LIVE: SpaceX Dragon CRS-1 (SpX-1) (EOM) Unberthing, Entry, Splashdown

[Space Pete]

A large collection of Dragon post-flight photos added to the NASA Expedition 33 photo gallery.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage17.html

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage18.html

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage19.html

[Ronsmytheiii]

A large collection of Dragon post-flight photos added to the NASA Expedition 33 photo gallery.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage17.html

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage18.html

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-33/inflight/ndxpage19.html

Believe SpaceX stated that this will be the first capsule to be reused, interesting to see if they can live up to that promise. All of the CRS flights budgeted for a new capsule everytime right?

[Ben the Space Brit]

Believe SpaceX stated that this will be the first capsule to be reused, interesting to see if they can live up to that promise. All of the CRS flights budgeted for a new capsule everytime right?

Could it be DragonLab-1?

[Zed_Noir]

A 2007 photo of the rear of American Islander showing the A-Frame and the clear access on and off the back of the vessel.

She's a great-looking boat.  Does anyone know: was she designed as a trawler or is she a purpose-built salvage boat?

She was built as a tug.

Originally a passenger vessel, maybe for crew transport to offshore rigs.

Hull #   Original Name  Original Owner                 Ship Type                GT   Delivery   Disposition
407      Barry G            American Workboats Inc  Passenger Vessel    98   1970        Now American Islander

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/history/shipyards/2large/inactive/bender.htm

[gwiz]

Originally a passenger vessel, maybe for crew transport to offshore rigs.

Was she used for all the Dragon recoveries?  I've a vague memory that recovery barges were used before.

[Nomadd]

 Not really a passenger vessel. One of it's purposes was crew transport in addition to supplies and heavy gear, and when you transport people on a paid basis you get the passenger tag. The frame and crane was used for ship to ship transfer, ROV deployment, bottom ops and buoy tending. It's pretty much been taking odd jobs since it was built, like many tug/crew boats. Most offshore rig work boats would have at least 40 foot rear decks, so I doubt is she does much of that.

[yg1968]

It looks like the mission had a few issues:
http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/spacex-and-nasa-still-determining-reasons-for-falcon-9-engine-failure

[Lars_J]

It looks like the mission had a few problems:
http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/spacex-and-nasa-still-determining-reasons-for-falcon-9-engine-failure

Thanks, very interesting info about the Dragon issues.

[robertross]

It looks like the mission had a few issues:
http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/spacex-and-nasa-still-determining-reasons-for-falcon-9-engine-failure

First I've heard of the Glacier issue! Not good, despite conservative margins.

The rad-hardening of the computers should be interesting to follow. This should be a natural progression anyway for BEO ops, so there is an opportunity for transition & testing.

[kevin-rf]

Yeah, a switch to rad hard computers would require a re-validation of software if not entirely new software. Unless CRS-2 is seriously delayed, I doubt we will see it on CRS-2.

[corrodedNut]

And now we know how long it takes from splashdown to hatch open: three hours.

[rickl]

Maybe they can try to use their current computers and software on the next couple of flights, and if they continue to have problems, then switch to the rad-hardened kind.

In the meantime they can be working on the new software, under the assumption that they will probably have to do that eventually.

Since they plan a dozen unmanned flights before they fly astronauts, they will have plenty of time and opportunities to work out bugs.  I like their long-term strategy.

[Comga]

"[Suffredini] speculated that the company would ultimately decide to use rad-hardened components in the future unless it is cost-prohibitive."

Sort of a non-statement.  They can afford better if they can afford them.

My guess, as one who only observes spacecraft computer and software efforts from the sidelines, is that they will improve their system's ability to reboot and resynch.  Sort of what NASA is doing with their smartphone cubesat.  They put in a watchdog circuit that reboots it if it stops transmitting.  It's millions or billions of dollars cheaper than building a rad-hard Android cell phone.

[rickl]

On the other hand, wouldn't they need to have rad-hardened components if they expect to fly Dragon on deep space missions, like to the Moon and Mars?

/yeah, I know, veering off-topic here.

[mlindner]

I'm wondering if the mentioned cooling pumps are NASAs or SpaceXs? Maybe they weren't designed for the impact that the Dragon experiences vs the Space Shuttle?

[mlindner]

My guess, as one who only observes spacecraft computer and software efforts from the sidelines, is that they will improve their system's ability to reboot and resynch.  Sort of what NASA is doing with their smartphone cubesat.  They put in a watchdog circuit that reboots it if it stops transmitting.  It's millions or billions of dollars cheaper than building a rad-hard Android cell phone.

With the cubesats we design here at University of Michigan we follow the same approach. Nothing we fly is rad hardened at the moment, we just have watchdogs everywhere (good general practice anyway). Actually for the main flight computer we have a hardware timer that causes a hard reset every something like 20 hours. As well as internal and external watchdog timers. We're also in the process of switching over to FRAM based microcontrollers that provide inherent radiation tolerance without being "rad hardened."

[woods170]

I'm wondering if the mentioned cooling pumps are NASAs or SpaceXs? Maybe they weren't designed for the impact that the Dragon experiences vs the Space Shuttle?

The story on SFN is that the three coolant pumps and the freezer lost power when electrical boxes ingested sea-water upon splash-down.

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/004/121114anomalies/#.UKTgtJFv7YU

That would suggest that the coolant pumps were inside the pressurized section, but that they got their electrical power from systems that are mounted outside the pressure-hull.

[Prober]

It looks like the mission had a few issues:
http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/spacex-and-nasa-still-determining-reasons-for-falcon-9-engine-failure

First I've heard of the Glacier issue! Not good, despite conservative margins.

"Problems with one of the Draco thrusters and a loss of all three coolant pumps after splashdown also marred the mission.  The Glacier freezer onboard Dragon used to return scientific samples from the ISS was at -65 degrees Centigrade (C) instead of the required -95 degrees C when it was accessed three hours after splashdown.   Suffredini said that some of the samples "exceeded limits" (presumably temperature limits), but that the limits were conservative.  How much of a problem the warmer temperature could cause apparently is not yet clear. "

This sounds like another investigation to me?    Is it possible this failure will be out of the bounds of the contract, and result in loss of payment from NASA?
 

[Jim]

This sounds like another investigation to me?    Is it possible this failure will be out of the bounds of the contract, and result in loss of payment from NASA?
 

No, not worthy of an investigation and far from contract breach.

[A_M_Swallow]

Did any of the radiation hardened processors NASA was working on get completed?
Project M started one.  Is the ALHAT equipment radiation hard?