The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
Quote from: ThereIWas3 on 12/15/2014 05:14 pmThe 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo(i.e. two crew members at the controls)
Quote from: Garrett on 12/22/2014 09:12 amQuote from: ThereIWas3 on 12/15/2014 05:14 pmThe 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo(i.e. two crew members at the controls)IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.It puzzle me why you need 2 pilots to monitor an autonomous automatic docking, unless you are proposing manual docking to the ISS.
Quote from: Garrett on 12/22/2014 09:12 amQuote from: ThereIWas3 on 12/15/2014 05:14 pmThe 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo(i.e. two crew members at the controls)IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.
It seems like capability to evacuate 7 would be a good thing to have. If something major requiring evacuation caused Soyuz to be unavailable it would be kind of rude to just leave three people behind.
It seems like capability to evacuate 7 would be a good thing to have. If something major requiring evacuation caused Soyuz to be unavailable it would be kind of rude to just leave three people behind. Two qualified pilots would be because they want piloted mode to be redundant in itself and not just a redundancy for automatic operation.
What are the engines Boeing is planning to use for CST abort system? I mean those 4 big nozzles at the bottom of SM, I suppose those are abort motors?
Quote from: fast on 12/25/2014 09:49 amWhat are the engines Boeing is planning to use for CST abort system? I mean those 4 big nozzles at the bottom of SM, I suppose those are abort motors? RS-88 by Aerojet-Rocketdyne. N2O4/MMH so that propellant can be used during mission (retro burn primarily) if not for abort. - Ed Kyle
Does anyone have a link to a data sheet of general CST 100 properties? Like how is it powered? How long can it stay under its own LSS. How does the integrated LAS work? Propellants used? etc. And maybe some launch vehilce data would be nice too.THANK YOU!!!!
Quote from: tesla on 01/23/2015 09:03 amDoes anyone have a link to a data sheet of general CST 100 properties? Like how is it powered? How long can it stay under its own LSS. How does the integrated LAS work? Propellants used? etc. And maybe some launch vehilce data would be nice too.THANK YOU!!!! Old, but probably most comprehensive: http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Reiley_2-6-13/Power: Batteries with solar panel "mission kit" to help maintain chargeNominal Endurance: 48 hours.LAS is a pusher setup using 4 modified RS-88 motors mounted in the Service module along with attitude control thrusters mounted in "doghouse" pods around the SM. Propellants are NTO/MMH.Launch Vehicle is Atlas V 422. Usually lots of information about Atlas available, but this will be a new variant so not as much data out there.
The arrays are a mission kit applied on the underside of the service module, between the abort thrusters. Bottom right on the attached image,