SpaceX Falcon 9/Dragon COTS Demo (C2+) GENERAL DISCUSSION

[Jim]

The outcome may be the end of F9, Dragon or Spacex but not HSF.

[Jim]

The outcome may be the end of F9, Dragon or Spacex

Really?  You mean in terms of other customers jumping ship and causing cascading financial problems that result in dissolution?  Or SpaceX getting chopped from COTS? 

I was only stating what could be the worse, not what I think will happen.  End of F9, Dragon or Spacex  vs end of HSF.

Spacex says they can weather it financially and they still have the CRS contract and they can try for the remaining COTS money.  But they have to get the demonstration done so that they can work CRS.
Other customers will make their own decisions.

Another outcome may be Spacex temporarily scaling back on other projects until things get routine with F9/Dragon.

[Lurker Steve]

Don't you just love how a $30 million F/A 18 can crash into an apartment block for no good reason without a single mention of grounding the fleet for 3 years or a massive cut in Pentagon funding?
But if SpaceX has a single malfunction on this flight,
And we really need to start treating spaceflight accidents EXACTLY....

Wrong analogy.   It was not the 3rd flight of the F/A-18. 

And unfortunately, accidents happen on military training flights all the time. Fortunately, the pilot and his instructor survived.

[Herb Schaltegger]

And unfortunately, accidents happen on military training flights all the time. Fortunately, the pilot and his instructor survived.

Even more fortunately, so did everyone on the ground - it could have been much, much worse.

Now all that being said, as Jim pointed out, the analogy is false anyway. IF SpaceX suffers a failure, THEN it will be time to assess the nature of the failure and the impacts on SpaceX, the Dragon program, Falcon 9, etc.  But absent the failure mode being the equivalent of pissing off the Almighty and causing a premature Apocalypse, it will NOT be the end of human spaceflight.  Geez.

[cuddihy]

Don't you just love how a $30 million F/A 18 can crash into an apartment block for no good reason without a single mention of grounding the fleet for 3 years or a massive cut in Pentagon funding?
But if SpaceX has a single malfunction on this flight, that's it, no more human spaceflight?

Congress is irrational and scientifically illiterate.  It's clear where their priorities lie, clear they have no desire to invest in the future.  So our only path forward is for commercial spaceflight to suceed and operate independent of NASA.

And we really need to start treating spaceflight accidents EXACTLY like military and commercial aerospace accidents - that is, that they are expected and do not terminate entire programs.  With the Shuttles gone, I don't want to ever, ever again have to suffer a political 3 year shutdown because of an accident when no other industry operates that way.

Actually, a lot of Navy folks are very worried about this -- civilian VA Beach chamber of commerce types have been complaining about the danger of approaches to NAS Oceana for years, it is on the next BRAC list for consideration ... folks are worried this will serve as fodder for moving the planes to a reopened Cecil field or a base in North Carolina.

[FinalFrontier]

So this leaves us with commercial vendors, being paid by the government to go fly, that develop the LV's on their own (et al, spacex, ula, ect.)

Basically what we have done by moving away from NASA run LV programs (with SLS being the remaining exception, for now) is put our eggs in the private sector.

So what happens if the first, long overdue, commercial flight to station is a total failure? ...If this mission was to fail there is a distinct possibility that they will in fact just end the whole thing.

So here is the argument I am making. If this launch fails, from a political standpoint, this will be a very bad thing.  ...be used as justification to cut the commercial programs to nothing and leave only SLS (which will be of little or no use to ISS) which is basically a non-starter.

Now commercial companies will continue to launch things they have a business case for (such as satellites and perhaps a dragon lab or two) but  of course without ISS no missions to ISS, and largely no reason to go forward with HSF capacity so that will drop). But the idea of exploration will basically disappear. There won't be a beo program, there won't be an ISS all of that will be gone, and private companies are not going to fly space stations for the sake of exploration
Anyway short version is that I think a failure now would result in so much negative politics that we lose most of our exploration programs

So you think if this test launch goes awry, even in a small way, that the ISS will get de-orbited sooner, all commercial contracts for resupply will be cancelled ASAP, and SLS cancelled within 5 years?     

I suppose that has a non-zero chance of happenning. 

I think a more likely scenario, if something should go wrong, is that yes; some politicians would flap their wings and hiss and spit.  But at the end of the day,    ISS won't be promptly discarded.  If that is true, then it comes back to wondering which is better (politically and economically): scraping the commercial crew development programs, or forking over significant $ to Russia?  "eggs in one basket" is defined better by SLS/Orion than by multiple relatively inexpensive providers. 

If NASA budgets get axed significantly, it will have more to do with dollars and the economy than the result of a test launch.  Significantly, philanthrocapitalism, and interest in both space tourism and sub-orbital transport would cushion such a blow to space flight.  Though clearly space geeks would increase their beer intake for a few weeks if the situation unfolds as you outline. 

Not in a small way my scenario only unfolds in total utter failure (like the vehicle explodes ect) which is unlikely.
At the very least it certainly would not help exploration based funding.

[FinalFrontier]

So here is the argument I am making. If this launch fails, from a political standpoint, this will be a very bad thing. Anyone and everyone opposed to commercial (which includes most of the pro SLS lawmakers) as well as the anti spaceflight crowed will use that as a political football, and the end result will either mean a drastic cutback in any federally funded or backed program (like the commercial programs and ISS) or total removal. That it or it will be used as justification to cut the commercial programs to nothing and leave only SLS (which will be of little or no use to ISS) which is basically a non-starter.

Don't you just love how a $30 million F/A 18 can crash into an apartment block for no good reason without a single mention of grounding the fleet for 3 years or a massive cut in Pentagon funding?
But if SpaceX has a single malfunction on this flight, that's it, no more human spaceflight?

Congress is irrational and scientifically illiterate.  It's clear where their priorities lie, clear they have no desire to invest in the future.  So our only path forward is for commercial spaceflight to suceed and operate independent of NASA.

And we really need to start treating spaceflight accidents EXACTLY like military and commercial aerospace accidents - that is, that they are expected and do not terminate entire programs.  With the Shuttles gone, I don't want to ever, ever again have to suffer a political 3 year shutdown because of an accident when no other industry operates that way.

There is one other industry that suffers similarly: The nuclear industry.

One accident, even in a poorly built outdated and irrationally operated reactor in another country, results in the U.S. industry taking massive hits in regulations and delays (or cancellations). Great example is STP cancelled 2 brand new reactors that we desperately need in Texas to scale back our nearby coal fired job were cancelled 2 weeks after Fukushima.

That's about the only other one I can think of off the top of my head but no doubt there are others.


Regarding your comments on congress, yes this is exactly why I am so "doom and gloom", as it were, because they prove time and again they care more about power than anything else. Very hard to find representatives these days who actually want to help people.

[Robotbeat]

SpaceX's enemies are among those who want to cast the coming flight as make-or-break.

It's an unmanned test-flight. Give it a rest. Everyone knows there's a significant chance that it could fail, like any other early spacecraft or launch vehicle flight. I suppose Orion counts as a complete failure because of its early parachute test failure? Obviously, it doesn't.

[Antares]

Congress is irrational and scientifically illiterate.  It's clear where their priorities lie, clear they have no desire to invest in the future.

They is us.  We get the government we allow.

[Blackjax]

Now commercial companies will continue to launch things they have a business case for (such as satellites and perhaps a dragon lab or two) but  of course without ISS no missions to ISS, and largely no reason to go forward with HSF capacity so that will drop).

Are you seriously trying to make the argument that the primary reason that Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bob Bigelow, and Paul Allen have started the companies they have and have made HSF a large component of their plans is somehow related to the government space program?

Yes, some of them have been willing to accept government funds to accelerate their efforts but do you really believe they are going to give up on their dreams just because some government program got cut?

If SpaceX ever got over a barrel, don't you think that Elon would consider talking to Allen or Bigelow about an equity investment before he'd close his doors?  His company is pretty critical to their plans.

[Jim]

His company is pretty critical to their plans.

Not Bigelow.  And no, Musk wouldn't

[mr. mark]

I have to agree with Jim on this one. Spacex and Bigelow were never partners and Bigelow is operating as a partner with Boeing in the development of CST-100 and space habs. Spacex is nowhere in the picture. In fact, Boeing most likely would like to freeze their competitor SpaceX out of the picture. SpaceX has painted themselves in a corner on this one. SpaceX's best hope besides NASA is to form contracts with other clients for manned spaceflight. Where SpaceX plans to go as a destination besides ISS is anyone's guess at this time. SpaceX's best hope starts with this COTS 2 launch. Form a basis of reliabily and that will draw clients. A track record of success is your best advertisment.

[manboy]

So when should we expect the press kit to be released?

[happyflower]

SpaceX's best hope starts with this COTS 2 launch. Form a basis of reliabily and that will draw clients. A track record of success is your best advertisment.

Nice quote. I think there will always be socio-political disagreement on what ULA and SpaceX do amongst the Enthusiasts. But like you said, fly the bird well and your case is made for you for all to see.

This first flight is going to be a wonderful data gathering experience for SpaceX. I hope it leads to many more flights (well 1 more this year since i voted for 2 flights this year  )

[tigerade]

So when should we expect the press kit to be released?

Probably after the FRR.  But last time it was just a few days before launch if I remember correctly.

[Chris Bergin]

So funny. I only have to sneeze about SpaceX on twitter and this happens...

[Wyvern]

I love how one of the puppies is pushed out of the way.

[beancounter]

I love how one of the puppies is pushed out of the way.

I think that one's me. 


wag wag wag.

I thought it was the pollies making for the trough!!  But then again, far too cute.

[mr. mark]

Ok, what do you think for the chances of an approx April 30th launch? A go or no go as of April 16th?

[Wyvern]

I think we will have to wait for the conference (FRR?) on the 16th before we can have enough information to know if the launch is a go or no go.