Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2  (Read 520873 times)

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10314
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #60 on: 01/26/2014 05:02 pm »
Here you go

http://events.aviationweek.com/html/ad13/Nov%2013_Mulholland.pdf

On page 4 of this presentation it mentions "Solar Panels (Mission Kit)" pictured on the bottom of the service module. Is this a new development as I thought the CST-100 was battery only... Or is this an option for longer duration missions or something?

Noticed that as well and believe its a good move on their part.  My only issue might be the location of the Solar panels.  Won't they get damaged by the thrusters?
 
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28750
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8852
  • Likes Given: 5741
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #61 on: 01/26/2014 05:07 pm »
"Mission kit" means optional.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #62 on: 01/26/2014 06:28 pm »
from @Commercial_Crew

Quote
Former astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #63 on: 01/26/2014 06:38 pm »
Here you go

http://events.aviationweek.com/html/ad13/Nov%2013_Mulholland.pdf

On page 4 of this presentation it mentions "Solar Panels (Mission Kit)" pictured on the bottom of the service module. Is this a new development as I thought the CST-100 was battery only... Or is this an option for longer duration missions or something?

Noticed that as well and believe its a good move on their part.  My only issue might be the location of the Solar panels.  Won't they get damaged by the thrusters?
 

Should be clear of the OMAC thrusters. I don't think anything on ISS would impinge on that either (assuming the solar mission kit ever flew to ISS).

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Liked: 449
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #64 on: 01/26/2014 11:44 pm »

So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?

Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4925
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 153
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #65 on: 01/26/2014 11:55 pm »
from @Commercial_Crew

Quote
Former astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK
Have not seen the same from the competition

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #66 on: 01/27/2014 12:57 am »

So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?

A good catch!

I have also attached an image of a crew access tower from the PDF. (edit: found a higher resolution version)
« Last Edit: 01/27/2014 12:58 am by Lars_J »

Offline BrightLight

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Northern New Mexico
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 349
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #67 on: 01/27/2014 01:04 am »

So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?
what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #68 on: 01/27/2014 01:16 am »


So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?
what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

Decreases. But I'm curious what caused the change - has the CST-100 mass grown so much in the last year?

Offline BrightLight

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Northern New Mexico
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 349
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #69 on: 01/27/2014 01:25 am »


So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?
what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

Decreases. But I'm curious what caused the change - has the CST-100 mass grown so much in the last year?
so its possible that the reliability of the LV decreases compared to a Atlas V 402 and the cost increases - compared to the SNC DC - hmmm,.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #70 on: 01/27/2014 01:51 am »

So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?

Does it say that somewhere? The renderings could be wrong. They'll probably always call it a 400 series since the centaur isn't under a fairing.



So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?
what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

Decreases. But I'm curious what caused the change - has the CST-100 mass grown so much in the last year?
so its possible that the reliability of the LV decreases compared to a Atlas V 402 and the cost increases - compared to the SNC DC - hmmm,.

Boeing is just distributing the risk differently; the LV does more and the spacecraft does less. Not asking Atlas V to do anything it hasn't done before.
« Last Edit: 01/27/2014 02:01 am by arachnitect »

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Liked: 449
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #71 on: 01/27/2014 03:12 am »
Quote from: BrightLight
...do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

It may provide engine-out capability for dual-engine centaur, then it would increase reliability.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32546
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11333
  • Likes Given: 334
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #72 on: 01/27/2014 03:13 am »
Quote from: BrightLight
...do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?

It may provide engine-out capability for dual-engine centaur, then it would increase reliability.

Centaur doesn't have engine out capability

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Liked: 449
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #73 on: 01/27/2014 03:20 am »
Quote from: Jim
Centaur doesn't have engine out capability

So what would happen if one engine fails on DEC? The other one must be shut down too?

But whatever, its not like engine-out capability is necessary in this case.
« Last Edit: 01/27/2014 03:37 am by Oli »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8828
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 5886
  • Likes Given: 1990
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #74 on: 01/27/2014 07:46 am »
from @Commercial_Crew

Quote
Former astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK
Have not seen the same from the competition
No? Here's the SNC DC one: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/commercial/crew/dreamchaser-sim-langley.html

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10063
  • UK
  • Liked: 1983
  • Likes Given: 197
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #75 on: 01/27/2014 11:23 am »
So why does this need the 522 configuration yet DC can use the no doubt cheaper 402 configuration?

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7144
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 663
  • Likes Given: 777
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #76 on: 01/27/2014 11:35 am »
@Star One,

I'm not sure but I think some of it this extra thrust requirement comes from compensating for the mass of the 5m fairing around the Centaur. I believe that CST-100 has turned out heavier than initially projected too.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #77 on: 01/27/2014 01:55 pm »
@Star One,

I'm not sure but I think some of it this extra thrust requirement comes from compensating for the mass of the 5m fairing around the Centaur. I believe that CST-100 has turned out heavier than initially projected too.
That just made the CST-100 a lot less attractive and might give the DC an edge.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10063
  • UK
  • Liked: 1983
  • Likes Given: 197
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #78 on: 01/27/2014 01:56 pm »

@Star One,

I'm not sure but I think some of it this extra thrust requirement comes from compensating for the mass of the 5m fairing around the Centaur. I believe that CST-100 has turned out heavier than initially projected too.

I can't help feeling this being the case it's a negative point in the comparison to DC unless there is some compensation through higher payload delivery or other plus points to offset this?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9769
  • Liked: 1459
  • Likes Given: 886
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #79 on: 01/27/2014 01:57 pm »
So why does this need the 522 configuration yet DC can use the no doubt cheaper 402 configuration?

Do we know that CST-100 will use the 522? How do we know it's not the 422?

Tags: