Quote from: MattMason on 04/20/2016 08:53 pmQuote from: docteurgeek on 04/20/2016 08:41 pmWhat is your opinion about using a refurbish first stage for the inflight abort test ?The CRS-8 recovered stage will undergo inspection and several test firings before being flown again, likely on a payload flight, in 2 or 3 months.I recall that the in-flight abort test will not attempt any kind of booster recovery, so it would be a waste to use the CRS-8 booster or any of the first recovered stages for this purpose. The F9R test stage mentioned, which only 3 engines, was last seen at Vandenburg base, used to test out tanking at the SpaceX launch pad there some time ago.Exactly. The abort will be at near max-Q. It's hard to imagine a booster in the transonic range surviving exposing a blunt nose with no control authority (part of the abort is shutting down the engines.)
Quote from: docteurgeek on 04/20/2016 08:41 pmWhat is your opinion about using a refurbish first stage for the inflight abort test ?The CRS-8 recovered stage will undergo inspection and several test firings before being flown again, likely on a payload flight, in 2 or 3 months.I recall that the in-flight abort test will not attempt any kind of booster recovery, so it would be a waste to use the CRS-8 booster or any of the first recovered stages for this purpose. The F9R test stage mentioned, which only 3 engines, was last seen at Vandenburg base, used to test out tanking at the SpaceX launch pad there some time ago.
What is your opinion about using a refurbish first stage for the inflight abort test ?
A spokesman for SpaceX told Ars Wednesday night that the company remains on track for crewed missions in 2017.
gloating over anyone's delays or difficulties is juvenile and unproductive.
Space was also "on track" for a Falcon Heavy launch to take place several years ago...delays occur and SpaceX is certainly no stranger to them, and probably will be reaquainted with them several more times, perhaps on commercial crew (again). A lot can happen and first launch of crew is still a long way off. gloating over anyone's delays or difficulties is juvenile and unproductive.
Quote from: Ike17055 on 05/12/2016 03:49 pmSpace was also "on track" for a Falcon Heavy launch to take place several years ago...delays occur and SpaceX is certainly no stranger to them, and probably will be reaquainted with them several more times, perhaps on commercial crew (again). A lot can happen and first launch of crew is still a long way off. gloating over anyone's delays or difficulties is juvenile and unproductive.I don't know what you are calling gloating. I just posted the most recent public statement from SpaceX about Crew Dragon schedule, sans commentary. SpaceX made that statement because they were asked the question.I am also skeptical of 2017 for a SpaceX flight, but it's worth noting their publicly reaffirmed plan of record.
I think that for a small company they've been busying on too many development projects. F9, F9v1.1 and later the full thrust and now recovery operations.
Quote from: bstrong on 05/12/2016 03:55 pmQuote from: Ike17055 on 05/12/2016 03:49 pmSpace was also "on track" for a Falcon Heavy launch to take place several years ago...delays occur and SpaceX is certainly no stranger to them, and probably will be reaquainted with them several more times, perhaps on commercial crew (again). A lot can happen and first launch of crew is still a long way off. gloating over anyone's delays or difficulties is juvenile and unproductive.I don't know what you are calling gloating. I just posted the most recent public statement from SpaceX about Crew Dragon schedule, sans commentary. SpaceX made that statement because they were asked the question.I am also skeptical of 2017 for a SpaceX flight, but it's worth noting their publicly reaffirmed plan of record.They are checking off some of the to do list in the engineering department too. So resources should be able to focus on less things. I think that for a small company they've been busying on too many development projects. F9, F9v1.1 and later the full thrust and now recovery operations. F9 is essentially out of the way.FH should be reasonably along it's way now. After that flies that leaves Dragon2 as the next big development.There is $2.6 billion riding on Dragon2. I think SpaceX should minimize internal pet projects like Dragon Fly and paper rockets and spacecraft for Mars. There is time for that later.
Quote from: wannamoonbase on 05/12/2016 04:46 pmI think that for a small company they've been busying on too many development projects. F9, F9v1.1 and later the full thrust and now recovery operations. At some point we're all going to have to stop thinking of SpaceX as a small company. They have ~5000 employees now. ULA has ~3400 according to their own website. ESA has ~2000 employees. NASA has ~18,000 plus contractors. SpaceX is rapidly becoming a large company, which probably means they have more resources than at least I usually default to thinking they do.
Quote from: Escapist on 05/12/2016 05:11 pmQuote from: wannamoonbase on 05/12/2016 04:46 pmI think that for a small company they've been busying on too many development projects. F9, F9v1.1 and later the full thrust and now recovery operations. At some point we're all going to have to stop thinking of SpaceX as a small company. They have ~5000 employees now. ULA has ~3400 according to their own website. ESA has ~2000 employees. NASA has ~18,000 plus contractors. SpaceX is rapidly becoming a large company, which probably means they have more resources than at least I usually default to thinking they do.I consider 100,000 a large company. But I get your point. Comparing employee count between those 3 companies is not valid since SpaceX is vertically integrated. Many of the jobs that ULA needs to support a launch vehicle are with subcontractors.
Quote from: wannamoonbase on 05/13/2016 12:08 amQuote from: Escapist on 05/12/2016 05:11 pmQuote from: wannamoonbase on 05/12/2016 04:46 pmI think that for a small company they've been busying on too many development projects. F9, F9v1.1 and later the full thrust and now recovery operations. At some point we're all going to have to stop thinking of SpaceX as a small company. They have ~5000 employees now. ULA has ~3400 according to their own website. ESA has ~2000 employees. NASA has ~18,000 plus contractors. SpaceX is rapidly becoming a large company, which probably means they have more resources than at least I usually default to thinking they do.I consider 100,000 a large company. But I get your point. Comparing employee count between those 3 companies is not valid since SpaceX is vertically integrated. Many of the jobs that ULA needs to support a launch vehicle are with subcontractors. Google got 61k employees. Highest valued public company as of yesterday at about $500b. tiny.
Am I seeing things, or is the side hatch much bigger than it was in the reveal nearly two years ago?
Is it time to rename this thread, "Crew Dragon Updates and Discussion"? The "V2" terminology appears to have disappeared entirely from Musk's/ SpaceX's lexicon.Like the purple hatch BTW, very festive.