SpaceX Falcon 9/Dragon CRS-2 SpX-2 MISSION GENERAL DISCUSSION

[plank]

did they open the hatch yet?

Edit: why no feed?

[woods170]

For anyone interested, here's some best available images (1080p @ fullscreeen) of the HRSGFs visible in the Dragon Trunk just after separation.

SpaceX have apparently been trying to keep images of the Trunk + cargo secret - pretty pointless in the end.

If SpaceX had really wanted to keep images of the trunk secret they would not have installed an upward looking camera inside the second stage of Falcon 9. Also, SpaceX is aware that either SSRMS or Dextre will reach into the trunk and thus provide images. Your conclusion about SpaceX being secretive with regards to the interior of the trunk is far fetched IMO.

[Space Pete]

If SpaceX had really wanted to keep images of the trunk secret they would not have installed an upward looking camera inside the second stage of Falcon 9. Also, SpaceX is aware that either SSRMS or Dextre will reach into the trunk and thus provide images. Your conclusion about SpaceX being secretive with regards to the interior of the trunk is far fetched IMO.

Well, that's the info I had per L2:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30259.msg1019060#msg1019060

[ugordan]

Well, that's the info I had per L2:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30259.msg1019060#msg1019060

But that doesn't actually say who embargoed them, does it?

[Space Pete]

But that doesn't actually say who embargoed them, does it?

True, good point.

[collectSPACE]

But that doesn't actually say who embargoed them, does it?

SpaceX restricted the release of the photos due to proprietary concerns. The public broadcast of the separation may have been an error on the part of the company, but may have also been approved based on the (low) resolution of the broadcast, according to a spokesperson. The (higher resolution) photos have not been cleared for release.

[Lars_J]

That seems very odd... There will be lots of images of the trunk & cargo while attached to ISS.

[Mike_1179]

That seems very odd... There will be lots of images of the trunk & cargo while attached to ISS.

But how many will be super-hi res to the point where you can read the hand-written labels on wires?

[Space Pete]

SpaceX restricted the release of the photos due to proprietary concerns. The public broadcast of the separation may have been an error on the part of the company, but may have also been approved based on the (low) resolution of the broadcast, according to a spokesperson. The (higher resolution) photos are still not cleared for release.

It's all pointless in the end, IMO - are (or can) SpaceX request no coverage of the cargo removal robotics ops? Are they going to tell NASA to switch off the helmetcams of the spacewalkers who will install the HRSGFs during an EVA in July?

I hope NASA would refuse such requests - SpaceX have the potential to completely ruin the technical coverage of ISS if they start requesting that all cargo associated with them be concealed from the public.

[collectSPACE]

Are they going to tell NASA to switch off the helmetcams of the spacewalkers who will install the HRSGFs during an EVA in July?[/B]

The HRSGFs are NASA's; SpaceX has no concern or say on imagery of the grapple fixtures. But the restraint system inside the trunk, and the trunk itself, are SpaceX's and I believe would have the option to request photos not be taken (or restricted for release).

SpaceX have the potential to completely ruin the technical coverage of ISS if they start requesting that all cargo associated with them be concealed from the public.

SpaceX isn't the first company/contractor to request imagery be protected for proprietary reasons.

[psloss]

That seems very odd...

Maybe from a purely rational point of view, but it wasn't a surprise.  The live video was a little surprising.

There will be lots of images of the trunk & cargo while attached to ISS.

There will be NTSC-level video, but there's nothing outside that can capture higher-quality imagery (not yet, anyway).  Inside, there's no way to directly see the inside of the trunk.

[Space Pete]

So, the only proprietary part of the HRSGFs is the SpaceX-designed hardware that retains it in the Trunk? I was under the impression that the hardware that attaches the HRSGFs to the ISS was also SpaceX-designed?

For those of you wondering where the HRSGFs will eventually be installed on the ISS, I have done some investigating.

Let's look at the first attached image, which was posted on Twitter by Chris Hadfield a while ago now. It shows some hardware that Hadfield was using to train for an EVA in the NBL (note that at the time, Hadfield was scheduled to perform the EVA to attach the HRSGFs to the ISS). I have circled two items of hardware in that image, labelled #1 and #2.

First, the item labelled #1 is also visible on the radiators on the ISS (see the next three attached images). I think these are the "Radiator Grapple Fixture Stowage Beams" that were installed during the final Shuttle missions. So that name would make sense - thus I think the HRSGFs will be attached to the radiators via these items.

The final attached image shows item #2 visible in the Trunk, which (I think) were also visible in the image Hadfield posted. I assume this is also some kind of item for attaching the HRSGFs to the ISS. But it at least shows that the items in Hadfield's image are related to the HRSGFs somehow.

Three items called "V-Guides" are also visible in Hadfield's image - I don't know what these do.

[Jim]

I hope NASA would refuse such requests - SpaceX have the potential to completely ruin the technical coverage of ISS if they start requesting that all cargo associated with them be concealed from the public.

NASA has to honor the request.
Spacex has no need to worry about ISS technical coverage

[LegendCJS]

So far, they are what, a bit behind on the 20 metric tonnes total, right? Or am I misremembering the mass on CRS-1 ?

Depends on how you count.  The original CRS contract was for a total of 12 flights with 20 tonnes up and an option for 3 tonnes down.*  With this Spx-2 flight they'll have delivered a total of 2024kg up (assuming unpressurized 373kg is correct) and 2935kg down.

With 10 flights following, that would mean an average of ~1798kg up-mass/flight.  Assuming F9v1.1 is anywhere close to its stated performance, they shouldn't have a problem hitting the up-mass requirement, and appear to be far exceeding down-mass requirements.


* While the CRS contract states 3mt down, the original RFP from back in 2008 has a a total down-mass requirement of 8mt or ~1.5mt/year.

Previous discussions on these forums have concluded that CRS1 was volume limited.  Launcher performance isn't going to solve that problem for them.  But once the procedures for using the trunk are worked out on this flight, I think trunk loads will constitute the majority of the up mass, and pressurized cargo will continue to mass about what it has been.

[joek]

So far, they are what, a bit behind on the 20 metric tonnes total, right? Or am I misremembering the mass on CRS-1 ?

Depends on how you count.  The original CRS contract was for a total of 12 flights with 20 tonnes up and an option for 3 tonnes down.*  With this Spx-2 flight they'll have delivered a total of 2024kg up (assuming unpressurized 373kg is correct) and 2935kg down.

With 10 flights following, that would mean an average of ~1798kg up-mass/flight.  Assuming F9v1.1 is anywhere close to its stated performance, they shouldn't have a problem hitting the up-mass requirement, and appear to be far exceeding down-mass requirements.

* While the CRS contract states 3mt down, the original RFP from back in 2008 has a a total down-mass requirement of 8mt or ~1.5mt/year.

Previous discussions on these forums have concluded that CRS1 was volume limited.  Launcher performance isn't going to solve that problem for them.  But once the procedures for using the trunk are worked out on this flight, I think trunk loads will constitute the majority of the up mass, and pressurized cargo will continue to mass about what it has been.

Attached is from the original CRS RFP.  It is certainly  dated, but the nominal amounts--or ratios--surely haven't changed that much?

edit: I think you're right... Dragon carries all of the unpressurized up, some of the pressurized up, and all of the pressurized down; Cygnus carries more of the pressurized up and most (all?) of the disposal.

edit (again): Attached chart better shows what I was trying to say about division of labor between SpaceX and OSC.

[Lars_J]

I've followed the update thread, but I have seen no footage or video from the Dragon hatch opening... Will NASA TV replay that at some point? Or have I just missed the obivous?

[davey142]

Does anyone know how much Dragon will have in its trunk when it leaves the ISS?

[Avron]

Does anyone know how much Dragon will have in its trunk when it leaves the ISS?

Should be just the mounting hardware noted above..

[manboy]

I've followed the update thread, but I have seen no footage or video from the Dragon hatch opening... Will NASA TV replay that at some point? Or have I just missed the obivous?

I don't believe the hatch opening was broadcasted.

[Avron]

Had a look at some pics of Dragon during and after docking.. and I do not see any markings on Dragon.. no name plates,  no flags and no manufactures name i.e. Spacex..   

Why, oh why would a commercial vendor  miss the opportunity to advertise ..   I have asked this before.. a year back.. still no logical answer..