The CCiCAP Award (PRE- and Post-AWARD DISCUSSION) Thread

[ugordan]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

[Lurker Steve]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

He is promissing a soft landing on legs. There is a ton of development and testing required. No problem with moving to a soft-landing on ground eventually, but is that really the quickest path to an operational system ? I see this adding at least 12 to 24 months to the schedule.

[docmordrid]

Except that SpaceX's latest video shows propulsive landing without parachutes.

[neilh]

Elon is over-promising again.

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

hmm, poll?

[savuporo]

Here is a timely question

Still, I just talked to Brian Duffy (ATK representative in Houston) and he did say what Kent Rominger said – that ATK would continue but at a slower pace.

That will be interesting to watch.

[ugordan]

He is promissing a soft landing on legs.

Where is he promising that in the CCiCAP proposal?

Having that as the ultimate goal by no means implies that that's what they put into their proposal to NASA.

[baldusi]

Since both Boeing and SNC got awards for a integrated system, who pays for the pad mods at LC-41?

I'm not convinced that DoD would allow LC-41 to be modified as it might interfere with the launch schedule for national security-critical payloads.  I still think it is more likely that commercial crew will have its own pad, maybe LC-37A; that way they can build as needed without having to build around DoD requirements.

I suspect that LC-39B will be the CC launch pad for NASA missions only.

Have you read the ULA papers, the Pad itself is not modified. The MLP is modified. They could even build a new, HR MLP.

[IRobot]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

It wasn't done during Apollo, so "it must be impossible".

[mr. mark]

It "seems" SpaceX will do things in stages. LAS testing, an unmanned launch to ISS with Dragonrider, water landings and then assisted parachute land based landings with Super Draco thrusters assisting. In the far off future the possibility of unassisted Super Draco landings. 

[savuporo]

It wasn't done during Apollo, so "it must be impossible".

I thought Soyuz was doing it during Apollo ?

[Nomadd]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

 About the best you could do would be a last second burst to soften the parachute landing. The instant you hit the jets, you lose the lift from the chutes and they collapse.

[Space Pete]

Overall, I'm pleased with the awards.

Too bad that ATK didn't get in, but the same could have been said for whoever didn't get in - the simple fact is that there were four strong bids, and only three awards available. At least all the selections have actually begun development, unlike ATK.

I don't think we've heard the last of ATK though - the ISS CRS contracts run out in 2016, at which time NASA will re-compete them. ATK have already said they will continue with Liberty using their own funding, so theoretically ATK could offer an ISS cargo service for the latter part of this decade. Then if you whack a CST-100 atop Liberty (as it is designed to be capable of flying on either Atlas or Liberty), then there's your dual cargo + crew capability, which is very beneficial to ISS, IMO.

[Robotbeat]

Quick analysis:

SpaceX award: makes perfect sense, they are almost ready anyway.

Boeing: Give unto Cesaer what is Cesaer's.

That last one is a little too cynical. Boeing has a capable, realistic, and mature design that should be quite flexible (i.e. not limited to LEO, though it may need some modifications) and that can launch on very well-proven existing launch vehicles. I agree with your SpaceX assessment, though.

SNC: Interesting choice, but I don't see how they get from here to there with $200 million.

$200 million is a significant amount of funding. They should be able to make a lot of progress, though maybe not all the way to manned flights. They won't be as well-proven as Boeing and SpaceX, but they should be pretty darned far along. It gives them a chance to prove themselves.

[jongoff]

Should Sierra Nevada be in need of live ballast for DC flight testing I'm more than willing to volunteer!

You and me both. And I'm not a fan of hybrids!

~Jon

[jongoff]

Elon is over-promising again.

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

I do. They've been working on a lot of this for longer than you realize.

~Jon

[jongoff]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

He is promissing a soft landing on legs. There is a ton of development and testing required. No problem with moving to a soft-landing on ground eventually, but is that really the quickest path to an operational system ? I see this adding at least 12 to 24 months to the schedule.

Masten figured out how to do propulsive landing on legs with 5 people and ~$3M. SpaceX is already working on Grasshopper (which is almost ready to fly), and has probably been working GN&C and structures on this for over a year now. Maybe I'm biased because I'm a VTVL guy, but I'm just not seeing this as being that hard. This is similar schedule to what DC-X had, and they've got a simpler system, more money, and more headstart.

~Jon

[enginerd]

I couldn't picture a better outcome. ATK provided a pretty cool and unique capability, but in the end it is about reaching ISS as soon as possible. It has been very enjoyable to watch this all develop on NSF. Haven't had this type of excitement for quite some time.

[Robotbeat]

I still think it will nominally use parachutes for the initial flights. And I'd put the odds of nominally using splashdown for the initial flights at around 50%.

The hybrid parachutes and propulsive landing in the desert (sort of like Soyuz but more controlled) seems increasingly likely, though, since it has appeared in one of their most recent videos. That'd still be survivable in case the rockets don't work.

[Star One]

Good award and seems to be the logical choices were picked if you want to keep the gap down to a minimum as far as actually providing crew services to the ISS is concerned.

[Lurker Steve]

Does anyone think they have a real chance of completing a crewed-Dragon capable of propusive landing by 2015 ??

What's so unbelievable about a propulsively assisted parachute landing?

He is promissing a soft landing on legs. There is a ton of development and testing required. No problem with moving to a soft-landing on ground eventually, but is that really the quickest path to an operational system ? I see this adding at least 12 to 24 months to the schedule.

Masten figured out how to do propulsive landing on legs with 5 people and ~$3M. SpaceX is already working on Grasshopper (which is almost ready to fly), and has probably been working GN&C and structures on this for over a year now. Maybe I'm biased because I'm a VTVL guy, but I'm just not seeing this as being that hard. This is similar schedule to what DC-X had, and they've got a simpler system, more money, and more headstart.

~Jon

OK, since you have experience in this area, I'll trust that it's not a big deal. I expect to see videos of actual Dragon hardware landing on a pad in Texas sometime in the next 24 months.