Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9/Dragon COTS Demo (C2+) PRE LAUNCH UPDATES (Read 245084 times)

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #460 on:** 05/02/2012 05:22 pm »

SpaceX:

Update on SpaceX COTS 2 Launch

At this time, a May 7th launch appears unlikely. SpaceX is continuing to work through the software assurance process with NASA. We will issue a statement as soon as a new launch target is set.

Space Pete · « **Reply #461 on:** 05/02/2012 05:35 pm »

In my personal opinion - and nothing more - I reckon they'll end up slipping past the Soyuz TMA-04M launch on the 15th.

If they launched on the 10th, they'd berth on the 13th, which leaves only two days of margin before Dragon and Soyuz would be "on top of each other" - and having a low margin of "troubleshooting days" is a bad move for a test flight. Plus, if there was a scrub on the 10th, then they would definitely end up overlapping.

So, if someone were to ask me to put my money on a launch date, I'd say NET 18th May, after the Soyuz TMA-04M docking on the 17th. Just my two cents.

butters · « **Reply #462 on:** 05/02/2012 05:51 pm »

Software is tricky. This isn't rocket science. You can't just send some guy into the interstage with a pair of tin snips. It's more complicated than that.

marsman2020 · « **Reply #463 on:** 05/02/2012 06:01 pm »

If this software is so darn tricky that NASA keeps holding them up on it....

Maybe it's important enough that C2 and C3 should have stayed as separate flights, so that ~1.5-2x as much data could be gathered about the operation of the software?

That's what the taxpayers are paying for, after all.

mr. mark · « **Reply #464 on:** 05/02/2012 06:02 pm »

While we are waiting for launch, another picture.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #465 on:** 05/02/2012 06:36 pm »

Quote from: marsman2020 on 05/02/2012 06:01 pm

If this software is so darn tricky that NASA keeps holding them up on it....

Maybe it's important enough that C2 and C3 should have stayed as separate flights, so that ~1.5-2x as much data could be gathered about the operation of the software? ...

It's software, so the analysis can be done on the ground. A test launch tests the hardware. It'd be dumb to do a really expensive hardware test when what you really want is careful analysis of the software.

kevin-rf · « **Reply #466 on:** 05/02/2012 06:46 pm »

If it is software review, I doubt we will see a launch before June. Being a software issue, we should have a Poll on who fly's first, Antares or SpaceX.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #467 on:** 05/02/2012 06:49 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 06:46 pm

If it is software review, I doubt we will see a launch before June. Being a software issue, we should have a Poll on who fly's first, Antares or SpaceX.

Why so long? It's not necessarily a big official review. If you're not privy to why they're doing the software testing, I don't see how you could possibly know it'd take that long.

kevin-rf · « **Reply #468 on:** 05/02/2012 07:44 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 05/02/2012 06:49 pm

Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 06:46 pm
If it is software review, I doubt we will see a launch before June. Being a software issue, we should have a Poll on who fly's first, Antares or SpaceX.
Why so long? It's not necessarily a big official review. If you're not privy to why they're doing the software testing, I don't see how you could possibly know it'd take that long.

If it is a review that finds something and requires changes you have to go through an entire QC cycle on the subsystem. Sorry, but not buying before June. Of course we should move it over to the number of 2012 flights Poll. I'm down grading from 2 with a third on the pad to 1 with 2 on the pad and a third backed up in a hanger.

tigerade · « **Reply #469 on:** 05/02/2012 07:58 pm »

A new NET posted in L2. Not as bad as I was thinking.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #470 on:** 05/02/2012 08:02 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 07:44 pm

Quote from: Robotbeat on 05/02/2012 06:49 pm
Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 06:46 pm
If it is software review, I doubt we will see a launch before June. Being a software issue, we should have a Poll on who fly's first, Antares or SpaceX.
Why so long? It's not necessarily a big official review. If you're not privy to why they're doing the software testing, I don't see how you could possibly know it'd take that long.
If it is a review that finds something and requires changes you have to go through an entire QC cycle on the subsystem. Sorry, but not buying before June. Of course we should move it over to the number of 2012 flights Poll. I'm down grading from 2 with a third on the pad to 1 with 2 on the pad and a third backed up in a hanger.

Look, it's pretty rare in this business to be wrong about picking a little later date for launch. But it still doesn't justify your saying with any certainty that it'd be June when you don't give any real reason for why it'd be that late. And I see no indication that they'd have to redo the ENTIRE QC cycle. Granted, they may slip for other reasons.

BTW, time for me to re-up L2 subscription... Chris, you didn't remind me!

stockman · « **Reply #471 on:** 05/02/2012 08:12 pm »

Quote from: tigerade on 05/02/2012 07:58 pm

A new NET posted in L2. Not as bad as I was thinking.

don't get too excited just yet.. thats a NET date and happens to be the next reserved day for SpaceX anyway... its not quite official but more of a placeholder for now as far as I read it...

BUT - I hope it becomes real...

spacetraveler · « **Reply #472 on:** 05/02/2012 08:14 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 07:44 pm

Quote from: Robotbeat on 05/02/2012 06:49 pm
Quote from: kevin-rf on 05/02/2012 06:46 pm
If it is software review, I doubt we will see a launch before June. Being a software issue, we should have a Poll on who fly's first, Antares or SpaceX.
Why so long? It's not necessarily a big official review. If you're not privy to why they're doing the software testing, I don't see how you could possibly know it'd take that long.
If it is a review that finds something and requires changes you have to go through an entire QC cycle on the subsystem. Sorry, but not buying before June. Of course we should move it over to the number of 2012 flights Poll. I'm down grading from 2 with a third on the pad to 1 with 2 on the pad and a third backed up in a hanger.

If changes are needed, yes I would agree. Because you would need to do regression testing and requalify the existing components. However there has been no indication that changes were needed yet. All that has been announced so far is that the delays were occurring to finish their current test plan.

tigerade · « **Reply #473 on:** 05/02/2012 08:17 pm »

Quote from: stockman on 05/02/2012 08:12 pm

Quote from: tigerade on 05/02/2012 07:58 pm
A new NET posted in L2. Not as bad as I was thinking.

don't get too excited just yet.. thats a NET date and happens to be the next reserved day for SpaceX anyway... its not quite official but more of a placeholder for now as far as I read it...

BUT - I hope it becomes real...

Same. I'll be out of town on the 19th so if it launches then I will likely only see the video few days after. I should be able to still see the berthing, though.

rcoppola · « **Reply #474 on:** 05/02/2012 08:36 pm »

It's all good by me. I'm on a waiting list for a tour and viewing for this launch. If they keep changing it, maybe a place will open up for me...one can hope...

Herb Schaltegger · « **Reply #475 on:** 05/02/2012 08:43 pm »

Quote from: butters on 05/02/2012 05:51 pm

Software is tricky. This isn't rocket science. You can't just send some guy into the interstage with a pair of tin snips. It's more complicated than that.

Okay, now THAT is comedy gold folks.

Halidon · « **Reply #476 on:** 05/03/2012 12:03 am »

Quote from: tigerade on 05/02/2012 07:58 pm

A new NET posted in L2. Not as bad as I was thinking.

So, its before 2020.

savuporo · « **Reply #477 on:** 05/03/2012 05:22 am »

My bet : they are not going to launch before i'm back from vacation and have internet access again

watermod · « **Reply #478 on:** 05/03/2012 06:24 am »

I've been in the software biz since the 70's and never seen a perfect anything in software. Does that mean that nothing made by SpaceX will ever be permitted to launch because it can't be guaranteed perfect? (Not a fan boy but just suspicious whenever anybody demands perfect software. Made doubly so by experience in cellular when poor quality systems trumped 5-9s when 5-9 infrastructure sold at 20x the cost of one nine....)

Jorge · « **Reply #479 on:** 05/03/2012 07:56 am »

Quote from: watermod on 05/03/2012 06:24 am

I've been in the software biz since the 70's and never seen a perfect anything in software. Does that mean that nothing made by SpaceX will ever be permitted to launch because it can't be guaranteed perfect?

No.

Quote

(Not a fan boy but just suspicious whenever anybody demands perfect software. Made doubly so by experience in cellular when poor quality systems trumped 5-9s when 5-9 infrastructure sold at 20x the cost of one nine....)

Flawed analogy. Cell phones don't kill people when the software fails. (Dragon may be unmanned, but it's flying an approach to a manned international space station that cost over $50B to build). No one expects perfect software, but mission-critical software is held to higher standards and undergoes more rigorous testing. The space shuttle software was considered the "gold standard" in this category:

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/06/writestuff.html

No one expects SpaceX (or any other commercial space company) to ever reach that level again, but there are still better analogies than cell phones:
Aircraft flight software
Air traffic control software
Nuclear powerplant control software

All of these must be more-or-less bug-free in normal operation, or people die.