The Red arrows could also be the red & green approach lights.
Quote from: GregTheGrumpy on 03/04/2019 05:15 pmThe Red arrows could also be the red & green approach lights.Maybe a combination array of approach light and Lidar at the Red Arrow locations.Think the Blue Arrow locations are RCS exhaust ports.
I have more questions about outside features on the capsule So what are these features on the attached picture?Green arrow: What is it?2 red arrows: Lidars?2 blue arrows: What is it?Thx!
No, those are the windows. And the red arrows do not point to Draco RCS thusters. Usually RCS thrusters are mirrored on the other side, but these are not. I suspect they are something else.I added an image to point on the drogues (and drogue mortar) covers.
actually i think the cameras are in the divot between the NDS and the green arrow feature.What are the yellow/gold pads inside the nose cone?
Latest hi-res NASA photo rotated, cropped, arrowed and my humble guess what is what is following:- yellow: 2x electric & data umbilical connectors- orange: 4x forward facing Draco thrusters- red: 2x lidar sensors- purple: 1x(2x) star tracker sensor(s)- green: 1x forward facing context camera- blue: 3x air ventilation ports (used post splashdown)Any comments?
Quote from: pospa on 03/07/2019 11:36 amLatest hi-res NASA photo rotated, cropped, arrowed and my humble guess what is what is following:- yellow: 2x electric & data umbilical connectors- orange: 4x forward facing Draco thrusters- red: 2x lidar sensors- purple: 1x(2x) star tracker sensor(s)- green: 1x forward facing context camera- blue: 3x air ventilation ports (used post splashdown)Any comments?Why would you have Draco thrusters right next to the docking ring?Use of Dracos in such close proximity of the docking ring will thermally affect the docking ring in a negative way. And mind you, that docking ring is what is used to latch the nose cone in place once it is closed.
Why would you have Draco thrusters right next to the docking ring?Use of Dracos in such close proximity of the docking ring will thermally affect the docking ring in a negative way. And mind you, that docking ring is what is used to latch the nose cone in place once it is closed.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/07/2019 11:58 amQuote from: pospa on 03/07/2019 11:36 amLatest hi-res NASA photo rotated, cropped, arrowed and my humble guess what is what is following:- yellow: 2x electric & data umbilical connectors- orange: 4x forward facing Draco thrusters- red: 2x lidar sensors- purple: 1x(2x) star tracker sensor(s)- green: 1x forward facing context camera- blue: 3x air ventilation ports (used post splashdown)Any comments?Why would you have Draco thrusters right next to the docking ring?Use of Dracos in such close proximity of the docking ring will thermally affect the docking ring in a negative way. And mind you, that docking ring is what is used to latch the nose cone in place once it is closed.I'm fairly certain Hans stated those are Dracos. Also if you look at other images of these four notional thrusters it looks like exhaust marks around them (though I have no idea what kind of residue the hypergolics leave - it could also be heating artifacts). Regardless, I do think these are thrusters.
Just something I noticed. The four black openings are centered around the docking hatch and its gear, which in turn is offset from the actual centerline of the spacecraft.
Quote from: darkenfast on 03/07/2019 01:28 pm Just something I noticed. The four black openings are centered around the docking hatch and its gear, which in turn is offset from the actual centerline of the spacecraft. I also wouldn't think there are dracos there.
How many total Draco Thrusters on this Dragon?
Latest hi-res NASA photo rotated, cropped, arrowed and my humble guess what is what as follows:- yellow: 2x electric & data umbilical connectors- orange: 4x forward facing Draco thrusters- red: 2x lidar sensors- purple: 1x(2x) star tracker sensor(s)- green: 1x forward facing context camera- blue: 3x air ventilation ports (used post splashdown)Any comments? Do you agree with any of my guesses?
Now obviously they are Dracos that they avoid firing in near proximity to the station, and they may in fact be more of a backup set for emergency deorbit. But they are Dracos.
Yes, after seeing that during the coverage it is pretty clear that the 4 forward thrusters are indeed the primary deorbit thrusters. (My post was made pre-deorbit)
Quote from: Lars-J on 03/10/2019 11:49 pmYes, after seeing that during the coverage it is pretty clear that the 4 forward thrusters are indeed the primary deorbit thrusters. (My post was made pre-deorbit)It is my understanding that they are the primary orbital maneuvering thrusters as well. If Dragon needs to change an orbit, it uses the nose thrusters.
Elon Musk"I'd like to also express a great appreciation for NASA, Space-Ex would not be here without NASA without the incredible work that was done before Space-Ex even started and without the support after Space-Ex did start, so thank you."This comment really impresses me and I think a lot of the SpaceEx fanpersons would do well in remembering just how true this message from Mr Musk really is. It is always respectful to at least acknowledge previous efforts and how they help with current and future successes.Mr Musk just gained some "rep points" in my book.
And now for the other end...I don't profess to have watched much of this due to hopper fascination so this may be a bit clueless. When I saw D2 from underneath as it was setting on the pad it appeared to me that the Super Dracos were covered up, either with a panel that covered that entire rectangular area or with individual 'corks'. What is the story there if there is one?
Quote from: OxCartMark on 03/12/2019 10:16 pmAnd now for the other end...I don't profess to have watched much of this due to hopper fascination so this may be a bit clueless. When I saw D2 from underneath as it was setting on the pad it appeared to me that the Super Dracos were covered up, either with a panel that covered that entire rectangular area or with individual 'corks'. What is the story there if there is one?thrusters are all capped for launchthe ones that aren't used (super dracos) are capped for landing too
"Regular Dracos are much less expensive and are only reused when they haven't suffered too much damage from in-space use, reentry heating and exposure to sea-water. To give an idea: on re-flown cargo Dragons a significant number of the RCS Dracos has been replaced with new ones. As such the term "This makes sense, but do you have any reference? In some of the pre-launch briefings, Hans has said, they reuse "almost everything" without being more specific.
As such the term "reused" for re-flown cargo Dragons is a tad misleading. "Rebuilt" is more in line with reality.
Quote from: Jcc on 03/13/2019 10:04 am"Regular Dracos are much less expensive and are only reused when they haven't suffered too much damage from in-space use, reentry heating and exposure to sea-water. To give an idea: on re-flown cargo Dragons a significant number of the RCS Dracos has been replaced with new ones. As such the term "This makes sense, but do you have any reference? In some of the pre-launch briefings, Hans has said, they reuse "almost everything" without being more specific.Woods170 has sources in SpaceX.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/13/2019 08:11 amAs such the term "reused" for re-flown cargo Dragons is a tad misleading. "Rebuilt" is more in line with reality.Didn't EM mention at some point in the past that, quite contrary to the F9 boosters, "rebuilding" the cargo Dragons doesn't actually save a whole lot (if any) cash compared to building a new one for each flight? Maybe it's more like an exercise to understand what actually gets fried during an orbital reentry and what can be reused after that.Celestar
The SuperDracos (abort thrusters) are covered with blow-out plugs that are designed to stay in place during the entire launch phase, in-space operations, reentry and landing.They are only blown-out when the SuperDracos are actually used.The blow-out plugs for the SuperDracos serve multiple purposes: prevention of FOD damage as well as protecting the SuperDracos against seawater intrusion upon splash-down and subsequent recovery operations.
Also, Hans' "almost everything" has the word "almost" in it. Notable things that are either completely refurbished, or outright replaced, on each re-flown cargo Dragon, are:- Draco RCS thrusters- Main heatshield- Backshell SPAM- CBM- Parachutes (drogues and mains)You will note that those are exactly the things that either get exposed to reentry (heating) effects or get directly exposed to sea water.But those items constitute a small minority of the sheer number of components of a cargo Dragon. Just about everything that is inside the waterproofed shell of a cargo Dragon is indeed reused with little to no refurbishment or replacement. Things such as:- Pressure vessel (aka the weldment)- Backshell panels- Service section structural components- Most tankage, plumbing and valves for RCS, propulsion, ECS and consumables- Avionics- Wiring harnasses- Just about everything else inside the pressure vessel that is part of cargo Dragon (other than cargo)- CBM hatch- Side hatch- Optical sensors and cameras- Nav lights- Etc, etc, etc.
Quote from: Celestar on 03/13/2019 10:45 amQuote from: woods170 on 03/13/2019 08:11 amAs such the term "reused" for re-flown cargo Dragons is a tad misleading. "Rebuilt" is more in line with reality.Didn't EM mention at some point in the past that, quite contrary to the F9 boosters, "rebuilding" the cargo Dragons doesn't actually save a whole lot (if any) cash compared to building a new one for each flight? Maybe it's more like an exercise to understand what actually gets fried during an orbital reentry and what can be reused after that.CelestarWhat they learned from reusing/rebuilding cargo Dragon was partially applied to Crew Dragon and will be applied to Starship. Some of what they learned was also used during the (currently on hold) efforts to reuse the upper stage of F9.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/13/2019 11:38 amSome of what they learned was also used during the (currently on hold) efforts to reuse the upper stage of F9.How seriously was this effort conducted? I suppose reusing the upper stage is a bit pointless if the entire vehicle will be replaced by SH/SS, but I'm curious about these efforts. Was it put on hold only because the work would be superfluous, or also because it was deemed technically impractical? My understanding of some of the debate (here and elsewhere) was that it would cut dearly into the payload margin, and would therefore not be economical.
Some of what they learned was also used during the (currently on hold) efforts to reuse the upper stage of F9.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/13/2019 10:50 amAlso, Hans' "almost everything" has the word "almost" in it. Notable things that are either completely refurbished, or outright replaced, on each re-flown cargo Dragon, are:- Draco RCS thrusters- Main heatshield- Backshell SPAM- CBM- Parachutes (drogues and mains)You will note that those are exactly the things that either get exposed to reentry (heating) effects or get directly exposed to sea water.But those items constitute a small minority of the sheer number of components of a cargo Dragon. Just about everything that is inside the waterproofed shell of a cargo Dragon is indeed reused with little to no refurbishment or replacement. Things such as:- Pressure vessel (aka the weldment)- Backshell panels- Service section structural components- Most tankage, plumbing and valves for RCS, propulsion, ECS and consumables- Avionics- Wiring harnasses- Just about everything else inside the pressure vessel that is part of cargo Dragon (other than cargo)- CBM hatch- Side hatch- Optical sensors and cameras- Nav lights- Etc, etc, etc.You listed the CBM in both sections as need replacement or full overhaul and as being reused with little to no refurbishment.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/13/2019 08:11 amThe SuperDracos (abort thrusters) are covered with blow-out plugs that are designed to stay in place during the entire launch phase, in-space operations, reentry and landing.They are only blown-out when the SuperDracos are actually used.The blow-out plugs for the SuperDracos serve multiple purposes: prevention of FOD damage as well as protecting the SuperDracos against seawater intrusion upon splash-down and subsequent recovery operations.Not to second guess SpaceX, but out of curiosity, how do they actually do that? - Are they air tight seals, then they are under pressure in space?- Or are they evacuated and tight seals, which means.. do they pull a vacuum on the ground prior to launch?- Or are they actually not air tight and there is a hole that equalizes the inside and outside pressure, but then how does this prevent salt water to get inside?
Which is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.
Quote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.Thank you. But NASA docking system is correct. "NASA docking system" refers to the standard docking system that is being implemented for CCP, which is NDS (NASA docking system). And although the implementation of NDS as flown on DM-1 was entirely built by SpaceX, it was still built to NDS specifications. Hence that I referred to it as NASA docking system.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/19/2019 05:40 pmQuote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.Thank you. But NASA docking system is correct. "NASA docking system" refers to the standard docking system that is being implemented for CCP, which is NDS (NASA docking system). And although the implementation of NDS as flown on DM-1 was entirely built by SpaceX, it was still built to NDS specifications. Hence that I referred to it as NASA docking system.If you mean IDSS-compliant system, then okay you aren't technically wrong - although no-one in the community refers to it that way. If you mean that SpaceX built a Nasa Docking System (i.e. same mechanism that is used on Orion/CST-100) then you are wrong - it uses a completely different attenuation system.
Quote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 05:47 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/19/2019 05:40 pmQuote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.Thank you. But NASA docking system is correct. "NASA docking system" refers to the standard docking system that is being implemented for CCP, which is NDS (NASA docking system). And although the implementation of NDS as flown on DM-1 was entirely built by SpaceX, it was still built to NDS specifications. Hence that I referred to it as NASA docking system.If you mean IDSS-compliant system, then okay you aren't technically wrong - although no-one in the community refers to it that way. If you mean that SpaceX built a Nasa Docking System (i.e. same mechanism that is used on Orion/CST-100) then you are wrong - it uses a completely different attenuation system.Attenuation system is not part of the NDS standard. SpaceX built a docking system that complies with the NDS specification. As such it is a NASA docking system, whether it is built by NASA or not.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/19/2019 08:32 pmQuote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 05:47 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/19/2019 05:40 pmQuote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.Thank you. But NASA docking system is correct. "NASA docking system" refers to the standard docking system that is being implemented for CCP, which is NDS (NASA docking system). And although the implementation of NDS as flown on DM-1 was entirely built by SpaceX, it was still built to NDS specifications. Hence that I referred to it as NASA docking system.If you mean IDSS-compliant system, then okay you aren't technically wrong - although no-one in the community refers to it that way. If you mean that SpaceX built a Nasa Docking System (i.e. same mechanism that is used on Orion/CST-100) then you are wrong - it uses a completely different attenuation system.Attenuation system is not part of the NDS standard. SpaceX built a docking system that complies with the NDS specification. As such it is a NASA docking system, whether it is built by NASA or not.Sorry, you are not correct. NDS is a Boeing built docking system for Orion and CST. IDSS is the standard/specification by which all the dockings systems, SxDS/NDS/IBDM must comply. There is no NDS specification.
SpaceX didn't build it docking system off the IDSS standard. They used the NDS IDD as the starting point for developing their version of NDS. That's because the NDS IDD was made available to them by NASA. And the fact that NASA had already written specifications for the host of gritty details (for NDS) that are not addressed in the IDSS standard. It allowed SpaceX to build their version of an IDSS-complient NDS in a much shorter time frame.As such the docking system SpaceX uses on Crew Dragon is the SpaceX implementation of NDS. Which means that the docking system follows the NDS IDD to the letter, except for those parts of the system that are not specified by the NDS IDD. Such as the attenuation system you mentioned.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/19/2019 05:40 pmQuote from: jarmumd on 03/19/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/14/2019 08:18 amWhich is why on Crew Dragon the entire docking business end is covered under a protective nose cap for reentry. All that equipment there (LIDAR, SpaceX Docking System, optical sensors, hatch, etc.) is expensive stuff. To protect it against reentry effects makes good sense. It allows all that stuff to be easily reused on a next Crew Dragon or to be reflown on the same vehicle in the role of cargo Dragon v2.Corrected that for you. It uses some parts from NDS, but most of it is SpaceX in house.Thank you. But NASA docking system is correct. "NASA docking system" refers to the standard docking system that is being implemented for CCP, which is NDS (NASA docking system). And although the implementation of NDS as flown on DM-1 was entirely built by SpaceX, it was still built to NDS specifications. Hence that I referred to it as NASA docking system.Girls, you’re both pretty... isn’t it kind of sad we have to argue over what nomenclature to use??