Second IDA will be flown to ISS this year.
I certainly hope so. It depends on Dragon returning to flight soon. It is the only vehicle that can do it.
With the loss of IDA-1, would it be possible to fit the early CST-100 capsules with hardware to connect directly with the APAS-95 docking interface of PMA-2? Perhaps NASA could donate spare STS hardware for the purpose?
It's not critical to have both IDAs on ISS by the time commercial crew starts flying.
That's correct.
It was mentioned in the presser today that NASA would like two IDAs so they can have two vehicles docked at the same time for crew rotations. Only having one at first won't be a problem.
The operative here is that a second IDA will be required to meet program requirements. I'll look for an IDA-specific thread, but I wonder if they'll use the/a test article to fabricate the replacement flight version.
The operative here is that a second IDA will be required to meet program requirements. I'll look for an IDA-specific thread, but I wonder if they'll use the/a test article to fabricate the replacement flight version.
IDA stuff is spread over a few ISS threads. There's some stuff here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28976.msg1334743#msg1334743They will probably try to build another one from spare parts. The main structure comes from RSC Energia apparently?
NASA Selects Astronauts for First U.S. Commercial Space Flights
July has always been a big month for America’s space program. Next week, on July 14, New Horizons will make the closest approach ever to Pluto, and the United States will become the first nation to visit this dwarf planet in the outer reaches of our solar system. It was on July 20, 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin made their giant leap for humankind. It was on July 30, 1971 that the lunar rover was driven on the surface of the Moon for the very first time. It was on July 4, 1997 that Pathfinder arrived on Mars. Furthermore, it was on July 14, 1965 – 50 years ago next week – that Mariner 4 flew by and sent us the very close-up first pictures of Mars.
Today, a half century after we received those first pictures of the Red Planet, we’re able to make a significant announcement that will further our nation’s Journey to Mars.
I am pleased to announce that four American space pioneers have been selected to be the first astronauts to train to fly to space on commercial crew carriers, all part of our ambitious plan to return space launches to U.S. soil, create good-paying American jobs and advance our goal of sending humans farther into the solar system than ever before. These distinguished, veteran astronauts are blazing a new trail, a trail that will one day land them in the history books and Americans on the surface of Mars. (Click on each astronaut’s name to learn more about him or her!):
· Robert Behnken
· Sunita Williams
· Eric Boe
· Douglas Hurley
For as long as I’ve been Administrator, President Obama has made it very clear that returning the launches of American astronauts to American soil is a top priority – and he has persistently supported this initiative in his budget requests to Congress. Had we received everything he asked for, we’d be preparing to send these astronauts to space on commercial carriers as soon as this year. As it stands, we’re currently working toward launching in 2017, and today’s announcement allows our astronauts to begin training for these flights starting now.
We are on a Journey to Mars, and in order to meet our goals for sending American astronauts to the Red Planet in the 2030s we need to be able to focus both on deep space and the groundbreaking work being done on the International Space Station (ISS).
Our commercial crew initiative makes these parallel endeavors possible. By working with American companies to get our astronauts to the ISS, NASA is able to focus on game-changing technologies, the Orion spacecraft and the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that are geared toward getting astronauts to deep space.
Furthermore, there are real economic benefits to bolstering America’s emerging commercial space market. We have over 350 American companies working across 36 states on our commercial crew initiative. Every dollar we invest on commercial crew is a dollar we invest in ourselves, rather than in the Russian economy.
Our plans to return launches to American soil also make fiscal sense. It currently costs $76 million per astronaut to fly on a Russian spacecraft. On an American-owned spacecraft, the average cost will be $58 million per astronaut. What’s more, each mission will carry four crewmembers instead of three, along with 100 kg of materials to support the important science and research we conduct on the ISS.
For these reasons, our commercial crew program is a worthy successor to the incredible 30-year run of the Space Shuttle Program. The decision that President Bush made in 2004 to retire the Space Shuttle was not an easy decision, but it was the right decision. As you’ll recall, it was the recommendation of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, and endorsed by many people in the space community – including yours truly.
I cannot think of a better way to continue our celebration of independence this July than to mark this milestone as we look to reassert our space travel independence and end our sole reliance on Russia to get American astronauts to the International Space Station.
***
I also want to take this opportunity to offer a special word of congratulations to astronaut candidates from the Class of 2013, who are transitioning into flight-ready status. These eight outstanding Americans – four of them women, four of them men -- were selected from a pool of more than 6,300 applicants – our second largest pool of applicants, ever.
The enthusiasm for NASA’s astronaut program reminds us that journeying to space continues to be the dream of Americans everywhere. So my message to members of our incredible NASA Family, is that you must never lose sight of the fact that by your work every day, you inspire today’s students to become tomorrow’s leaders, scientists, engineers and astronauts.
You can click on each astronaut’s name to learn more about our newest astronauts:
· Josh Cassada
· Victor Glover
· Tyler "Nick" Hague
· Christina Hammock
· Nicole Mann
· Anne McClain
· Jessica Meir
· Andrew Morgan
Do you have a link for this announcement, so we can follow the links to the bios?
That's correct.
It was mentioned in the presser today that NASA would like two IDAs so they can have two vehicles docked at the same time for crew rotations. Only having one at first won't be a problem.
It's not a problem but it would force an indirect handover.
So do I understand this correctly? In the Boeing design the landing airbags (designed for land operations), also can be used as floatation in water landings?
No - acts only to break the impact.
That's correct.
It was mentioned in the presser today that NASA would like two IDAs so they can have two vehicles docked at the same time for crew rotations. Only having one at first won't be a problem.
It's not a problem but it would force an indirect handover.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
That's correct.
It was mentioned in the presser today that NASA would like two IDAs so they can have two vehicles docked at the same time for crew rotations. Only having one at first won't be a problem.
It's not a problem but it would force an indirect handover.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
When 2 docking ports are available and enough vehciles NASA will use direct handover and do port relocations to mitigate exposure, if required.
The truss, being aft of both the zenith and forward docking ports, offers basically zero protection in either case.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
The truss, being aft of both the zenith and forward docking ports, offers basically zero protection in either case.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
When Shuttle was docked, didn't the ISS flew with ROS forward? Else the USCV will be exposing its aft. Of curse they are somewhat protected by their thrunks. But Dragon's is very small. In comparison Soyuz is a lot better protected by its PAO.
The truss, being aft of both the zenith and forward docking ports, offers basically zero protection in either case.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
When Shuttle was docked, didn't the ISS flew with ROS forward? Else the USCV will be exposing its aft. Of curse they are somewhat protected by their thrunks. But Dragon's is very small. In comparison Soyuz is a lot better protected by its PAO.
The ISS is not designed to fly in that attitude permanently. This is a big issue with the commercial crewed vehicles. The Node 2 Forward position is the preferred option but at the tip of the sphere for MMOD. Zenith is slight better but you still have one side into the wind (and really particles to come at the ISS from the sides as well). Both companies are being asked to meet very tight limits - which is proving to be difficult for 6 months. Having things like your heat shield protected by a service module helps but is not perfect. The ISS is looking at inspection options but they are limited.
The truss, being aft of both the zenith and forward docking ports, offers basically zero protection in either case.
Which I understand they are going to use anyways. Using the zenith IDA would expose one full side of the capsule to MMOD, or does the truss offers enough protection?
When Shuttle was docked, didn't the ISS flew with ROS forward? Else the USCV will be exposing its aft. Of curse they are somewhat protected by their thrunks. But Dragon's is very small. In comparison Soyuz is a lot better protected by its PAO.
The ISS is not designed to fly in that attitude permanently. This is a big issue with the commercial crewed vehicles. The Node 2 Forward position is the preferred option but at the tip of the sphere for MMOD. Zenith is slight better but you still have one side into the wind (and really particles to come at the ISS from the sides as well). Both companies are being asked to meet very tight limits - which is proving to be difficult for 6 months. Having things like your heat shield protected by a service module helps but is not perfect. The ISS is looking at inspection options but they are limited.
Shouldn't then move the IDA from forward to Nadir, now that there is a second CBM in nadir?