Author Topic: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis  (Read 183955 times)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
  • US
  • Liked: 2722
  • Likes Given: 1639
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #520 on: 04/12/2018 04:47 PM »
Tweet from Marcia Smith:
Quote
Culberson-schedule for cmrcl crew flights?
Lighftoof -- both companies will have uncrewed flight tests before end of 2018.  Will have to get back to you on when crewed flights are expected. I'm focused on the uncrewed flights now.

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9584
  • Liked: 1339
  • Likes Given: 849
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #521 on: 04/14/2018 01:53 PM »
One important thing that Lightfoot mentioned at the recent House Hearing is that NASA is considering spacing out some of the upcoming purchased Soyuz flights (which would mean extended stays for the astronauts) in order to make sure that there is no gap between the remaining purchased Soyuz seats and commercial crew.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44955.msg1809776#msg1809776
« Last Edit: 04/14/2018 01:54 PM by yg1968 »

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 149
  • Liked: 91
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #522 on: 04/14/2018 02:34 PM »
So, when could we expect the test flights to appear on the lauch schedules?  The pads and range require launches scheduling into the flow, presumably months in advance. At some point pretty soon, we should get a fairly concrete idea of projected lauch timeframes for the uncrewed test missions slated for this year. We are solidly into Q2 now. How much notice should we get, for instance, based on working into the Atlas v launches already scheduled.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
  • Liked: 2122
  • Likes Given: 1269
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #523 on: 05/01/2018 08:50 PM »
The GAO issues a report today on NASA's large projects.

Sounds like both Crew test flights are still planned for 2018, but might slip to 2019.

Quote
In January 2018, we found the contractors’ test flights
have slipped to 2018 and the final certification reviews
have slipped to early 2019.d
 This represents a delay of 17
months for Boeing and 22 months for SpaceX from initial
schedules. The Commercial Crew Program is tracking
risks that both contractors could experience additional
schedule delays and its schedule risk analysis indicates
that certification is likely to slip until late 2019 for SpaceX
and early 2020 for Boeing.

Interestingly enough, the issue of loading propellants after crew are on board does not appear under "Other Issues to Be Monitored" or anywhere else.
« Last Edit: 05/01/2018 08:58 PM by envy887 »

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #524 on: 05/01/2018 09:05 PM »
The GAO issues a report today on NASA's large projects.

Sounds like both Crew test flights are still planned for 2018, but might slip to 2019.


Again, this reports appears to be based on past schedules. A direct quote from the document you posted:

"Boeing has conducted
extensive wind tunnel testing and plans to complete a pad
abort test in April 2018."

Apparently, it's already May and the pad abort test hasn't been completed yet.

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1011
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 221
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #525 on: 05/02/2018 01:09 AM »
The GAO issues a report today on NASA's large projects.

Sounds like both Crew test flights are still planned for 2018, but might slip to 2019.

Quote
In January 2018, we found the contractors’ test flights
have slipped to 2018 and the final certification reviews
have slipped to early 2019.d
 This represents a delay of 17
months for Boeing and 22 months for SpaceX from initial
schedules. The Commercial Crew Program is tracking
risks that both contractors could experience additional
schedule delays and its schedule risk analysis indicates
that certification is likely to slip until late 2019 for SpaceX
and early 2020 for Boeing.

Interestingly enough, the issue of loading propellants after crew are on board does not appear under "Other Issues to Be Monitored" or anywhere else.
GAO mostly deals with schedules and budgets. Which would crew loading fall under?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
  • US
  • Liked: 2722
  • Likes Given: 1639
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #526 on: 05/02/2018 01:15 AM »
Interestingly enough, the issue of loading propellants after crew are on board does not appear under "Other Issues to Be Monitored" or anywhere else.

It was a one page summary covering both providers, not meant to be comprehensive.

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Liked: 695
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #527 on: 05/02/2018 04:20 AM »
Interestingly enough, the issue of loading propellants after crew are on board does not appear under "Other Issues to Be Monitored" or anywhere else.
GAO mostly deals with schedules and budgets. Which would crew loading fall under?

Major schedule risk. The report covers several such risks, including an obscure Boeing parachute issue we have never heard of. So if the crew loading is a major issue that could impact schedule, it would be mentioned, assuming everyone is honest.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8198
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4328
  • Likes Given: 1335
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #528 on: 05/02/2018 12:04 PM »
Interesting tidbit that results from comparing the 2017 edition of the GAO review to the 2018 edition of the GAO review.

Original certification dates:
- Boeing: 08/17
- SpaceX: 04/17

2017:
- Boeing was 14 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 10/18.
- SpaceX was 15 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 07/18.

2018:
- Boeing is 17 months behind on certification. New target certification date is 01/19.
- SpaceX is 22 months behind on cerfitication. New target certifcation date is 02/19.

In other words:
- In the past year Boeing slipped 3 months.
- In the past year SpaceX slipped 7 months.

Also of note: the past year was the second year in a row that SpaceX slipped more than Boeing. Whatever lead SpaceX had over Boeing is now completely gone. That corroborates with some of my NASA sources stating that Boeing's CFT mission will fly BEFORE SpaceX's Demo-2 mission.

I have the impression that the bigger amount of money available to Boeing ($ 4.2B versus $ 2.6B for SpaceX) is one of the reasons why Boeing slips less than SpaceX.

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 546
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #529 on: 05/02/2018 12:34 PM »
I have the impression that the bigger amount of money available to Boeing ($ 4.2B versus $ 2.6B for SpaceX) is one of the reasons why Boeing slips less than SpaceX.

I wonder how much BFR plays in as well. With Dragon 2, SpaceX's internal goals and NASA's goals are no longer in alignment. So, the extra oomph to get things done a bit quicker may not be there. Not to mention that some of SpaceX's top talent has probably moved over to BFR already if they are as far along was they seem to indicate.

Offline kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
  • Dublin/London
  • Liked: 338
  • Likes Given: 397
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #530 on: 05/02/2018 01:15 PM »
that was my thought a week or so ago looking at the requested changes in Dragon 2.  This program has dragged on years more than it was planned, plus BFR is the next big thing and I would not be surprised if the Dragon 2 program was losing some of it's shine inside SpaceX.

Choice of working on BFR vs Dragon 2 with it's endless meetings/reviews/paperwork/oversight. I know which one I would choose.

I have the impression that the bigger amount of money available to Boeing ($ 4.2B versus $ 2.6B for SpaceX) is one of the reasons why Boeing slips less than SpaceX.

I wonder how much BFR plays in as well. With Dragon 2, SpaceX's internal goals and NASA's goals are no longer in alignment. So, the extra oomph to get things done a bit quicker may not be there. Not to mention that some of SpaceX's top talent has probably moved over to BFR already if they are as far along was they seem to indicate.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • California
  • Liked: 1726
  • Likes Given: 3551
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #531 on: 05/02/2018 03:28 PM »
Interesting tidbit that results from comparing the 2017 edition of the GAO review to the 2018 edition of the GAO review.

Original certification dates:
- Boeing: 08/17
- SpaceX: 04/17

2017:
- Boeing was 14 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 10/18.
- SpaceX was 15 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 07/18.

2018:
- Boeing is 17 months behind on certification. New target certification date is 01/19.
- SpaceX is 22 months behind on cerfitication. New target certifcation date is 02/19.

In other words:
- In the past year Boeing slipped 3 months.
- In the past year SpaceX slipped 7 months.

Also of note: the past year was the second year in a row that SpaceX slipped more than Boeing. Whatever lead SpaceX had over Boeing is now completely gone. That corroborates with some of my NASA sources stating that Boeing's CFT mission will fly BEFORE SpaceX's Demo-2 mission.

I have the impression that the bigger amount of money available to Boeing ($ 4.2B versus $ 2.6B for SpaceX) is one of the reasons why Boeing slips less than SpaceX.

Also the fact that 2 years ago Boeing's chosen rocket didn't have a catastrophic failure necessitating a standdown, investigation, redesign, and requalification might have something to do with it.  Did the 2017 GAO report (which was written based on inquiry in 2016) already take into account SpaceX's delay from AMOS-6?  Though maybe your sources are saying that Dragon would have been delayed this much on its own anyway?
« Last Edit: 05/02/2018 03:28 PM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1011
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 221
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #532 on: 05/02/2018 08:36 PM »
Interestingly enough, the issue of loading propellants after crew are on board does not appear under "Other Issues to Be Monitored" or anywhere else.
GAO mostly deals with schedules and budgets. Which would crew loading fall under?

Major schedule risk. The report covers several such risks, including an obscure Boeing parachute issue we have never heard of. So if the crew loading is a major issue that could impact schedule, it would be mentioned, assuming everyone is honest.

Parachute development can run into roadblocks that require additional weeks testing.

Crew loading shouldn't be a schedule risk unless they find it takes them 3 months to get the crew in through the hatch.

Offline rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
  • USA
  • Liked: 1285
  • Likes Given: 556
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #533 on: 05/02/2018 08:59 PM »
Nobody who's skills are best-in-class and critical to the success of the Dragon2 program is leaving before the job is done and verified. The best path to BFS, is through a successful Dragon2 program culminating with the splashdown of smiling and safe Astronauts. imo.

While this NASA gauntlet may not be everything they were expecting, I'm certain they have learned many dozens of valuable lessons during the last couple years. Many that will greatly inform crew considerations on BFS.

Until I hear SpaceX themselves loudly start to leak that they are absolutely ready but being held back for some arbitrary reasons or unfounded, last minute, unneeded, way over the top requirements, I'll assume it's heads down, rock and roll...
« Last Edit: 05/02/2018 08:59 PM by rcoppola »
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1082
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 328
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #534 on: 05/02/2018 10:20 PM »
Nobody who's skills are best-in-class and critical to the success of the Dragon2 program is leaving before the job is done and verified. The best path to BFS, is through a successful Dragon2 program culminating with the splashdown of smiling and safe Astronauts. imo.

While this NASA gauntlet may not be everything they were expecting, I'm certain they have learned many dozens of valuable lessons during the last couple years. Many that will greatly inform crew considerations on BFS.

Until I hear SpaceX themselves loudly start to leak that they are absolutely ready but being held back for some arbitrary reasons or unfounded, last minute, unneeded, way over the top requirements, I'll assume it's heads down, rock and roll...

My question is what will it cost SX to dump this program and your comment seems to answer that, too much when you factor in the bad PR and the lessons that can be learned from NASA.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • California
  • Liked: 1726
  • Likes Given: 3551
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #535 on: 05/02/2018 10:41 PM »
Major schedule risk. The report covers several such risks, including an obscure Boeing parachute issue we have never heard of. So if the crew loading is a major issue that could impact schedule, it would be mentioned, assuming everyone is honest.

Parachute development can run into roadblocks that require additional weeks testing.

Crew loading shouldn't be a schedule risk unless they find it takes them 3 months to get the crew in through the hatch.

The schedule risk would be that the program doesn't have a tested and approved crew loading procedure that all stakeholders are comfortable with.  In that case, a potentially new and different procedure will have to baselined and all the related performance analysis will have to be done for that alternate.  That risks adding a delay to the beginning of operational missions, and hence would be considered a schedule risk.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4760
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1852
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #536 on: 05/03/2018 05:19 AM »
Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
SpaceX Crew Dragon ships to the Cape in about 3 months
5:00 PM - May 2, 2018

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/991784449275670528?s=19
DM

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8198
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4328
  • Likes Given: 1335
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #537 on: 05/03/2018 06:53 AM »
Interesting tidbit that results from comparing the 2017 edition of the GAO review to the 2018 edition of the GAO review.

Original certification dates:
- Boeing: 08/17
- SpaceX: 04/17

2017:
- Boeing was 14 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 10/18.
- SpaceX was 15 months behind on certification. New target certification date was 07/18.

2018:
- Boeing is 17 months behind on certification. New target certification date is 01/19.
- SpaceX is 22 months behind on cerfitication. New target certifcation date is 02/19.

In other words:
- In the past year Boeing slipped 3 months.
- In the past year SpaceX slipped 7 months.

Also of note: the past year was the second year in a row that SpaceX slipped more than Boeing. Whatever lead SpaceX had over Boeing is now completely gone. That corroborates with some of my NASA sources stating that Boeing's CFT mission will fly BEFORE SpaceX's Demo-2 mission.

I have the impression that the bigger amount of money available to Boeing ($ 4.2B versus $ 2.6B for SpaceX) is one of the reasons why Boeing slips less than SpaceX.

Also the fact that 2 years ago Boeing's chosen rocket didn't have a catastrophic failure necessitating a standdown, investigation, redesign, and requalification might have something to do with it.  Did the 2017 GAO report (which was written based on inquiry in 2016) already take into account SpaceX's delay from AMOS-6?  Though maybe your sources are saying that Dragon would have been delayed this much on its own anyway?

GAO reports on CCP as a whole. Which is more than just the spacecraft. It includes the lauch vehicle as well (among many other aspects). There is no doubt whatsoever that AMOS-6 contributed to the delay experienced by SpaceX. Simply because of the necessity to do COPV v2.0.
But GAO also notes this:
Quote from: GAO
Additionally, program officials told us that one of their greatest upcoming challenges will be to complete two oversight activities — conducting phased safety reviews and verifying that contractors meet requirements — concurrently.
Which means NASA is behind on schedule in performing the reviews. And that is exactly what ASAP has been warning NASA about for the past two years.
In the end we may see that the contractors are finally ready to fly (after having suffered their own delays) only to find out that they are not (yet) allowed to fly because NASA doesn't have its reviewing-act together.

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8396
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 313
  • Likes Given: 135
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #538 on: 05/03/2018 01:56 PM »
Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
SpaceX Crew Dragon ships to the Cape in about 3 months
5:00 PM - May 2, 2018

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/991784449275670528?s=19

About 3 months is August/September 2018. The Dragon 2 was due to launch in August so SpaceX may have slipped 1 month.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8198
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4328
  • Likes Given: 1335
Re: Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis
« Reply #539 on: 05/04/2018 06:10 AM »
Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
SpaceX Crew Dragon ships to the Cape in about 3 months
5:00 PM - May 2, 2018

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/991784449275670528?s=19

About 3 months is August/September 2018. The Dragon 2 was due to launch in August so SpaceX may have slipped 1 month.
Likely more than that. Preliminary schedules I've seen puts the Demo-1 mission in early December 2018.

Tags: