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

[Prober]

I have yet to see an ground-to-orbit manifest from SpaceX for the Dragon spacecraft COTS(C2).
I wonder if any of you have?

 And furthermore, SpaceX isn't even saying if the Dragon will be hauling
anything back to Earth from the ISS, either in the role  of a glorified orbital "garbage scow", or as an recyclable-collection orbital 'truck' (bringing back ISS hardware for repair, reconditioning and reuse.)   

There's info in it in the FRR and some info was released in some earlier interviews.

They're launching 521 kg of low value cargo like food and clothes. They're not launching any unpressurized cargo but Canadarm2 will inspect the interior of the trunk (I think this what they said but I would have to rewatch the video).

They're returning up to 660 kg of cargo but that number isn't finalized yet. They plan to return some replaceable ORUs because returning them in Dragon would allow them to  potential refurbish them instead of having to procure new ones. The ORUs are a pump, a couple of multifiltration beds that were in the water processor, and a JAXA supply power box used for the JAXA communications system. I'm unsure of what else they are returning.

That review was very good, and alot of things came out of it.   Elon was downplaying the mission.   But SpaceX comes out fine even if they screw up.  NASA will cover for SpaceX, because they must.

SpaceX has the only "possible" download mass available.  I don't want to start anything, but the we are seeing the early signs of the effects of the loss of the shuttle.

[Patchouli]

That review was very good, and alot of things came out of it.   Elon was downplaying the mission.   But SpaceX comes out fine even if they screw up.  NASA will cover for SpaceX, because they must.

SpaceX has the only "possible" download mass available.  I don't want to start anything, but the we are seeing the early signs of the effects of the loss of the shuttle.

For now they have the only substantial down mass capability but that may change when Boeing's and SNC's vehicles are ready.

[baldusi]

For now they have the only substantial down mass capability but that may change when Boeing's and SNC's vehicles are ready.

That's a 2016 capability at best.

[mr. mark]

For now they have the only substantial down mass capability but that may change when Boeing's and SNC's vehicles are ready.

That's a 2016 capability at best.

If at all. My hunch is one of those will go mainly due to development slippage. It seems the two potential winners are already distancing themselves from the other 2 due to faster development.

[beancounter]

That review was very good, and alot of things came out of it.   Elon was downplaying the mission.   But SpaceX comes out fine even if they screw up.  NASA will cover for SpaceX, because they must.

SpaceX has the only "possible" download mass available.  I don't want to start anything, but the we are seeing the early signs of the effects of the loss of the shuttle.

For now they have the only substantial down mass capability but that may change when Boeing's and SNC's vehicles are ready.

Haven't seen any down mass capability for CST-100 or DC.  Thought they were crew only.  Anyone have any info' on that.

And agreed, SpaceX Dragon will be the only vehicle in next few years with any usable down mass capability.  Soyuz has next to nothing other than a bit of personal space.  Even that's being generous.  The others are just garbage disposal which while important, doesn't help when it comes to returning equipment for refurbishment or research racks, etc.

[woods170]

That review was very good, and alot of things came out of it.   Elon was downplaying the mission.   But SpaceX comes out fine even if they screw up.  NASA will cover for SpaceX, because they must.

SpaceX has the only "possible" download mass available.  I don't want to start anything, but the we are seeing the early signs of the effects of the loss of the shuttle.

For now they have the only substantial down mass capability but that may change when Boeing's and SNC's vehicles are ready.

Haven't seen any down mass capability for CST-100 or DC.  Thought they were crew only.  Anyone have any info' on that.

And agreed, SpaceX Dragon will be the only vehicle in next few years with any usable down mass capability.  Soyuz has next to nothing other than a bit of personal space.  Even that's being generous.  The others are just garbage disposal which while important, doesn't help when it comes to returning equipment for refurbishment or research racks, etc.

Dragon is not equipped to carry International Standard Payload Racks (ISPR), the primary laboratory racks used on the USOS section of ISS.

[A_M_Swallow]

Dragon is not equipped to carry International Standard Payload Racks (ISPR), the primary laboratory racks used on the USOS section of ISS.

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems.  Maximum height and width of 32.0 inches, preferably 685 millimetres (27.0 in).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Docking_System

[Jim]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

[A_M_Swallow]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

[baldusi]

The CRS crafts use CBM. That's full rack sized. Dracon and current Cygnus lack the internal volume. Cygnus could be enlarged.

[woods170]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

No, Jim is right. You are missing a key point here. You assume that every future VV will dock / berth to a NDS docking port. That won't be the case. CBM's for direct berthing will be available over the life of ISS, and thus the ability to at least 'upload' ISPR sized racks.

[Jim]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

No, Jim is right. You are missing a key point here. You assume that every future VV will dock / berth to a NDS docking port. That won't be the case. CBM's for direct berthing will be available over the life of ISS, and thus the ability to at least 'upload' ISPR sized racks.

As usual I am, and the other poster is wrong, again. 

Racks are not just for experiments.
Not all experiments are rack sized
Not all experiments require changeout, just their samples.
Spacecraft with docking systems generally are not logistics vehicles for swapping out station racks.

Not all future stations (and/or next generation of laboratory racks) are going to be the same size as the ISS.

But one thing is constant, the width of laboratory rack hardware/experiment.   The reason is up reader to find out.

[Herb Schaltegger]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

No, Jim is right. You are missing a key point here. You assume that every future VV will dock / berth to a NDS docking port. That won't be the case. CBM's for direct berthing will be available over the life of ISS, and thus the ability to at least 'upload' ISPR sized racks.

As usual I am, and the other poster is wrong, again. 

Racks are not just for experiments.
Not all experiments are rack sized
Not all experiments require changeout, just their samples.
Spacecraft with docking systems generally are not logistics vehicles for swapping out station racks.

Not all future stations (and/or next generation of laboratory racks) and going to be the same size as the ISS.

But one thing is constant, the width of laboratory rack hardware/experiment.   The reason is up reader to find out.

In addition to what Jim wrote, most equipment racks would never need to be replaced in the first place. They are designed to be unlocked and rotated out of their slots along the standoff structure at the base. Individual ORUs can be removed and replaced using the standard on-orbit tools available. Depending on the system or subsystem involved, ORUs are generally very much smaller than the rack structures into which they are installed.

[Lurker Steve]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

No, Jim is right. You are missing a key point here. You assume that every future VV will dock / berth to a NDS docking port. That won't be the case. CBM's for direct berthing will be available over the life of ISS, and thus the ability to at least 'upload' ISPR sized racks.

As usual I am, and the other poster is wrong, again. 

Racks are not just for experiments.
Not all experiments are rack sized
Not all experiments require changeout, just their samples.
Spacecraft with docking systems generally are not logistics vehicles for swapping out station racks.

Not all future stations (and/or next generation of laboratory racks) and going to be the same size as the ISS.

But one thing is constant, the width of laboratory rack hardware/experiment.   The reason is up reader to find out.

All of the current racks in the USOS were either pre-installed or delivered inside a MPLM, right ? Does the rack also supply the required power, heating / cooling to the equipment mounted in the rack ? I suppose the rack also provides some sort of isolation from the vibrations of the rest of the station / MPLM.

I would think that a cargo vessel designed to carry rack-mounted experiments to the ISS would have these racks somehow built into the base vehicle, so that each experiment would not have to deal with separate designs for power / cooling during launch processing and actual on-orbit operation.

[Jim]

I would think that a cargo vessel designed to carry rack-mounted experiments to the ISS would have these racks somehow built into the base vehicle, so that each experiment would not have to deal with separate designs for power / cooling during launch processing and actual on-orbit operation.

Racks are not typically powered during delivery. (there were plans for MPLM, but it was to do the following)
Only sample containers such as freezers, coolers, temp controlled containers, plant and animal containers are powered and they do not have to be rack sized.  They can be inserts for racks.   The interfaces for the containers would be the same whether it is a rack or in the logistics vehicle.

And to stick with the topic, the Dragon does have the interfaces for powered experiments.   That was reason for the test of the whiteroom while the vehicle was horizontal.  That is where powered experiments would be installed.

[Jim]

All of the current racks in the USOS were either pre-installed or delivered inside a MPLM, right ? Does the rack also supply the required power, heating / cooling to the equipment mounted in the rack ? I suppose the rack also provides some sort of isolation from the vibrations of the rest of the station / MPLM.

yes
Yes, that was the point of an ISPR ("S" was for Standard)
Some are isolated, see ARIS.

[Prober]

Want to commend the recent posters, civil, entertaining and informative.

[woods170]

The next generation of laboratory racks will have to be made compatible with spacecraft docking systems. 

Wrong for many obvious reasons.   

No you are wrong.

For experiments to be uploaded and downloaded from the ISS they have to fit through the docking port.  So either the ports need to be bigger or the racks narrower.

The width of the iLIDS was not increased to fit so it will be the racks.

No, Jim is right. You are missing a key point here. You assume that every future VV will dock / berth to a NDS docking port. That won't be the case. CBM's for direct berthing will be available over the life of ISS, and thus the ability to at least 'upload' ISPR sized racks.

As usual I am, and the other poster is wrong, again. 

I notice that you being right, as usual, has done wonders for your ego. 

[sojourner]

Not sure if it's out there, but if it is, can someone point me to a list of the cargo for the flight?

[QuantumG]

Best bet is the press kit, which isn't out yet.