Quote from: Chandonn on 10/30/2010 01:38 pmGuys, we need to get this thread back on topic and take the discussion to teh SpaceX Discussion thread...http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22769.msg653494Another SpaceX music video posted: http://spacex.com/multimedia/videos.php?id=54It looks like the Dragon drop test put to music.
Guys, we need to get this thread back on topic and take the discussion to teh SpaceX Discussion thread...http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22769.msg653494
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/30/2010 11:42 pmIt looks a lot like the chutes are stored in the ring outside the pressure vessel but just above the heat shield.Hasn't that fact been established a long time ago?
It looks a lot like the chutes are stored in the ring outside the pressure vessel but just above the heat shield.
Quote from: savuporo on 10/29/2010 07:46 pm7 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. Yes, but those skydivers are standing in an open doorway. They don't have to climb over each other and squeeze out of a pressure hatch after six months of zero gravity. In the Dragon you would have a difficult time just getting two people to the door at the same time. Much better to put your backup chute on the capsule. Dragon has three and only needs two for a safe landing. A single open chute would probably make for a survivable if not entirely healthy landing on water. Apollo 15 landed with only two good parachutes and the impact wasn't even severe enough to dislodge the Hassleblad camera that Jim Irwin was gripping between his knees at the time. That is a risk I would much rather take than any attempt at a bailout from a spinning, rapidly descending, crowded, capsule.
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.
The launch moved to November 19 due to range conflict with Delta 4-Heavy.
At times, it seems like SpaceX is following this formula with their scheduling:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise
Space News is now (Nov 5) saying NET November 20.
Quote from: Comga on 11/06/2010 02:04 amSpace News is now (Nov 5) saying NET November 20.Range conflight:http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22769.msg656842#msg656842
Quote from: Chandonn on 11/06/2010 09:10 amQuote from: Comga on 11/06/2010 02:04 amSpace News is now (Nov 5) saying NET November 20.Range conflight:http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22769.msg656842#msg656842December 7 (NET)http://fdfhome.gsfc.nasa.gov/fdinfo_Launch_2010.html
Quote from: savuporo on 11/05/2010 12:02 amAt times, it seems like SpaceX is following this formula with their scheduling:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoiseHa, very gooood!! Point to you!
hopefully they'll make good use of the extra time to triple check everything and continue to rehearse.
Im confused by all these range conflict slips. Is F9 just low man on the totem pole and keeps getting deferred due to other vehicles, or is there something else at play with the schedule (thanksgiving, for example)?
Quote from: chrisking0997 on 11/08/2010 08:12 pmIm confused by all these range conflict slips. Is F9 just low man on the totem pole and keeps getting deferred due to other vehicles, or is there something else at play with the schedule (thanksgiving, for example)?It is first come, first serve wrt the range. Space keeps wanting dates that other projects have already reserved, so I surmise.
