You realize the Falcon 9 + Dragon V2 stack is scheduled to fly early next year right?
Quote from: joek on 10/17/2014 07:57 pmThen you should stay away from safety- or life-critical systems. That is a very different world, where opportunities to iterate in the real world are limited, testing is not a sufficient defense, and mistakes can cause death, dismemberment and destruction.I am calling you on this. Test is the ONLY true way you can determine unknown unknowns. A billion CDRs doesn't help you find unknown unknowns, just your known knows or perhaps known unknowns. ...
Then you should stay away from safety- or life-critical systems. That is a very different world, where opportunities to iterate in the real world are limited, testing is not a sufficient defense, and mistakes can cause death, dismemberment and destruction.
In the expensive world of aeronautical research and development, the best test is extensive computer modeling before you begin building anything.
Quote from: QuantumG on 10/17/2014 06:05 amWho said it was a cake walk?Chris, respectfully, you have said that all Boeing had produced was some Power Points and Word documents. Though you did not use the term specific term cake walk, what you did say implied that Boeing had not done serious or scholarly work.
Who said it was a cake walk?
Quote from: TomH on 10/17/2014 08:57 pmIn the expensive world of aeronautical research and development, the best test is extensive computer modeling before you begin building anything.Worked great on Ares I.
I'm not Chris, Robotbeat is. Again, Powerpoint and Word documents can be plenty hard. People make a career out of it. What it isn't is integrated hardware, which various people keep trying to insist Boeing has, but can't show us any evidence.
In any case, I think it is premature to say that "SpaceX is on the verge of completing its CDR".
Quote from: QuantumG on 10/18/2014 01:56 amI'm not Chris, Robotbeat is. Again, Powerpoint and Word documents can be plenty hard. People make a career out of it. What it isn't is integrated hardware, which various people keep trying to insist Boeing has, but can't show us any evidence.Nor does SpaceX.
Yeah, the Dragon 2 unveiling showed hardware integration, certainly more than Boeing has.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/18/2014 02:03 amYeah, the Dragon 2 unveiling showed hardware integration, certainly more than Boeing has.Don't play his goalpost moving game.
So, we again come back to the fact that everyone who is claiming Boeing has done more work than the other competitors has no way to prove their claims. As long as everyone agrees to this, I think we know how we should treat these claims.
“NASA approved SpaceX’s request to split some content from its Integrated Critical Design Review (Milestone 13) to two, resulting in Milestone 13A and 13B,” said Kraft. “More recently, NASA approved SpaceX’s request to shift some content from Milestone 13A to two new milestones, Milestone 13C and 13D, along with commensurate funding. SpaceX has completed the newly formed Milestone 13A. Milestones 13B, 13C and 13D are planned for later this year. None of the original milestone content was removed from the agreement, just shifted among the milestones, nor was any content added to the agreement.”
As has been said multiple times on here, dismissing CDR as "just a powerpoint" shows a complete lack of knowledge of how engineering design works.To dumb it down somewhat, CDR is when the blueprints get approved. Here are just a few examples of tricky design issues that have to be tackled to ...