SpaceX COTS Demo 2 Updates

[Prober]

I believe an "on-time" CRS flight would have occurred sometime in 2009. The Q1 2012 date is just the latest iteration of the schedule that has already been shifted to the right multiple times.

Ok, let's define "on-time" as being something different to being "on-schedule". In this case, on-time means occurring within a time-frame that allows NASA to have a substitute cargo vehicle after the Shuttle's retirement. NASA have bought some time for SpaceX (and the other CRS contractors) with the current cargo aboard STS-135, with provisions until late Q2 2012. SpaceX have been promising a 2011 arrival at the launch pad for the past year I believe, so NASA is well aware of what "on-time" means.

So to summarize, I would define late Q2 2012 as too close to the wire to be called on-time. Early Q1 2012, would, I presume, be satisfactory for ISS resupply needs, so I consider it on-time.

I also need to restate my initial question: would resupply flights with shorter intervals than four months, so as to "catch-up" on lost time, be of practical use to NASA/ISS?

This is only a test and after five months of no resupply from the USA Dec 2011 should be the target.

[Geron]

I'm not personally stating anything, just quoting what other ranking NASA official have said.

AFAIK the combined COTS 2/3 has always been NET late 2011 since the idea was proposed. In a development program, the smart money doesn't bet on the NET date. I wouldn't take some NASA official not spelling out the NET as an indication the date was firm.

Note that the non-combined COTS 2 was penciled in for the middle of this month, according to Chris's May article: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/05/nasa-aligning-combine-final-dragon-cots-missions/

And it's come up during the STS-135 MSB presser. The FD noted the plan is to combine and that the launch date is being evaluated, expected to be December or early 2012.

I don't think this is an official SOMD type decision yet, just the work to plan ahead of that formal announcement.

My bet is on December 2011 for combined cots mission. By December a lot of testing will be able to be done. I think they are really close to being able to launch now, we are sort of at the point now where we were in February of 2010 prior to the June 4th launch.

[Prober]

I'm not personally stating anything, just quoting what other ranking NASA official have said.

AFAIK the combined COTS 2/3 has always been NET late 2011 since the idea was proposed. In a development program, the smart money doesn't bet on the NET date. I wouldn't take some NASA official not spelling out the NET as an indication the date was firm.

Note that the non-combined COTS 2 was penciled in for the middle of this month, according to Chris's May article: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/05/nasa-aligning-combine-final-dragon-cots-missions/

And it's come up during the STS-135 MSB presser. The FD noted the plan is to combine and that the launch date is being evaluated, expected to be December or early 2012.

I don't think this is an official SOMD type decision yet, just the work to plan ahead of that formal announcement.

My bet is on December 2011 for combined cots mission. By December a lot of testing will be able to be done. I think they are really close to being able to launch now, we are sort of at the point now where we were in February of 2010 prior to the June 4th launch.

I hope Dec. 2011 is the date as the crew on the ISS is trained and expected to handle this mission.  A slip again would mean extra training for the next crew and additional costs.
 

[psloss]

I hope Dec. 2011 is the date as the crew on the ISS is trained and expected to handle this mission.  A slip again would mean extra training for the next crew and additional costs.

The training is probably standard for at least one member of the Station crews flying in this time period (before and after December).

(That included Doug Hurley on the current Shuttle crew for the hypothetical contingency case that's not needed.)

[FinalFrontier]

Great, so we have slipped again. IMO it won't be until sometime in January 2012. Granted its a very challenging mission but I was really hoping they could do this before the end of the year. Oh well. Really going to miss having operational capability after STS 135.........

[psloss]

Great, so we have slipped again.

Not officially/publicly.  As Chris noted, the mention the other day was noting one of the elements of the status quo (that teams are preparing to be able to support the combination option).

[mr. mark]

I don't see a big difference between a Dec 2011 or a Jan 2012 launch especially, if it's a combined mission ending with berthing to the ISS. This mission will push Spacex to the brink of their experience, that's why it's talking a while longer.

[hop]

I hope Dec. 2011 is the date as the crew on the ISS is trained and expected to handle this mission.  A slip again would mean extra training for the next crew and additional costs.

Huh ?

The later crews are already being trained trained for Dragon anyway. There are going to be more flights, and NASA and everyone else knows these schedules are not set in stone. Even if SpaceX were magically 100% on time, there are plenty of external factors that could force a slip.

The whole "crew X is trained for Dragon, therefore..." line of reasoning doesn't have any basis in reality.

Great, so we have slipped again. IMO it won't be until sometime in January 2012.

The end of 2011 date has always been a NET. Aerospace, Situation Normal.

[Prober]

I don't see a big difference between a Dec 2011 or a Jan 2012 launch especially, if it's a combined mission ending with berthing to the ISS. This mission will push Spacex to the brink of their experience, that's why it's talking a while longer.

I beg to differ.  I thought two Cots missions of the dragon were scheduled for 2011.   This combo mission was a fool idea IMHO.  The falcon9 should have done the two missions per the contract.  The Falcon9 needs more experience and each launch adds to that experience.

But with the slip now and Orbital also having engine issues, commercial is off to a very bad start as a contractor for the ISS.

[hop]

I beg to differ.  I thought two Cots missions of the dragon were scheduled for 2011.

Which part of No Earlier Than did you not understand ?

But with the slip now and Orbital also having engine issues, commercial is off to a very bad start as a contractor for the ISS.

This is pretty normal stuff for a significant aerospace project. It's not unique to these being commercial, and so far is not at all out of family. If this is the worst that happens in COTS, it's doing very well indeed.

[go4mars]

But with the slip now and Orbital also having engine issues, commercial is off to a very bad start as a contractor for the ISS.

Do you really want to probe into "non-commercial" performance lately as a comparison?   

[SpacexULA]

I beg to differ.  I thought two Cots missions of the dragon were scheduled for 2011.   This combo mission was a fool idea IMHO.  The falcon9 should have done the two missions per the contract.  The Falcon9 needs more experience and each launch adds to that experience.

But with the slip now and Orbital also having engine issues, commercial is off to a very bad start as a contractor for the ISS.

The long poll here is the capsules, not the launchers.  NASA is between a rock and a hard place with SpaceX.

If COTS2 and 3 had been separate this is entirely a likely possibility

COTS2 goes perfect, 3-5 months later (which was the original "gap) between these launches; SpaceX launches COTS3, but finds an simple issue to fix on the ground, but impossible to fix in orbit.  Even by SpaceX's NET date the 4th capsule is not going to be ready till spring 2012.

Under combined COTS 2/3 COTS2/3 launches, completes COTS 2 mission objectives, green lighted 1-2 weeks later for COTS 3, tries to berth and has an issue, SpaceX then splashes the COTS 2/3 vehicle, NASA/SpaceX review what ever issues caused the failure and can launch again as soon as the fix can be found.

The earlier SpaceX can successfully birth the Dragon, the sooner NASA can know where it stands on logistics.  COTS2 was going to do ISS no favors, but if skipping COTS2 brings the tang and toilet paper of COTS3 to the ISS a little later, but they get 1 more logistics flight in 2012, its a huge win for NASA.

A few week slip is not a big deal.

[vt_hokie]

This is pretty normal stuff for a significant aerospace project. It's not unique to these being commercial, and so far is not at all out of family. If this is the worst that happens in COTS, it's doing very well indeed.

That's kind of what I predicted though - despite all the hype about being so much faster, better, and cheaper, it'll really end up being pretty much more of the same!

[SpacexULA]

That's kind of what I predicted though - despite all the hype about being so much faster, better, and cheaper, it'll really end up being pretty much more of the same!

A few week slip is not anything Constellation like.

Even Apollo/Gemini/STS didn't hit all their NET numbers.

Remember part of this delay is NASA wanted more tests of the Dragon capsule before it was launched (and rightly so).

[Jason1701]

This is pretty normal stuff for a significant aerospace project. It's not unique to these being commercial, and so far is not at all out of family. If this is the worst that happens in COTS, it's doing very well indeed.

That's kind of what I predicted though - despite all the hype about being so much faster, better, and cheaper, it'll really end up being pretty much more of the same!

Well, "better" is hard to define, but you have access to "fast" and "cheap" data from SpaceX as well as Shuttle, ISS, Ares, Orion, and JWST. Why not do a comparison and see how commercial measures up?

[Seer]

The bottom line if Spacex doesn't launch cots 2/3 until next year, is that they wont have launched anything this year, and their launch rate will have reverted to the one per year rate that has been the average for the last 5 years.
 
Spacex keep promising that they will ramp up their launch rate to 5/6 per year, but they are actually going backwards in that respect. Now they will have to achieve that launch rate while at the same times developing falcon heavy and crewed dragon.

[Prober]

This is pretty normal stuff for a significant aerospace project. It's not unique to these being commercial, and so far is not at all out of family. If this is the worst that happens in COTS, it's doing very well indeed.

That's kind of what I predicted though - despite all the hype about being so much faster, better, and cheaper, it'll really end up being pretty much more of the same!

Well, "better" is hard to define, but you have access to "fast" and "cheap" data from SpaceX as well as Shuttle, ISS, Ares, Orion, and JWST. Why not do a comparison and see how commercial measures up?

Fine, The Shuttle is the only proven launcher.
Commercial has failed in all its timelines (face the facts). 
Commercial is NOT getting better.

Costs: any cost savings might have just been eaten up with the Atlantis mission.  This mission is a 12 month supply mission that commercial should have done.  How much did the mission cost?

[SpacemanInSPACE]

The bottom line if Spacex doesn't launch cots 2/3 until next year, is that they wont have launched anything this year, and their launch rate will have reverted to the one per year rate that has been the average for the last 5 years.
 
Spacex keep promising that they will ramp up their launch rate to 5/6 per year, but they are actually going backwards in that respect. Now they will have to achieve that launch rate while at the same times developing falcon heavy and crewed dragon.

Should we be counting the test flights as part of the launch rate? I mean, they can be held back by a number of external forces. For example, given its current status the COTS2 rocket could probably launch by the end of august if they wanted to, but NASA is evaluating its options.

Anyway, I'll be interested to know to how far along in development the COTS3/CR1 rocket has progressed.

[Robotbeat]

This is pretty normal stuff for a significant aerospace project. It's not unique to these being commercial, and so far is not at all out of family. If this is the worst that happens in COTS, it's doing very well indeed.

That's kind of what I predicted though - despite all the hype about being so much faster, better, and cheaper, it'll really end up being pretty much more of the same!

Well, "better" is hard to define, but you have access to "fast" and "cheap" data from SpaceX as well as Shuttle, ISS, Ares, Orion, and JWST. Why not do a comparison and see how commercial measures up?

Fine, The Shuttle is the only proven launcher.
Commercial has failed in all its timelines (face the facts). 
...
...

Both false.

[mr. mark]

COTS 2 second stage has arrived at the cape as expected.