Author Topic: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)  (Read 1064722 times)

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3900
  • Likes Given: 5274
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2440 on: 05/23/2023 09:33 pm »
Quote
Sierra Space hosted its first-ever official Dream Chaser training for astronauts, Jasmin Moghbeli (@NASA) and Satoshi Furukawa (@JAXA_en), of the upcoming #SpaceX Crew-7 mission to the @Space_Station.

Press Release:

[snip]
The astronauts – Jasmin Moghbeli (United States) and Satoshi Furukawa (Japan) – are two members of the upcoming SpaceX Crew-7 mission to the International Space Station (ISS). During their planned six-month stay, Dream Chaser will make its maiden voyage to deliver cargo to the ISS as part of NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services-2 (CRS-2) contract.
[snip]

Crew 7 is targeting August, so that would indicate the hope/possibility is that Dream Chaser could make its debut launch to the ISS somewhere in the August-February (if C7 is end of August) time period.  Presumably still a NET.  Maybe we'll get more information about a possible debut launch window in the upcoming months.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2441 on: 06/02/2023 08:30 am »
I know Dream Chaser has had its own fair share of issues causing delays, but I have to wonder if it would have been a better bet for crewed flight to ISS than Starliner is proving to be.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5487
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4320
  • Likes Given: 1759
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2442 on: 06/02/2023 01:19 pm »
I know Dream Chaser has had its own fair share of issues causing delays, but I have to wonder if it would have been a better bet for crewed flight to ISS than Starliner is proving to be.
Easy to say in retrospect. However, in 2014 when CCP was awarded, NASA thought Boeing was the conservative "sure thing" choice and SpaceX was the backup "diverse redundancy" choice. to add Dream Chaser, they likely would have removed Crew Dragon.

Offline Cherokee43v6

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • Garner, NC
  • Liked: 935
  • Likes Given: 236
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2443 on: 06/02/2023 02:02 pm »
I know Dream Chaser has had its own fair share of issues causing delays, but I have to wonder if it would have been a better bet for crewed flight to ISS than Starliner is proving to be.
Easy to say in retrospect. However, in 2014 when CCP was awarded, NASA thought Boeing was the conservative "sure thing" choice and SpaceX was the backup "diverse redundancy" choice. to add Dream Chaser, they likely would have removed Crew Dragon.

I'm not so sure that's true.  I remember, at that time, there was a lot of argument on the board here about what actual 'redundancy' meant.  The fact that Dreamchaser was intended to launch on AtlasV meant that both selections would be dependent upon a single point failure... the launch vehicle.  True redundancy meant that it was going to be SpaceX and either Boeing or Dreamchaser.
"I didn't open the can of worms...
        ...I just pointed at it and laughed a little too loudly."

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3900
  • Likes Given: 5274
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2444 on: 06/02/2023 02:43 pm »
DreamChaser has struggled just as much as Starliner and the bar for unscrewed flight is much lower than for a manned capsule.  There’s zero reason to think they’d be done by now any more than Boeing (although at least they would have been a lot cheaper).

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3900
  • Likes Given: 5274
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2445 on: 06/02/2023 02:48 pm »
True redundancy meant that it was going to be SpaceX and either Boeing or Dreamchaser.
As we found out later, NASA was very close to selecting only Boeing, so the whole “redundancy” thing in reference to the selection is greatly overblown.  Both vehicles being launched on Atlas V (one of the most reliable launchers in history) wouldn’t have mattered much.

Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2446 on: 06/02/2023 02:59 pm »
DreamChaser has struggled just as much as Starliner and the bar for unscrewed flight is much lower than for a manned capsule.  There’s zero reason to think they’d be done by now any more than Boeing (although at least they would have been a lot cheaper).

A: Dreamchaser has developed about as fast as Starliner has, despite:
    - Boeing having more internal capital and resources than Sierra Nevada/Space
    - A spaceplane being a more difficult engineering challenge than a capsule
B: NASA awarded Boeing more money than they did Sierra Nevada
C: NASA awarded significant funding to Boeing years before doing so with Sierra Nevada

All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.
Wait, ∆V? This site will accept the ∆ symbol? How many times have I written out the word "delta" for no reason?

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3900
  • Likes Given: 5274
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2447 on: 06/02/2023 03:07 pm »
Not having enough capital (yet making a much cheaper bid in an effort to win the contract) and it being harder are terrible arguments to say it’d be done sooner.  Congress slow-rolled commercial crew funding for years, which slowed both SpaceX and Boeing substantially.  There was no such funding delay with DreamChaser.

Worth remembering Boeing actually has two flights under its belt, as problematic as they were, while DreamChaser hasn’t even flown yet.  Maybe wait and see when the inaugural flight happens and how well it goes first?  I do want them to succeed, they just need to actually do it.

Blind optimism is the only reason to think SNC would magically be done sooner than Boeing.
« Last Edit: 06/02/2023 03:12 pm by abaddon »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2448 on: 06/02/2023 03:47 pm »


All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.

No, Dreamchaser is still more than a year away for launching a cargo version.  A crew version would be much further away.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2449 on: 06/02/2023 06:00 pm »
...
All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.
Cargo maybe; crew no. Meeting LoC goals has been a challenge for years, in large part due to MMOD concerns.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2450 on: 06/02/2023 06:45 pm »


All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.

No, Dreamchaser is still more than a year away for launching a cargo version.  A crew version would be much further away.
DC development slowed considerably after SNC lost commercial crew funding. Had they won then crew version should've done its maiden launched while ago. But it didn't win so here we are.


Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2451 on: 06/02/2023 06:56 pm »


All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.

No, Dreamchaser is still more than a year away for launching a cargo version.  A crew version would be much further away.
DC development slowed considerably after SNC lost commercial crew funding. Had they won then crew version should've done its maiden launched while ago. But it didn't win so here we are.

Can’t say that

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 8746
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2452 on: 06/02/2023 07:35 pm »
I've yet to see an explanation for how a crewed DC can abort from inside the fairing. The spacecraft is inside there for a reason.
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2453 on: 06/02/2023 11:26 pm »
I've yet to see an explanation for how a crewed DC can abort from inside the fairing. The spacecraft is inside there for a reason.

Crewed version wouldn't be inside a fairing, the last time I asked.

Offline JAFO

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1032
    • My hobby
  • Liked: 875
  • Likes Given: 967
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2454 on: 06/02/2023 11:50 pm »
DreamChaser has struggled just as much as Starliner and the bar for unscrewed flight is much lower than for a manned capsule.  There’s zero reason to think they’d be done by now any more than Boeing (although at least they would have been a lot cheaper).

A: Dreamchaser has developed about as fast as Starliner has, despite:
    - Boeing having more internal capital and resources than Sierra Nevada/Space
    - A spaceplane being a more difficult engineering challenge than a capsule
B: NASA awarded Boeing more money than they did Sierra Nevada
C: NASA awarded significant funding to Boeing years before doing so with Sierra Nevada

All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.
I must be reading this wrong. In A you say Boeing has more money and a spaceplane is more difficult, B that NASA gave more money to Boeing, and C NASA gave more more money to Boeing years before SNC.

But your conclusion is that SNC should be further along? Don't you mean Boeing should be further along?
Anyone can do the job when things are going right. In this business we play for keeps.
— Ernest K. Gann

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 8746
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2455 on: 06/03/2023 12:35 am »
I've yet to see an explanation for how a crewed DC can abort from inside the fairing. The spacecraft is inside there for a reason.

Crewed version wouldn't be inside a fairing, the last time I asked.

Then why do they need to put the cargo version inside a fairing, and what would change that would make the crewed version work without a fairing?
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2456 on: 06/03/2023 12:49 am »
I've yet to see an explanation for how a crewed DC can abort from inside the fairing. The spacecraft is inside there for a reason.

Crewed version wouldn't be inside a fairing, the last time I asked.

Then why do they need to put the cargo version inside a fairing, and what would change that would make the crewed version work without a fairing?

The cargo version has the aft unpressurized cargo bay and folding wings while the crew version has locked wings.  There are a great many other differences, including propulsion.

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2457 on: 06/03/2023 03:03 am »
DreamChaser has struggled just as much as Starliner and the bar for unscrewed flight is much lower than for a manned capsule.  There’s zero reason to think they’d be done by now any more than Boeing (although at least they would have been a lot cheaper).

A: Dreamchaser has developed about as fast as Starliner has, despite:
    - Boeing having more internal capital and resources than Sierra Nevada/Space
    - A spaceplane being a more difficult engineering challenge than a capsule
B: NASA awarded Boeing more money than they did Sierra Nevada
C: NASA awarded significant funding to Boeing years before doing so with Sierra Nevada

All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.
I must be reading this wrong. In A you say Boeing has more money and a spaceplane is more difficult, B that NASA gave more money to Boeing, and C NASA gave more more money to Boeing years before SNC.

But your conclusion is that SNC should be further along? Don't you mean Boeing should be further along?
The CST-100 Starliner was conceived in 2010. The Dream Chaser's origins go back to 2004, and a 2012 PowerPoint document by Giuseppe De Chiara (see attached file) explains the early genesis of the Dream Chaser as follows:
Quote
The HL-20 story was no to end since in mid 2004 Jim Benson announced that the HL-20 development would be continued by his SpaceDev as Dream Chaser spacecraft. The SpaceDev was acquired by Sierra Nevada Corporation at the very end of 2008. On 1 February 2010, Sierra Nevada Corporation was awarded $20 million under NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) phase 1 program for the development of the Dream Chaser. On 3 August 2012, NASA announced the award of $212.5 million to Sierra Nevada to continue work on the Dream Chaser under the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCAP) Program. Even if it share the same shape of HL-20, the Dream Chaser is a quite different vehicle inside using a lot of “state of the art technologies” (as carbon fiber for the pressure vessel and other structural elements).

In other words, SpaceDev decided to take over design and development of the HL-20 in mid-2004, using the HL-20 airframe as the basis for the new Dream Chaser, and development of the Dream Chaser continued despite the Sierra Nevada Corporation acquired SpaceDev in late 2008. Even if Dream Chaser has yet to make an orbital flight, the gestation of development and testing of the Dream Chaser spaceplane is more comparable to that of the X-37 (which was initially designed for launch from the Space Shuttle's cargo bay but was later reworked for launches from the Atlas V in the early 2000s) than to development of the Starliner.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2023 03:05 am by Vahe231991 »

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 8746
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2458 on: 06/03/2023 08:04 am »
I've yet to see an explanation for how a crewed DC can abort from inside the fairing. The spacecraft is inside there for a reason.

Crewed version wouldn't be inside a fairing, the last time I asked.

Then why do they need to put the cargo version inside a fairing, and what would change that would make the crewed version work without a fairing?

The cargo version has the aft unpressurized cargo bay and folding wings while the crew version has locked wings.  There are a great many other differences, including propulsion.

My point is that Dream Chaser without the fairing represents an aerodynamic challenge for the launch vehicle. This would take time and money to solve. It appears to have been enough of a problem to make the weight and expense of the folding wing mechanism and the weight and expense of the fairing worth it for the cargo version, which does not need an abort system. If it was just the cargo module that was the problem, a much smaller set of panels, such as those covering Orion's service module would have sufficed.
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: Sierra Space Dream Chaser DISCUSSION Thread (was SNC)
« Reply #2459 on: 06/03/2023 10:28 am »
DreamChaser has struggled just as much as Starliner and the bar for unscrewed flight is much lower than for a manned capsule.  There’s zero reason to think they’d be done by now any more than Boeing (although at least they would have been a lot cheaper).

A: Dreamchaser has developed about as fast as Starliner has, despite:
    - Boeing having more internal capital and resources than Sierra Nevada/Space
    - A spaceplane being a more difficult engineering challenge than a capsule
B: NASA awarded Boeing more money than they did Sierra Nevada
C: NASA awarded significant funding to Boeing years before doing so with Sierra Nevada

All things considered, I think there's lots of reasons to think they'd be more done by now than Boeing is.
Sierra Nevada strike me as a more agile company than Boeing these days, and one I’d have more faith in delivering a product on time.

 

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