Author Topic: SpaceX COTS Demo 1 Updates  (Read 651054 times)

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #360 on: 10/28/2010 07:43 pm »
I assume the Dragon capsule is designed to survive a ballistic (and passive) reentry, right?

So, if control is lost on the Dragon capsule, its orbit would decay and it'd survive reentry (although not landing!) if all power is somehow lost after it reached orbit and had shed its service module?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #361 on: 10/29/2010 08:16 am »
I assume the Dragon capsule is designed to survive a ballistic (and passive) reentry, right?

So, if control is lost on the Dragon capsule, its orbit would decay and it'd survive reentry (although not landing!) if all power is somehow lost after it reached orbit and had shed its service module?

Well parts of it would survive landing - lol.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline e of pi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 406
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #362 on: 10/29/2010 10:32 am »
I assume the Dragon capsule is designed to survive a ballistic (and passive) reentry, right?

So, if control is lost on the Dragon capsule, its orbit would decay and it'd survive reentry (although not landing!) if all power is somehow lost after it reached orbit and had shed its service module?

I may be wrong, but orientation is a big issue there. If oriented properly before power loss? I think it could survive entry, you'd just essentially be replacing the impulse of a retro burn with the cumulative drag effects. However, I'm not so sure it could survive intact it not oriented properly.

Parachutes might also be an issue. The capsule might survive entry only to plow into the ocean going far faster than designed.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6503
  • Liked: 4623
  • Likes Given: 5353
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #363 on: 10/29/2010 03:15 pm »
I assume the Dragon capsule is designed to survive a ballistic (and passive) reentry, right?

So, if control is lost on the Dragon capsule, its orbit would decay and it'd survive reentry (although not landing!) if all power is somehow lost after it reached orbit and had shed its service module?

I may be wrong, but orientation is a big issue there. If oriented properly before power loss? I think it could survive entry, you'd just essentially be replacing the impulse of a retro burn with the cumulative drag effects. However, I'm not so sure it could survive intact it not oriented properly.

Parachutes might also be an issue. The capsule might survive entry only to plow into the ocean going far faster than designed.

Remember the Soyuz missions where the Service Module failed to detach as planned?  As soon as the reentry forces tore it away the capsules righted themselves.  Given sufficient stability, (including sheding the Trunk) a stable capsule will enter heatshield first.  And when it does that, one would suppose that its subsonic velocity at a few miles altitude would be close to nominal regardless of how it reentered.  Of course, if it lost power, it might not deploy the parachutes.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #364 on: 10/29/2010 03:49 pm »
Using a terminal velocity calculator, SpaceX numbers for Dragon and a few guesses I got a terminal velocity for it  of 323.386 kph/200.943 mph.  Even if off by 25% that's NOT a soft landing.
DM

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1003
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #365 on: 10/29/2010 06:06 pm »
300kph is borderline doable for jumping out of an airplane. Not nice, but tolerable.

Can Dragon's hatch be blown for emergency skydiving ops ?
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #366 on: 10/29/2010 06:22 pm »
Using a terminal velocity calculator, SpaceX numbers for Dragon and a few guesses I got a terminal velocity for it  of 323.386 kph/200.943 mph.  Even if off by 25% that's NOT a soft landing.
200mph sounds about right. I wonder if a single astronaut could bail out at that speed, within half a minute? It should be technically possible (though not at all safe), and smallish reserve parachutes are rather lightweight (a couple 8 kg).

EDIT:Thanks, savuporo. :)
« Last Edit: 10/29/2010 06:35 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1003
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #367 on: 10/29/2010 06:25 pm »
200mph sounds about right. I wonder if a single astronaut could bail out at that speed, within half a minute? It should be technically possible (though not at all safe), and smallish reserve parachutes are rather lightweight (a couple kg).
I just went and weighed mine : it 8 kilograms rig, 150sqft main canopy.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #368 on: 10/29/2010 06:48 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
« Last Edit: 10/29/2010 06:49 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #369 on: 10/29/2010 06:50 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
I'm sure you'd have no problem getting a parachute opening spec at something like 350kph if you had to.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 2575
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #370 on: 10/29/2010 07:21 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
I'm sure you'd have no problem getting a parachute opening spec at something like 350kph if you had to.
The problem will be to get as much as 7 astronauts out of the hatch in time.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #371 on: 10/29/2010 07:22 pm »
Why blow that tiny side hatch? Couldn't they blow the much larger CBM & exit the top? Or both?
« Last Edit: 10/29/2010 07:27 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #372 on: 10/29/2010 07:27 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
I'm sure you'd have no problem getting a parachute opening spec at something like 350kph if you had to.
The problem will be to get as much as 7 astronauts out of the hatch in time.
Quite true. Unless you split the capsule in half, I don't see how 7 could exit in time (after the main chutes failed but before hitting the water). For one or two or maybe even three, it might be possible.

A Vostok repeat could be done. Better to just ensure the main chutes work.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4223
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #373 on: 10/29/2010 07:30 pm »
Repeat: blow the CBM
DM

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #374 on: 10/29/2010 07:37 pm »
Repeat: blow the CBM

before that, why not just have a backup set of chutes inside the vehcile itself, if the mains don't deploy, blow the hatch and deploy chute from inside the vehicle. 

I thought all systems on a "man rated" spacecraft had to be triple failure tollerant, so, are there already backup chute systems designed into Orion/Soyuz today?
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1003
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #375 on: 10/29/2010 07:39 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
Erm. I have done headdown dives at near 300kph, and have no problems braking down from there to a normal box position and deploying at regular 170kph.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #376 on: 10/29/2010 07:40 pm »
Repeat: blow the CBM

Manned Dragon won't have a CBM. The docking hatch will have a much smaller diameter.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1003
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #377 on: 10/29/2010 07:46 pm »
Have to free-fall a bit to slow to a normal human TV though since most 'chutes I've seen spec at ~140kts = 160mph/260kph.
I'm sure you'd have no problem getting a parachute opening spec at something like 350kph if you had to.
The problem will be to get as much as 7 astronauts out of the hatch in time.
7 skydivers can exit a plane in 2-3 seconds. Even with this being more difficult in freefall, if you start jumping at 15000feet ( regularly considered safe jumping altitude ) that gives you quite a bit of time to get out.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Chandonn

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1241
  • "Pudding!!! UNLIMITED Rice Pudding!!!"
  • Lexington, Ky
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #378 on: 10/29/2010 08:19 pm »
Manned Dragon won't have a CBM. The docking hatch will have a much smaller diameter.

Acually, I'm not sure if they will have a CBM or not.  There may be a simple CBM-to-LIDS adapter on manned Dragon -- just to keep the designs as similar as possible.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #379 on: 10/29/2010 08:28 pm »
Manned Dragon won't have a CBM. The docking hatch will have a much smaller diameter.

Acually, I'm not sure if they will have a CBM or not.  There may be a simple CBM-to-LIDS adapter on manned Dragon -- just to keep the designs as similar as possible.
And with a "lifeboat Orion," there isn't a requirement to be able to undock/unberth without station power.

This is starting get off-topic, and it's my fault.

What do people give odds for successful reentry and recovery of COTS Demo 1 Dragon, assuming it gets to orbit?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0