That's certainly something we could do. But I don't think it's going to be necessary, anymore than passengers on an aircraft need to wait until the aircraft is fully fueled before boarding. I mean, that would be a crazy delay if everyone off of the aircraft and until it gets fueled, now you can't board. But no, it's normal to load propellant, to load fuel on an aircraft while boarding, or have the fuel fully loaded before boarding. It's not a fundamental risk. You know, we need to make sure about things like the COPVs. I'd say like, the only material risk I'm aware of is the COPV, and the amount of testing and research that's gone into COPV safety is gigantic. This is by far the most advanced pressure vessel ever developed by humanity. It's nuts. And I've personally gone over the test design, I've lost count how many times. But the top engineering minds at SpaceX have agonized over this. We've tested the living daylights out of it. We've been in deep, deep discussions with NASA about this. And I think we're in a good situation. We do have a contingency plan for the COPV, which I'd say would really be the only thing that represents a risk of any materiality. Which would be a switch from high-strength carbon fiber with aluminum liner to a, sort of like, an Inconel sphere. We have a contingency plan for that, if need be. But I think that is unlikely to be necessary. But that's really the only thing that I'd consider to be the most [legitimate?] of the risks. But yeah, this is really not something that should be needed. I mean, we obviously have competitors that are willing to make hay out of it, but I really do not see this as a risk representing any materiality. And worst case scenario, we've already demonstrated that Dragon is fully capable of a safe abort from zero velocity, zero altitude, and escaping whatever fireball that may occur on the pad, even in a worst case situation. So I really do not think this represents a safety issue for astronauts. But if, for any reason, NASA felt different, we can adjust our operational procedures to load propellant before the astronauts board. But I really think this is an overblown issue.So potentially a "COPV 3.0" or "feul before crew" options.It didn't seem that the COPVs were really the issue for "crew before load".Rather it was Jim's points of stable vs dynamic conditions in general.Musk's being so sanguine is fascinating.
If it’s an Inconel PV it isn’t really a COPV because it lacks the CO. So more just PV 3.0. Unless I totally misunderstood what he was suggesting with the Inconel comment.
Quote from: cppetrie on 05/14/2018 11:13 pmIf it’s an Inconel PV it isn’t really a COPV because it lacks the CO. So more just PV 3.0. Unless I totally misunderstood what he was suggesting with the Inconel comment.Without any knowledge of what they did, I could see using a thin Inconel shell in place of the Aluminum one.
Several members of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel said that as long as potential hazards can be controlled, loading crew before fueling is finished could be acceptable."My sense is that, assuming there are adequate, verifiable controls identified and implemented for the credible hazard causes, and those which could potentially result in an emergency situation … it appears load-and-go is a viable option for the program to consider," panel member Capt. Brent Jett Jr. (Ret.) said during Thursday's meeting....The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel said the NASA Commercial Crew program is expected to make a decision soon on the appropriate sequence for loading crew and fuel into SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket.
Quote from: wolfpack on 05/09/2018 01:10 amQuote from: woods170 on 05/08/2018 08:01 pmNo. Those are the options. Either NASA certifies (or waivers) "fuel-n-go" or Crew Dragon won't be certified at all.We fuel airplanes with passengers aboard.Guess we have to learn to do it with rockets, too.Not at all a valid analogy. Cryogens are not involved.
Quote from: woods170 on 05/08/2018 08:01 pmNo. Those are the options. Either NASA certifies (or waivers) "fuel-n-go" or Crew Dragon won't be certified at all.We fuel airplanes with passengers aboard.Guess we have to learn to do it with rockets, too.
No. Those are the options. Either NASA certifies (or waivers) "fuel-n-go" or Crew Dragon won't be certified at all.
They can’t argue for greater reliance on LAS as the solution to “fuel and go” potential risks,
and then say nothing is different from how launches have always been conducted...but that is pretty much what has happened here.
These images of the commercial crew astronauts training have likely already been posted but, in case they haven't, here is a link to the images:https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasakennedy/sets/72157655607394806https://twitter.com/Commercial_Crew/status/1004351233845612544
Quote from: yg1968 on 06/06/2018 03:12 pmThese images of the commercial crew astronauts training have likely already been posted but, in case they haven't, here is a link to the images:https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasakennedy/sets/72157655607394806https://twitter.com/Commercial_Crew/status/1004351233845612544Any ideas why the lack of SpaceX images of crew dragon and astronauts. All images we got are some weird angle barely showing anything. Are there even any images of final crew dragon interior? And what about space suit images? All we got are 2-3 highly photoshopped ones not showing much details.
I have a dumb question. As the LOX warms it'll vent, no big deal. As the RP-1 warms and expands do they use the feed line to "vent" (like when draining after an abort), or is there a separate umbilical to capture overflow? I assume they don't run it down the side of the rocket.