Author Topic: SpaceX COTS Demo 2/3 Updates (THREAD 2) (Read 787800 times)

8900 · « **Reply #180 on:** 09/20/2011 02:50 pm »

bad news, it seems to be the case that SpaceX is not allowed to combine COTS2/3 and dock with ISS
http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Private_US_capsule_not_to_dock_with_ISS_999.html

mr. mark · « **Reply #181 on:** 09/20/2011 02:53 pm »

This has been gone over on many websites. NASA states this is a false report.

kevin-rf · « **Reply #182 on:** 09/20/2011 02:54 pm »

Quote

bad news, it seems to be the case that SpaceX is not allowed to combine COTS2/3 and dock with ISS
http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Private_US_capsule_not_to_dock_with_ISS_999.html

My read,

They have not provided Russia enough paper work yet, you know those little papers with green ink on them. Once the paperwork is delivered in an armored car, all will be fine.

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #183 on:** 09/20/2011 03:03 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 09/20/2011 02:54 pm

Quote
bad news, it seems to be the case that SpaceX is not allowed to combine COTS2/3 and dock with ISS
http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Private_US_capsule_not_to_dock_with_ISS_999.html

My read,

They have not provided Russia enough paper work yet, you know those little papers with green ink on them. Once the paperwork is delivered in an armored car, all will be fine.

My prediction: The rendezvous and berthing will go ahead and Roskosmos won't utter a peep. It will turn out to be unauthorised briefing by someone with their own agenda or a mistranslation of a completely different statement.

In any case, Dragon will berth at the US segment. Correct me if I'm wrong but the Russians have little or no say what happens there, do they?

iamlucky13 · « **Reply #184 on:** 09/20/2011 07:22 pm »

Proximity operations pose a potential risk to the station as a whole. I'm sure the Russians have some input. I seriously doubt they're holding up the approval.

Prober · « **Reply #185 on:** 09/20/2011 07:26 pm »

Quote from: iamlucky13 on 09/20/2011 07:22 pm

Proximity operations pose a potential risk to the station as a whole. I'm sure the Russians have some input. I seriously doubt they're holding up the approval.

this point was talked about early in the year, we are well past issues with the Russian partner.

hop · « **Reply #186 on:** 09/20/2011 08:37 pm »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 09/20/2011 03:03 pm

It will turn out to be unauthorised briefing by someone with their own agenda or a mistranslation of a completely different statement.

I suspect it's even simpler than that. From the article:

Quote from: Solovyov

A flight by the Dragon to the ISS, but without berthing, has tentatively been scheduled for the end of this year.

The combined mission has still not been formally approved AFAIK, so this is an accurate description of the current plan of record, even if everyone is working toward a combined flight. Whether Solovyov went into more detail isn't clear, but it wouldn't be surprising if the editors chopped out the context. This appears to be a rehash of the rian.ru story discussed earlier in the thread http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26616.msg807876#msg807876 so it's had the opportunity to be mangled a number of times.

Quote

In any case, Dragon will berth at the US segment. Correct me if I'm wrong but the Russians have little or no say what happens there, do they?

No, there are still potential impacts (hopefully not literally) on their side. Plume impingement, RFI, station attitude come to mind.

Quote from: iamlucky13 on 09/20/2011 07:22 pm

I seriously doubt they're holding up the approval.

Indeed. The whole partnership just received a harsh reminder about value of redundant access, hard to see the Russians wanting to slow things down without reason.

spacetraveler · « **Reply #187 on:** 09/20/2011 10:44 pm »

Quote from: dragon44 on 09/19/2011 02:01 am

Quote from: Jim on 09/18/2011 02:42 pm
Wrong. COTS 2 objectives do not require approach to ISS. Spacex could fly this on their own. They are the ones wanting to combined COTS 2 &3, so it is their delay, not NASA's.

Know a little more before trying to correct people
If by approach you mean traveling up the r-bar, that is correct. However, there are other objectives for C2 that require ISS.

From http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/553720main_Lueders%20C2C3%20Combine%20Assessment%205-2011.pdf
C2 objectives include "AGPS, Abort, Commanding from ISS, RGPS, Free Drift"

From http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/580957main_August%202011_CSD%2060%20Day%20Report_508.pdf
"C2 mission objectives include demonstrating ISS/Dragon communications and flight navigation, control, and contingency operations near ISS"

Obviously "Commanding from ISS" needs NASA support and astronauts trained on using the CUCU unit to send commands. RGPS is Relative GPS which requires ISS to send it's raw GPS signal to Dragon. I think there is enough here to show ISS is required to meet all of the C2 objectives.

That doesn't mean their aren't some C2 objectives that could be met with a non-NASA supported flight, but you would still end up with a C2/C3 mission for the third Dragon flight.

Good explanation there, thanks for the clarification.

balan h20 · « **Reply #188 on:** 09/21/2011 03:20 am »

There is one reason for the Russians to want to slow things down. Revenue to thier program will be cut when SpaceX starts hauling freight and Astraunauts up. That will be a major revenue cut in thier pockets for ferry services. The longer they can keep up the ferry routine the more they make.

Jorge · « **Reply #189 on:** 09/21/2011 04:28 am »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 09/20/2011 03:03 pm

In any case, Dragon will berth at the US segment. Correct me if I'm wrong but the Russians have little or no say what happens there, do they?

You are wrong.

mr. mark · « **Reply #190 on:** 09/23/2011 10:57 pm »

Updated info on mission.. Courtesy of aviationweek.com

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2011/09/19/AW_09_19_2011_p50-370132.xml&headline=SpaceX,%20Roscosmos%20Cool%20Their%20Jets

yg1968 · « **Reply #191 on:** 09/26/2011 01:04 am »

There are some surprises in the minutes to the August 2-3 2011 Joint Meeting of the NAC Space Operations and Exploration Committees. On pages 8-9:

Quote

Mr. Lindenmoyer presented first, with a status update on COTS, including the latest information from Orbital Sciences Corporation (Orbital) and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX). Both are progressing well, though there have been some delays due to the typical development challenges. SpaceX successfully completed its first COTS demonstration mission in December, 2010, and has demonstration flights C2 and C3 scheduled for November 2011 and

March 2012. The company asked NASA to consider combining the integration of cargo on the two missions, accelerating the C3 mission objectives (ISS berthing) on C2 flight. NASA has been studying the safety, reliability, and technical aspects of this proposal and is close to a formal approval. However, questions remain due to the SpaceX desire to do secondary payloads. Therefore, NASA is looking at the proposal more closely, and SpaceX is looking at changes that might mitigate risks. SpaceX will conduct the third flight regardless, so this is an opportunity to do berthing early. A successful C2 flight means that the C3 flight would have a “bonus” objective. NASA will assess how well the mission meets the total objective. The milestones are based on objective criteria; NASA has paid not for a certain number of rockets, but for the demonstration missions. The last payments are small.

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/582570main_NACEXP-SpaceopsminutesAugust2-32011_508.pdf

docmordrid · « **Reply #192 on:** 09/26/2011 01:40 am »

A bonus mission for C3?

Let the speculation begin

Antares · « **Reply #193 on:** 09/26/2011 01:43 am »

I think you're reading too much into this. This is positive spin from the COTS Program Manager.

go4mars · « **Reply #194 on:** 09/26/2011 02:27 am »

Quote from: docmordrid on 09/26/2011 01:40 am

A bonus mission for C3?

Let the speculation begin

Either jalapeno-havarti or muenster. Old cheddar would be too obvious.

beancounter · « **Reply #195 on:** 09/26/2011 06:52 am »

My understanding is that SpaceX is paid for milestones achieved on the flights, nothing more, nothing less. If NASA added a milestone relating to cargo for the combined 2/3 flight, then they'd add a milestone payment. If there's a combined mission, the milestone payments are still made for milestones achieved not for the flight per se.

yg1968 · « **Reply #196 on:** 09/26/2011 02:29 pm »

I sort of wonder about that too. Any bonus milestones would have to be accepted by SpaceX. They are unlikley to accept bonus milestones unless it pays for the entire flight ($130 million for Falcon 9 and Dragon).

arkaska · « **Reply #197 on:** 09/26/2011 02:43 pm »

Quote from: docmordrid on 09/26/2011 01:40 am

A bonus mission for C3?

Let the speculation begin

Probably just means that C3 might carry cargo.

boaorm · « **Reply #198 on:** 09/26/2011 03:01 pm »

Folks,

what's being said is that if the C3 milestones are met during the C2 flight, Spacex will still do the C3 flight. To me that reads clearly that there will be two rocket launches/missions regardless of whether the C2/C3 milestones are combined into one mission or not.

Now this could mean nothing more than Spacex planning to achieve all milestones in one mission(in November per early August), and perform the first resupply mission in March 2012 (again, per early August).

starsilk · « **Reply #199 on:** 09/26/2011 03:07 pm »

sounds to me like they're a bit nervous that C2+C3 won't succeed - ie NASA (or the Russians) won't like the C2 performance enough to allow C3 to take place.

that way they're all planned (logistics etc) for a C3 launch. if it turns out that C2+C3 IS a success, then they have a spare rocket and capsule for a 'bonus mission'.