SpaceX COTS Demo 2/3 Updates (THREAD 2)

[apace]

From ISS On-Orbit Status Report for 30/11/2011.
CDR Dan Burbank spent several hours on the scheduled updating of CUCU (COTS UHF Communications Unit) software & Dragon CCP (Crew Command Panel) firmware. After working on the updates of the redundant CUCU strings and the primary & spare CCPs, the subsequent Dryden test of the CCPs was delayed due to frequency clearance issues.

Don't understand why this cannot be done remotely. Sounds like hours of wasted time for an ISS CDR.

[Space Pete]

Don't understand why this cannot be done remotely. Sounds like hours of wasted time for an ISS CDR.

All explained in this post - manual loading of CDs/USB sticks and cabling is required:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26616.msg834543#msg834543

[apace]

Don't understand why this cannot be done remotely. Sounds like hours of wasted time for an ISS CDR.

All explained in this post - manual loading of CDs/USB sticks and cabling is required:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26616.msg834543#msg834543

Yes, I know. But there are other ways today to do updates.

[Space Pete]

Yes, I know. But there are other ways today to do updates.

But that would probably require hardware modifications to the CUCU and CCP to allow them to be networked into the station.

[apace]

Yes, I know. But there are other ways today to do updates.

But that would probably require hardware modifications to the CUCU and CCP to allow them to be networked into the station.

Of course. I was surprised how this kind of work goes at the ISS. I expected something else.

[mb199]

These are the steps that need to happen before COTS Demo 2/3 will take place

1. The ISS must be fully maned with 6 crew members after the next Soyuz launch is complete the TBD will be removed and a date for launch will be set.

2. Before the 3rd part of the COTS mission the dragon flight everything must go well before the final GO to dock with the ISS.

[iamlucky13]

Don't understand why this cannot be done remotely. Sounds like hours of wasted time for an ISS CDR.

All explained in this post - manual loading of CDs/USB sticks and cabling is required:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26616.msg834543#msg834543

Yes, I know. But there are other ways today to do updates.

Not if a device isn't designed to be updated any other way, which could be done for many reasons, including reducing development effort or isolation from other systems.

[2552]

Pared Funding for Space Taxis Ups Ante for SpaceX Test Flight

“From a SpaceX standpoint, we’re ready to go in December, but we have to coordinate that with NASA and any other missions that are going to the space station. What I’ve heard through the grapevine is that NASA is maybe aiming for a February launch,” Musk said. “We’re not going to launch until we’re ready and until NASA thinks we’re ready.”

[manboy]

These are the steps that need to happen before COTS Demo 2/3 will take place

1. The ISS must be fully maned with 6 crew members after the next Soyuz launch is complete the TBD will be removed and a date for launch will be set.

2. Before the 3rd part of the COTS mission the dragon flight everything must go well before the final GO to dock with the ISS.

It's actually berthing not docking.

[Comga]

These are the steps that need to happen before COTS Demo 2/3 will take place

1. The ISS must be fully maned with 6 crew members after the next Soyuz launch is complete the TBD will be removed and a date for launch will be set.

2. Before the 3rd part of the COTS mission the dragon flight everything must go well before the final GO to dock with the ISS.

It's actually berthing not docking.

mb199's statements are unsubstantiated and unsourced.
His first statement is not a single coherent sentence.
There is no way mb199 can state that these are all the necessary and sufficient conditions for berthing. 
This has been discussed over and over.
And all you can says is "berthing, not docking"?
(You editied your remarks.  Did you type "birthing"?)
:-)

[Space Pete]

From ISS On-Orbit Status Report for 01/12/2011.

CUCU Clarification:
Yesterday's software upload for the CUCU (COTS UHF Communications Unit), which the ground successfully checked out, supports the first SpaceX Dragon Demo flight early next year. The Combined Demo, which would merge Demo 2 & Demo 3, mentioned in yesterday's report, continues to be under study and has not yet been approved for implementation. Yesterday's planned firmware update and checkout of the two CCPs (Crew Command Panels) has been deferred due to insufficient time. They will be required for the Dryden frequency test – which currently has frequency clearance issues. [Currently the soonest the delayed Dryden frequency test can be performed is 12/06, followed by 30 days in which the test can be performed, to support the SpaceX Demo-1 flight, planned for early 2012.]

[rcoppola]

I am reminded of an article I recently read about the Armed services deploying iOS and Android devices in the field. Many reasons listed. Among them are: They are much, much cheaper to deploy then custom built units and by the time a custom built unit goes through all processes, it's already 6 years obsolete. Less learning curve, easier to update, service and cheaper to replace.. etc..

In reading many posts as to how the ISS is readying for Dragon, I feel like SpaceX is trying to back-fit into non-optimal and perhaps some outdated or overly complicated ISS systems.

Now, I fully admit I really don't know, so I ask those who know or can surmise. Are we, or will we see a collision between Commercial tech and NASA/Govt tech?

The Govt can spend 30 Million on a quadruple redundant, stands up against the wrath of God type circuit board, but a SpaceX can't and shouldn't be asked to if they can do it simpler and cheaper and maybe just have a dual redundancy etc...

[Robotbeat]

It's not raw capability or redundancy you're paying for, it's "process" and "traceability" and things like that.

[Jim]

I am reminded of an article I recently read about the Armed services deploying iOS and Android devices in the field. Many reasons listed. Among them are: They are much, much cheaper to deploy then custom built units and by the time a custom built unit goes through all processes, it's already 6 years obsolete. Less learning curve, easier to update, service and cheaper to replace.. etc..

In reading many posts as to how the ISS is readying for Dragon, I feel like SpaceX is trying to back-fit into non-optimal and perhaps some outdated or overly complicated ISS systems.

Now, I fully admit I really don't know, so I ask those who know or can surmise. Are we, or will we see a collision between Commercial tech and NASA/Govt tech?

The Govt can spend 30 Million on a quadruple redundant, stands up against the wrath of God type circuit board, but a SpaceX can't and shouldn't be asked to if they can do it simpler and cheaper and maybe just have a dual redundancy etc...

No, the CUCU is all Spacex hardware and it is independent of ISS avionics. 

Typical NASA bad, nuspace good POV.   

[Comga]

From ISS On-Orbit Status Report for 01/12/2011.

CUCU Clarification:
Yesterday's software upload for the CUCU (COTS UHF Communications Unit), which the ground successfully checked out, supports the first SpaceX Dragon Demo flight early next year. The Combined Demo, which would merge Demo 2 & Demo 3, mentioned in yesterday's report, continues to be under study and has not yet been approved for implementation. Yesterday's planned firmware update and checkout of the two CCPs (Crew Command Panels) has been deferred due to insufficient time. They will be required for the Dryden frequency test – which currently has frequency clearance issues. [Currently the soonest the delayed Dryden frequency test can be performed is 12/06, followed by 30 days in which the test can be performed, to support the SpaceX Demo-1 flight, planned for early 2012.]

What is the "Dryden frequency test"?
A quick search lead back to this forum and the source of this one article. :-P
What are "frequency clearance issues" and how do they get resolved?

[Robotbeat]

Why aren't the two missions combined officially, yet? What's specifically the hold-up on combining?

(The secondary payloads wouldn't really affect this too much since COTS-2 would send Dragon close to ISS anyway, and COTS-3 wouldn't start until the secondaries are far, far away.)

[rcoppola]

I am reminded of an article I recently read about the Armed services deploying iOS and Android devices in the field. Many reasons listed. Among them are: They are much, much cheaper to deploy then custom built units and by the time a custom built unit goes through all processes, it's already 6 years obsolete. Less learning curve, easier to update, service and cheaper to replace.. etc..

In reading many posts as to how the ISS is readying for Dragon, I feel like SpaceX is trying to back-fit into non-optimal and perhaps some outdated or overly complicated ISS systems.

Now, I fully admit I really don't know, so I ask those who know or can surmise. Are we, or will we see a collision between Commercial tech and NASA/Govt tech?

The Govt can spend 30 Million on a quadruple redundant, stands up against the wrath of God type circuit board, but a SpaceX can't and shouldn't be asked to if they can do it simpler and cheaper and maybe just have a dual redundancy etc...

No, the CUCU is all Spacex hardware and it is independent of ISS avionics. 

Typical NASA bad, nuspace good POV.   

No Jim. Please don't put me in that camp. I don't deserve it and that was not my point. It's why I am "asking" the question. And it goes beyond the specifics of CUCU. If there was no expectation of cost efficiencies in using Commercial suppliers, then what is this all about? And if there is, then where are the cost efficiencies coming from if not systems and processes?

[pippin]

Bad your comparison was bad.
iPhones are cheaper because using them for a mil application is adding a relatively small number to the much, much larger number of devices they sell on commercial markets and which make development (and deployment) of all these capabilities much cheaper than building a few 10K dedicated mil units.

That doesn't apply to SpaceX at all because right now, there ain't any other customers for their Dragon than NASA so nothing else that makes things cheap than maybe some new good ideas which I'm sure will be used but which SpaceX has no monopoly on.

Where "commercial" is cheaper than government it's usually for one of three reasons:
1. It can't afford to go the expensive way. I would not want to fly something that's cheap for only this reason.
2. It has a much broader and larger market. Not the case here, SpaceX has not flown even a single commercial mission so far.
3. Competition. That's what all the CRS and CCDev activities are about.

[rcoppola]

Bad your comparison was bad.
iPhones are cheaper because using them for a mil application is adding a relatively small number to the much, much larger number of devices they sell on commercial markets and which make development (and deployment) of all these capabilities much cheaper than building a few 10K dedicated mil units.

I don't understand. Isn't what you just wrote "Exactly" the idea behind commercial? Didn't Elon explicitly say at one of the latest Congressional hearings that he can close the business case and offer lower prices because SpaceX has such a large launch manifest for the Falcon beyond NASA? And that scale allows the same efficiencies you just listed as the reason for why the iPhone works in the context I previously listed? And as for actual launches, I don't see your point in the least. Boeing drops billions into an airplane program because they have the "orders" way before they actual deliver any of them to the launch customers....

[pippin]

"Say" and "do" are two different things.

Elon may have a nice manifest but to date he has launched nothing of that.

And that launch manifest doesn't contain a single commercial flight for a Dragon.
OK, there are _two_ "Dragon Lab" missions on the manifest. Didn't hear any details on what the customer is or whether they are placeholders. Don't give any economies of scale compared to the 12 NASA flight on the manifest, though.

ULA also has a large launch manifest beyond NASA, even though that's also gov. launches.

Boeing planes is acting in a mature market they know very well and where they are selling hundred of planes each year, that's quite a bit different from what we are having here.