Speculation into what future versions of Dragon will involve

[Maciej Olesinski]

Few cool pictures ie. vertical draco test stand

And presentation: http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/718299main_CCP-Status-Update-1-9-13-finalSM.pdf

p.s. fancy space suit (Star Trek like )

[mlindner]

Thread on the presser here.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30772.75

[e of pi]

Nice Find!
Look at the image of the Dragon. Looks like a forward pointing conical section has been added to the base. I wonder how different this would be aerodynamically to the current flat based version?

You mean the cutaway image? That's the pressure hull as it exists. The remaining volume is the systems for the thrusters and all that, and they stripped that from that image to better show the layout of the crew area.

[mlindner]

Few cool pictures ie. vertical draco test stand

Yeah friend of mine (intern) worked on the horizontal one. Apparently Musk pressed it on them to make a horizontal jury-rig to make a video of the super draco early on before they made a proper stand.

[mlindner]

Nice Find!
Look at the image of the Dragon. Looks like a forward pointing conical section has been added to the base. I wonder how different this would be aerodynamically to the current flat based version?

You mean the cutaway image? That's the pressure hull as it exists. The remaining volume is the systems for the thrusters and all that, and they stripped that from that image to better show the layout of the crew area.

In the presentation they show an image of a dragon model in a heating chamber apparently testing something. It was stated that this is the new shape of the dragon. So there is apparently change in the outer hull of the dragon, unclear if there is any change to pressure vessel.

[Lars_J]

Nice Find!
Look at the image of the Dragon. Looks like a forward pointing conical section has been added to the base. I wonder how different this would be aerodynamically to the current flat based version?

You mean the cutaway image? That's the pressure hull as it exists. The remaining volume is the systems for the thrusters and all that, and they stripped that from that image to better show the layout of the crew area.

In the presentation they show an image of a dragon model in a heating chamber apparently testing something. It was stated that this is the new shape of the dragon. So there is apparently change in the outer hull of the dragon, unclear if there is any change to pressure vessel.

... And just as many of us have said from the start, the outline of that Dragon model in the wind tunnel looks virtually identical to a cargo Dragon. Despite what many think, it won't look that different from the current Dragon.

[Jason1701]

Few cool pictures ie. vertical draco test stand

Yeah friend of mine (intern) worked on the horizontal one. Apparently Musk pressed it on them to make a horizontal jury-rig to make a video of the super draco early on before they made a proper stand.

Possibly so Musk would have his own version of Boeing and Polaris's fancy hotfire video.

[ciscosdad]

Nice Find!
Look at the image of the Dragon. Looks like a forward pointing conical section has been added to the base. I wonder how different this would be aerodynamically to the current flat based version?

You mean the cutaway image? That's the pressure hull as it exists. The remaining volume is the systems for the thrusters and all that, and they stripped that from that image to better show the layout of the crew area.

You are correct. I should have looked more closely.

[ciscosdad]

I believe they can go to ~1.5 x the main stage diameter before they get unreasonable structural or aerodynamic stability probelems. I think I recall it being called a "hammerhead" configuration.
Not sure what sacrifices would need to be made to enable larger diameter ratios, or even if it is practically possible.

That isn't the limit at all. Atlas V has an available configuration for a 7.2m diameter fairing (for a 3.8m diameter rocket, giving a ratio of 1.9x), and that's not necessarily the upper limit:

Should a customer have a unique requirement to accommodate a larger payload, longer and wider payload fairings can be developed. Payload fairings as large as 7.2m (283 in.) in diameter and up to 32.3m (106 ft) in length have been considered. These larger fairings require moderate vehicle changes and modifications to the launch pad, which are limited mostly to secondary vertical processing facility structure. Please contact ULA for additional information on larger fairings.

http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/product_cards/guides/AtlasVUsersGuide2010.pdf

So that's what's possible for a fairing. Probably wouldn't want such a huge upper stage, but if you have a special payload that needs a 7m diameter fairing, there's nothing in principle that says it /can't/ be launched on a Falcon 9.

Thanks for that. I stand corrected.
I assume there is some practical limit, though obviously 2x or greater.
Are the limitations structural or aerodynamic? Assuming one can live with the weight of a monstrous fairing. This I guess would apply more to Falcon Heavy and any versions of Dragon designed for that.

[ArbitraryConstant]

... And just as many of us have said from the start, the outline of that Dragon model in the wind tunnel looks virtually identical to a cargo Dragon. Despite what many think, it won't look that different from the current Dragon.

It occurs to me that the pad abort test is also going to have to be damn near identical.

[RanulfC]

there went MY "speculative-idea" on the matter
http://www.nianet.org/rascal/forum2005/presentations/georgia_paper.pdf

Randy

Nice find!

Thanks but I can't take credit for "finding" it I've been collecting as much information on the various "Lenticular Reentry Vehicle" designs for quite a while and had this one when it first came out. "Pushing" maybe... Not finding

As a "side" note the LRV design dates back to the initial Apollo studies and was considered for a long while before they went with the concical design.

From a volume perspective, it seems crappier than a dragon shape.  From cross-range and larger cross-sectional area perspective, it's great (especially with the window-cover/aerosurface flaps/tabs).  Needs some superdracos and legs in there somewhere.  Looks like it's squat enough to fit beneath underpasses.

"Volume" wise it is pretty cramped. This model would "carry" four passengers and a pilot. As for fitting under an underpass that's a "given" as it's ONLY 6-feet tall

This version would (IIRC my numbers) would just barely "fit" onto the Falcon-9 body in the "standard" heat shield-down mode and for more room you could always increase the diamter and move to a "sideways" connection as is suggested in the concept.

No "Super-Draco's" needed as they design lands by parachute for final touch down. (You can look up "LRV water landing tests" to see why you want to have a parachute, just in case ) and no landing legs are needed as the heat-shield acts as the landing surface. (In the same NASA work as the water landing tests above they did studies on using a "solid" heat shield as a landing surface for flying landings. Turns out it worked pretty damn good actually, but then again Elon doesn't like "wings" or flying things as far as I can tell )

From a landed mass at Mars perspective, with those flaps, this pancake should outperform the current "red dragon" numbers by a lot.  It also allows for an easier egress of rovers and equipment.

Yes, but... 
As Jim notes a "Dragon" size vehicle wouldn't generate much lift in the Martian atmosphere. Aerobraking is a possible advantage, especially if you make the entire "vehicle" bigger, but that is far and away getting away from the topic here.
(And deployment would require some way of getting the equipment over the "lip" and then down to the ground. Shorter distance "down" but longer and more complicated distance "out" as it were )

Interesting direction.  Perhaps some of these ideas will make their way into dragon 2.

No chance there As noted Elon doesn't like "flying" things so if "wings" are useless then a "lifting-body" is probably worse

More on subject though, my understanding was that once the second stage got the Dragon on the "way" to the ISS it could/would be cut lose to reenter (return in the reusable version) and the Dragon with SDs would have enough delta-V to do everything else?

Randy

[Lar]

Re the Venture Beat article.... Why are new space suits on the list of tasks SpaceX has to execute? Wouldn't they use existing suits? (yes, they're in the slides but ... why?)

[JBF]

Re the Venture Beat article.... Why are new space suits on the list of tasks SpaceX has to execute? Wouldn't they use existing suits? (yes, they're in the slides but ... why?)

They will need suits for the test crew. Who's existing suits would they use? Most are custom per astronaut.

[Robotbeat]

Re the Venture Beat article.... Why are new space suits on the list of tasks SpaceX has to execute? Wouldn't they use existing suits? (yes, they're in the slides but ... why?)

They will need suits for the test crew. Who's existing suits would they use? Most are custom per astronaut.

Also, the space suits generally need to be different for different types of spacecraft. Or so I've read, according to a space suit manufacturer.

[Lar]

Re the Venture Beat article.... Why are new space suits on the list of tasks SpaceX has to execute? Wouldn't they use existing suits? (yes, they're in the slides but ... why?)

They will need suits for the test crew. Who's existing suits would they use? Most are custom per astronaut.

Also, the space suits generally need to be different for different types of spacecraft. Or so I've read, according to a space suit manufacturer.

I can see, if one needs custom per astronaut suits, that one would need new instances but I'm not clear on why new designs are needed.

What causes suits not to be adaptable for multiple craft types? Is this a  common thing with other pressurised suits like flight suits? Does an F16 flight suit differ in substantial ways from an F15 flight suit?

I'm just surprised that SpaceX would go to this expense.

[go4mars]

No "Super-Draco's" needed as they design lands by parachute for final touch down...and no landing legs are needed as the heat-shield acts as the landing surface.

Superdraco's and legs may be of benefit for the same reasons they are of benefit to propulsive-landing/abort dragon.

Elon doesn't like "wings" or flying things as far as I can tell )  As noted Elon doesn't like "flying" things so if "wings" are useless then a "lifting-body" is probably worse

Context.  Pretty sure he likes wings.  He used to have one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-39
And I think he still has one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Falcon_900

deployment would require some way of getting the equipment over the "lip" and then down to the ground. Shorter distance "down" but longer and more complicated distance "out" as it were

Maybe so.  I was thinking egress would include a walk or drive down the open tabs.   

[simonbp]

I don't think we can read too much into Elon's 'flying saucer' comment. He probably means 'UFO' and there are lots of alleged shapes for UFOs.

I believe the quote was that it will look "like something from the future."

Unless there's another interview I'm not aware of, Elon never said flying saucer.

Well, bummer... there went MY "speculative-idea" on the matter
http://www.nianet.org/rascal/forum2005/presentations/georgia_paper.pdf

Randy

The GE Apollo R-3 design has you beat by a few decades...

[Halidon]

Am I crazy or are those guys naked? I wasn't aware GE proposed a spacecraft with its own Sauna onboard.

[IRobot]

Am I crazy or are those guys naked?

You are not crazy, you are horny

[Lar]

Am I crazy or are those guys naked?

You are not crazy, you are horny

I thought spacemen got all the chicks.

That is one wacky craft, thanks for posting it.