SpaceX Dragon XL

[yg1968]

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

[Asteroza]

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).

[yg1968]

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

[yg1968]

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

[yg1968]

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

[Zed_Noir]

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/

[Asteroza]

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)

[Zed_Noir]

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.

[dglow]

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.

[Khadgars]

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.

[DanClemmensen]

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.

[pathfinder_01]

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.

[DanClemmensen]

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.

[Zed_Noir]

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.

[Alvian@IDN]

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

[tbellman]

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.

[Tuna-Fish]

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.

[yg1968]

Interesting slide on Dragon XL (attached):

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

Slides:
https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/03-02-2022/docs/DC0BF676E68FE1EB91942287931466DBB9799C13C5E9

https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/03-02-2022/decadal-survey-on-biological-and-physical-sciences-research-in-space-2023-2032-biological-sciences-panel-meeting-4

[whitelancer64]

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.

[gemmy0I]

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...

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.