Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2  (Read 521075 times)

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10317
  • 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 #220 on: 03/16/2014 04:26 pm »
A crew of 4 is still less than 40 million per passenger (assuming no cargo and no extra passengers on the flight). Still cheap compared to 70 million for the Russians.
Not only that, those are dollars that stay in America, a lot goes back to government in taxes and almost all of it stays in the US economy.

Also it is a political move. As an European, I don't understand how Americans tolerate that Russian dependency.

Problem is the timing need to get a crew system up and running by 2015 as planned.

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

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #221 on: 03/16/2014 04:29 pm »
Problem is the timing need to get a crew system up and running by 2015 as planned.
Could have been faster if congress had funded commercial crew as requested. Instead they cut funding, rather sending money to the Russians.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10317
  • 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 #222 on: 03/16/2014 05:02 pm »
Problem is the timing need to get a crew system up and running by 2015 as planned.
Could have been faster if congress had funded commercial crew as requested. Instead they cut funding, rather sending money to the Russians.

sorry your going to disagree with me on this  :o

Its not underfunded;  the millstones are getting all the funds they requested.

Not fully funded is another word game  :-X
« Last Edit: 03/19/2014 01:06 am by Prober »
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

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #223 on: 03/16/2014 05:33 pm »
Problem is the timing need to get a crew system up and running by 2015 as planned.
Could have been faster if congress had funded commercial crew as requested. Instead they cut funding, rather sending money to the Russians.

sorry your going to disagree with me on this  :o

Its not underfunded the millstones are getting all the funds they requested.

Not fully funded is another word game  :-X
No, they got less money than requested. That meant that the money was not there to pay the milestones as originally planned and had to be delayed years on NASAs side (pay it with next years budget or the budget of the year after that). This is not what I say, that's what NASA says. And this is on topic as it affects CST 100 as well.
« Last Edit: 03/16/2014 05:34 pm by Elmar Moelzer »

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1459
  • Likes Given: 4518
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #224 on: 03/16/2014 09:14 pm »
I don't know about the others. But I'm pretty sure the Boeing with a full funding profile could have gotten the CST-100 commissioned by 2015. If there's anybody that could have done it, it's them.

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 963
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 501
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #225 on: 03/16/2014 09:17 pm »
Its not underfunded the millstones are getting all the funds they requested.

Not fully funded is another word game  :-X
So you claim underfunding commercial few years in row hasn't any negative effects? ::) Or that there were not any underfunding? ::)

It is like reading some comments under articles about situation in Crimea...
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline TrevorMonty

Both Dream Chaser ( started in 2004) and Dragon will be taken to completion with or without NASA funding. Not so sure about CST100.
 With extension of ISS to 2024 there are more crew and cargo supply contracts up for grab. Enough business for 2-3 suppliers/vehicles but a 4th vehicle may have to find alternative work.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #227 on: 03/31/2014 10:38 pm »
NASA Commercial Crew Partners Complete Space System Milestones - March 31, 2014
http://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-commercial-crew-partners-complete-space-system-milestones-0/#.UznTfNy5o-J



Press Release was posted over in the DC thread.

CST-100 primary structures CDR complete. Software CDR anticipated in April.

Offline wolfpack

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 699
  • Wake Forest, NC
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #228 on: 04/01/2014 02:18 pm »
I wouldn't discount CST-100 so much. (Warning - unfounded opinion follows). Boeing has plenty on its plate outside of CST-100, so the fact they don't toot their own horn about it perhaps as much as others do their respective products doesn't mean its not progressing. I'd worry more about DC. Crashing a flight test article is not good.

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #229 on: 04/01/2014 02:57 pm »
I wouldn't discount CST-100 so much. (Warning - unfounded opinion follows). Boeing has plenty on its plate outside of CST-100, so the fact they don't toot their own horn about it perhaps as much as others do their respective products doesn't mean its not progressing. I'd worry more about DC. Crashing a flight test article is not good.

The landing crash means nothing other than showing the aircraft and crew can walk away to fly again. They used landing gear harvested from an F-5.


Offline simonbp

I wouldn't discount CST-100 so much. (Warning - unfounded opinion follows). Boeing has plenty on its plate outside of CST-100, so the fact they don't toot their own horn about it perhaps as much as others do their respective products doesn't mean its not progressing. I'd worry more about DC. Crashing a flight test article is not good.

The landing crash means nothing other than showing the aircraft and crew can walk away to fly again. They used landing gear harvested from an F-5.

Not to belabor the point, but it was a failure that should never have happened. F-5s don't regularly crash upon landing. Someone wasn't doing their job right.

SNC was going for a splash with that first drop test, and got more than they bargained for. Boeing is taking a slower, more incremental approach, which is much less likely to produce "surprises" like DreamChaser's crash.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2014 05:45 am by simonbp »

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #231 on: 04/04/2014 12:29 pm »
F5s don't regular crash because they use their own gear.

Sierra installed what they could in time to meet the milestone. The biggest challenge was verifying the aircraft could even fly. It flew perfectly.

The comparison to CST-100 is irrelevant. We know capsules can fly. At some point SNC had to take a bold step before they began OTV fabrication to verify the design.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2014 12:33 pm by newpylong »

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #232 on: 04/04/2014 01:47 pm »

The comparison to CST-100 is irrelevant. We know capsules can fly. At some point SNC had to take a bold step before they began OTV fabrication to verify the design.

Actually, don't all capsules need to somehow manage the angle of attack they used upon reentry, so that they get the proper "lift" or maximum effect of the heat shield ? It may not be as difficult as guiding an airframe to a landing on a runway, but something needs to be done during the early stages of de-orbit.

I haven't seen the video from the SNC landing, but the video from the CST-100 parachute / airbag tests didn't exactly show a nice gentle touchdown either.

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1722
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 419
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #233 on: 04/04/2014 02:50 pm »

The comparison to CST-100 is irrelevant. We know capsules can fly. At some point SNC had to take a bold step before they began OTV fabrication to verify the design.

Actually, don't all capsules need to somehow manage the angle of attack they used upon reentry, so that they get the proper "lift" or maximum effect of the heat shield ? It may not be as difficult as guiding an airframe to a landing on a runway, but something needs to be done during the early stages of de-orbit.

I haven't seen the video from the SNC landing, but the video from the CST-100 parachute / airbag tests didn't exactly show a nice gentle touchdown either.
A capsule can generate lift during reentry, though certainly not as much as a lifting body or winged vehicle. Doing so allows for a wider cross range, smaller landing area, and lower deceleration forces on the crew. So most capsules do this. However this is not strictly necessary when returning from LEO. The Mercury, Vostok, and Voskhod capsules did not generate lift. On occasion the Soyuz has been forced to do a ballistic entry due to an inability to control attitude. Capsules returning from BEO though do need to generate lift due to the more extreme deceleration forces and heat.

At hyper-sonic speeds the Shuttle and Dream Chase are not really flying all that much either, acting more like blunt bodies. It is the low speed low altitude part of the flight that need a bit of testing. Orion, Dragon, and CTS-100 all are undergoing numerous parachute tests and Dream Chaser like the Shuttle before is doing landing tests.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #234 on: 04/04/2014 06:44 pm »
CST-100 coverage in Boeing Frontiers (company publication).

http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2014/april/#/20/

Not much new. A lot of talk about adapting the airliner interior elements to CST. One caption caught my attention:

Quote
Boeing’s CST-100 spacecraft will typically carry five people plus cargo to low Earth orbit destinations, including the International Space Station.

NASA is rotating 4 crew. Is Boeing proposing a taxi model?

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #235 on: 04/05/2014 12:04 am »
Is the 5th person a commercial "pilot", maybe?

Offline Sesquipedalian

  • Whee!
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 649
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 626
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #236 on: 04/05/2014 03:18 am »
That's the same question as "is this a taxi model".

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #237 on: 04/07/2014 12:08 am »
The quote says "destinations". If you're going to a Bigelow station, more passengers = more money.

Offline Wigles

  • Member
  • Posts: 52
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #238 on: 04/08/2014 11:47 am »
The taxi model could result in more flexibility for customers, including NASA as the passangers do not get involved in flying and therefore don't need to be qualified and trained as such. NASA could swap out astronauts with little notice if required.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1459
  • Likes Given: 4518
Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #239 on: 04/08/2014 01:21 pm »
For ISS the capsule are also used for emergency evacuation. They'll need to keep a couple of NASA astronauts trained onboard. So "taxi" model doesn't works on ISS as currently projected. Also, there are just two docking ports. And NASA wants two open for redundancy for crew docking. So keeping a dedicated egress vehicle of other company is not a good option either.
I'm frankly baffled. I understood that the next Russian module would allow for just one extra crew. And that the partners are planning keeping just one Soyuz and on Commercial Crew Vehicle on station. In each increment one will land and the next of the same will go up. In this scenario, unless Russians come up with a four crew Soyuz, there's no space for temporary crew members.
« Last Edit: 04/08/2014 01:27 pm by baldusi »

Tags: