Author Topic: SpaceX Dragon XL  (Read 275501 times)

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #660 on: 03/09/2022 02:39 am »
The smart thing to do would be cancel Dragon XL in favor of Starship GLS. The smarter thing to do would be cancel Gateway.

Unwise. I wouldn't even consider considering Starship until it flies to at least LEO and successfully returns to the launch site - several times. Once it has consistently demonstrated that it will actually live up to all the hype, then maybe. All of us have the highest expectations for Starship but as of now it is not a viable option. It has only made low level hops using engines that will not even be on the operational vehicle and the booster has never flown at all. Don't let your enthusiasm get ahead of reality.
Apparently the first GLS mission is in NET 2026. The first Starship HLS mission is in 2024, and Artemis 3 depends on Starship HLS. Thus, Artemis is already dependent on the success of Starship and depending on another simpler variant does not appreciably increase the risk to the Artemis program.  As I said in the portion of my post that you trimmed, this GLS variant can be expendable, like HLS, and a Starship GLS mission would still be cheaper than a Dragon XL mission.

According to the last GAO report (GAO-21-306, May 2021), it seems that the first Dragon XL mission was supposed to be ready for Artemis III but it seems that some people are expecting Gateway and Dragon XL to be ready after Artemis III.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50467.msg2311451#msg2311451
« Last Edit: 03/09/2022 03:07 am by yg1968 »

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #661 on: 03/09/2022 02:54 am »
Too bad XL isn't available now/soonish. Would have provided a potential option/alternative to Cygnus for a potential ISS reboost role by a vehicle with an active and qualified launcher (F9HR).

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #662 on: 03/28/2022 11:37 pm »
Quote from: NASA FY23 Budget
The DSL (Deep Space Logistics) team and GLS contractor, SpaceX, will continue special studies during FY 2022 in advance of the first mission Authority to Proceed (ATP). [...]

ATP has not yet been provided for the first mission.

See pages 92 and 93:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy23_nasa_budget_request_full_opt.pdf
« Last Edit: 03/29/2022 02:25 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #663 on: 03/31/2022 12:43 am »
The first Dragon XL mission has been pushed back to Artemis V in 2028:

See slide 7:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy23_nasa_budget_request_summary.pdf
« Last Edit: 03/31/2022 12:59 am by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #664 on: 04/07/2022 02:21 am »
As pointed out in the GLS thread, NASA has issued a new RFI that opens the door to Starship delivering cargo to Gateway, in addition to (or instead of ?) Dragon XL:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48353.msg2357503#msg2357503

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #665 on: 04/19/2022 03:39 am »
Our own @vaporcobra have written a Teslarati news article on the recent NASA RFI for Gateway Logistics Services.

https://www.teslarati.com/nasa-spacex-dragon-xl-lunar-cargo-spacecraft-rfi/

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #666 on: 04/21/2022 12:42 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #667 on: 04/21/2022 02:09 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.


Offline dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Liked: 2295
  • Likes Given: 4433
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #668 on: 04/21/2022 02:15 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.

National Security payloads will be counting on Falcon 9 and Heavy for years to come.

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1750
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1132
  • Likes Given: 3156
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #669 on: 04/21/2022 02:29 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.

I don't quite understand.  NASA already provided a contract for Dragon XL right?  And I can't see Falcon 9/Heavy being retired in the foreseeable future, Starship is a long ways away from being certified to fly all the missions those two fly, if ever.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5484
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4316
  • Likes Given: 1757
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #670 on: 04/21/2022 02:33 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.
I think NASA has imposed a mass constraint on the GLS module, which will be docked to Gateway for six months. I suspect SpaceX will therefore produce a version of Dragon XL no engine and deliver it to Gateway using a standard Cargo Starship.

Offline pathfinder_01

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2074
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #671 on: 04/21/2022 02:37 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.

Dragon XL is supposed to remain docked at the gateway for up to a year. I am not sure if Starship could remain for a year but Starship could in theory launch and bring it back to earth for reuse. In addition with it might be possible to lengthen the pressurized section to carry a bit more cargo.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5484
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4316
  • Likes Given: 1757
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #672 on: 04/21/2022 02:44 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.

I don't quite understand.  NASA already provided a contract for Dragon XL right?  And I can't see Falcon 9/Heavy being retired in the foreseeable future, Starship is a long ways away from being certified to fly all the missions those two fly, if ever.

Are you also skeptical about Vulcan? If not, why are the two different with regard to "certification"?
If Starship works at all:
Starship and Vulcan are both supposed to fly this year. We have no no data that I know of that allows us to think Vulcan will get "certified" for any particular use before Starship does. SpaceX will bid Starship for any mission that on which a customer will accept it, because SpaceX can make a higher profit with Starship than with F9 or FH.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #673 on: 04/21/2022 03:46 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.
I think NASA has imposed a mass constraint on the GLS module, which will be docked to Gateway for six months. I suspect SpaceX will therefore produce a version of Dragon XL no engine and deliver it to Gateway using a standard Cargo Starship.
Maybe or SpaceX might build a soft capture docking port for Starship. Hence my comment about a suitable docking port.

The mass constraint NASA imposed fly in the face of the Lunar Starship docking for extended periods of time to the gateway.

Offline Alvian@IDN

Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #674 on: 04/21/2022 03:53 am »
So the question is, will SpaceX drop Dragon XL and go all in on Starship in the cislunar sphere, or hedge their bets (to cover a perceived need for a particular class of cislunar vehicle/deep space vehicle)
My guess is that if Starship is operational before SpaceX received the project go ahead from NASA. We will only have the rendered images of the Dragon XL. Since it is likely cheaper for SpaceX to build a few Starships with a suitable docking port for Gateway logistics than developing a limited use expendable spacecraft. Never mind the need to retire the Falcon Heavy as soon as possible when the Starship enters service.

I don't quite understand.  NASA already provided a contract for Dragon XL right?  And I can't see Falcon 9/Heavy being retired in the foreseeable future, Starship is a long ways away from being certified to fly all the missions those two fly, if ever.
It's basically only a risk-reduction studies. And since NASA didn't give an ATP (Authority To Proceed), this contract is basically on hold. NASA then release a new RFI on how to improve from this contract, hence recent discussion
My parents was just being born when the Apollo program is over. Why we are still stuck in this stagnation, let's go forward again

Offline tbellman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 964
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #675 on: 04/21/2022 07:43 am »
I think NASA has imposed a mass constraint on the GLS module, which will be docked to Gateway for six months. I suspect SpaceX will therefore produce a version of Dragon XL no engine and deliver it to Gateway using a standard Cargo Starship.

For the original GLS procurement (that was won by Dragon XL), NASA had set a limit of 14 tonnes for the vehicle.  However, NASA officials have later said that in hindsight that was not a necessary limit.  In particular, Mark Wiese, manager of deep space logistics for Lunar Gateway at NASA, said in a Main Engine Cut Off podcast that "going forward, that requirement will be gone".

https://mainenginecutoff.com/podcast/161, starting at 12:39.

One reason the limit was set to 14 tonnes, was regarding how much thrust and propellant would be needed by the Lunar Gateway PPE in order to control the docked stack.  At that time, they were also thinking the GLS vehicle should be able to stay for three years, which would drive up propellant usage, but that was then changed to just one year.  And with more analysis and knowledge gained later, they then realized that Gateway could handle much more than 14 tonnes, but that was presumably after the RFP went out and thus too late to change.

Another reason for the 14 tonne limit, was that that was about as much as current launch vehicles could throw towards NRHO.  In order to not get proposals that couldn't be launched, they thus set that limit.  Later they have realized that that was unnecessary; GLS providers need to arrange their own launch, so they would not propose solutions they couldn't launch anyway, so setting a mass limit for that reason was just silly.

Offline Tuna-Fish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Finland
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #676 on: 04/21/2022 09:30 pm »
I don't quite understand.  NASA already provided a contract for Dragon XL right?  And I can't see Falcon 9/Heavy being retired in the foreseeable future, Starship is a long ways away from being certified to fly all the missions those two fly, if ever.

Yes, NASA provided a contract for Dragon XL. Then, on April 1st, NASA posted this RFI related to the contract. Scroll down past the initial legalese to the list with the Questions subheading.

It's very hard to read this RFI as anything other than NASA asking SpaceX to offer Starship as a replacement for Dragon XL.

Unwise. I wouldn't even consider considering Starship until it flies to at least LEO and successfully returns to the launch site - several times. Once it has consistently demonstrated that it will actually live up to all the hype, then maybe. All of us have the highest expectations for Starship but as of now it is not a viable option. It has only made low level hops using engines that will not even be on the operational vehicle and the booster has never flown at all. Don't let your enthusiasm get ahead of reality.

I would 100% agree, except that the mission that the Gateway Logistics Service contract supports already depends on Starship to work. If Starship is delayed, so is the rest of Artemis. Because of this, going with Starship for the GLS retires risk. No matter how badly it's delayed, there is no additional risk to the program.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
« Last Edit: 05/17/2022 01:14 am by yg1968 »

Offline whitelancer64

Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #678 on: 05/16/2022 02:54 pm »
Interesting slide on Dragon XL (attached):

https://twitter.com/jenekuns/status/1507214653382103041

The slide on additional sample return is far more intriguing to me, but it's off topic for this thread.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline gemmy0I

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 295
  • Liked: 595
  • Likes Given: 1958
Re: SpaceX Dragon XL
« Reply #679 on: 05/16/2022 05:47 pm »
This slide, showing the delivery architecture for GLS/Dragon XL missions, is particularly interesting. That launch vehicle upper stage looks an awful lot like Starship... :D

Granted, the diagram is clearly intended to be a generic placeholder (its depiction of fairing separation doesn't really make sense for either Starship or Falcon Heavy), but it's an interesting view into how NASA and SpaceX are currently envisioning this working behind the scenes. While Falcon Heavy is no doubt still the "official" baseline launch vehicle for Dragon XL as it is guaranteed to be available, switching it out for the "chomper" satellite-launching version of Starship would be an easy and sensible upgrade if it happens to be available. Given that the first GLS launch isn't scheduled until 2024, there's a solid chance of that being the case, even if "fancier" versions of Starship like the HLS lander aren't ready yet.

The availability of Chomper-Starship as a launch vehicle for Dragon XL also opens up interesting possibilities for recapture and reuse of the DXL vehicle post-mission. Starship could bring DXL back to Earth safely ensconced in its payload bay, similarly to how MPLMs were reused in the Shuttle era. This might even be feasible without in-space refueling of Starship, if DXL could (gradually) make its way back down to LEO without spending much fuel, e.g. via ballistic departure from lunar orbit followed by gradual aerobraking.

Incidentally, Starship-based recovery of DXL would be a very effective solution to the sample return problem.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1