Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2  (Read 521181 times)

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 #720 on: 12/16/2014 03:05 pm »
With all those touch-screens, moving seats and the like, I'm thinking that both Boeing and SpaceX's interior design engineers are fully paid-up Trekkies! ;D
"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!!!

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13122
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4378
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #721 on: 12/16/2014 08:18 pm »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
Surely there is a "co-pilot" position?

 - Ed Kyle

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #722 on: 12/16/2014 10:11 pm »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
Surely there is a "co-pilot" position?

 - Ed Kyle

I don't think there's a co-pilot position in the way you'd see in an airliner with duplicate displays, controls, etc. Look at the pictures of Ferguson in the simulator.

The way it's described I think whoever's in the left seat is already the "co-pilot," the flight computer is supposed to be flying the capsule anyways.

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13122
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4378
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #723 on: 12/17/2014 12:27 am »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/17/2014 12:27 am by edkyle99 »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28759
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8869
  • Likes Given: 5743
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #724 on: 12/17/2014 01:02 am »
SpaceX has option of using Dragon 2 for both if they wanted to, too. But the docking port is much smaller for the crew vehicles, so Dragon cargo no doubt offers the superior value to NASA.

And besides, Where is the profit for Boeing if they offer it at a competitive price? The launch on Atlas V (with a couple solids) alone costs as much as SpaceX charged for fully expended Falcon 9 and Dragon combined.
« Last Edit: 12/17/2014 01:06 am by Robotbeat »
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 erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1289
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #725 on: 12/17/2014 01:06 am »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
Surely there is a "co-pilot" position?

 - Ed Kyle

I don't think there's a co-pilot position in the way you'd see in an airliner with duplicate displays, controls, etc. Look at the pictures of Ferguson in the simulator.

The way it's described I think whoever's in the left seat is already the "co-pilot," the flight computer is supposed to be flying the capsule anyways.

Requirement is to be able to operate these commercial vehicles with one person.  NASA will almost certainly train two.

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 #726 on: 12/17/2014 12:20 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

Would a "CST-100C" need to be re-engineered to have a CBM rather than an NDS at the apex?
"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 MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 935
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 647
  • Likes Given: 1166
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #727 on: 12/17/2014 01:07 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

Would a "CST-100C" need to be re-engineered to have a CBM rather than an NDS at the apex?

My guess is no since the CST's design would have to be widened considerably, making it effectively a new spacecraft. They'd use the NASA docking port and cargo would be scaled to fit there. If they needed larger items, Cygnus and Dragon v1 and their use of the CBM would do.

A cargo CST has quite a bit of pressurized volume but I can't locate the usable volume in comparison to Dragon v1 and v2.

The versatility of having three cargo craft (Cygnus, Dragon, CST-100) is something NASA shouldn't say no to, especially in light of the recent Antares failure. I'm not sure about the CST's service module propulsion, but it may also be a bonus if it can provide needed orbital boosts to the ISS itself. Bonus for NASA gaining a 2nd vehicle with safe cargo return ability.
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13122
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4378
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #728 on: 12/17/2014 01:41 pm »
The versatility of having three cargo craft (Cygnus, Dragon, CST-100) is something NASA shouldn't say no to, especially in light of the recent Antares failure. I'm not sure about the CST's service module propulsion, but it may also be a bonus if it can provide needed orbital boosts to the ISS itself. Bonus for NASA gaining a 2nd vehicle with safe cargo return ability.
I see a need for a Cygnus-like cargo hauler (no heavy heat shield so more upmass and more volume) and for one return-capable cargo ship (Dragon or CST or something else).  One of each would be enough.

 - Ed Kyle

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 #729 on: 12/17/2014 01:42 pm »
Please consider that ISS would just have two NDS docking ports. Thus, a cargo craft that only uses docking (instead of berthing) means that there would be no redundancy of docking ports for the cargo craft. And they would have to be cleared for the docking of manned crafts to enable a second docking option for crew. Not to mention the limitation for cargo. The latest IDSS standard has fixed petals. 800mm round hole is a lot less than a 1500mm square one. The pressure vessels are formed from one billet and then machined. Looking at its design, it would seem like they could widen a bit the tunnel passage. it might need a new aerodynamic fairing. But they'll be customizing quite a lot of it anyways to reduce costs.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5330
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2632
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #730 on: 12/19/2014 12:22 pm »
IIRC, though both Dragon V1 and Cygnus use CBM they have different hatch sizes.

Dragon V1: 1270 mm
Cygnus: 940 mm
DM

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 #731 on: 12/20/2014 11:00 am »
IIRC, though both Dragon V1 and Cygnus use CBM they have different hatch sizes.

Dragon V1: 1270 mm
Cygnus: 940 mm
But the CBM berthing ring is exactly the same. You could have no door, but you still need the collar. I believe that's how the ISS truss is attached, in fact. The question is if CST-100 has enough diameter for such a ring.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9773
  • Liked: 1460
  • Likes Given: 887
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #732 on: 12/20/2014 03:20 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle

We will see. I don't see why NASA would be willing to pay twice the price for the same service for cargo. It is possible that NASA would select three companies for cargo. 

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9219
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 3068
  • Likes Given: 8345
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #733 on: 12/20/2014 03:32 pm »
I just donít see another capsule player needed for cargo since they are essentially duplication of the same entry forces and donít provide the low g entry of Dream Chaser on sensitive experiments...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4425
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 3071
  • Likes Given: 4181
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #734 on: 12/20/2014 03:55 pm »
My guess is no since the CST's design would have to be widened considerably, making it effectively a new spacecraft. They'd use the NASA docking port and cargo would be scaled to fit there. If they needed larger items, Cygnus and Dragon v1 and their use of the CBM would do.

In which case why use the CST-100 if it cannot do the job by itself?  Remember that's the whole reason for redundancy is that any vehicle can perform the required tasks for getting cargo to the ISS.

Returning cargo to Earth is currently a mixed bag, where right now only the SpaceX Dragon can return significant cargo, but once Commercial Crew comes online then any of the CC vehicles could be used to return cargo that fits through their docking ports (GLACIER freezers would be an issue, but maybe their contents could be transferred).  That would allow operations to continue until any problems are solved.

Quote
The versatility of having three cargo craft (Cygnus, Dragon, CST-100) is something NASA shouldn't say no to, especially in light of the recent Antares failure.

And they won't have to, since once both Commercial Crew vehicles becomes operational NASA will have access to four different spacecraft that would be capable of moving cargo to the ISS (two with size restrictions), and three that can return cargo to Earth (two with size restrictions).

NASA's decision point for the CRS2 contract should be based on price at this point, since technical issues have already been dealt with (or being dealt with on CCtCap).
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13122
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4378
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #735 on: 12/20/2014 04:01 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle

We will see. I don't see why NASA would be willing to pay twice the price for the same service for cargo. It is possible that NASA would select three companies for cargo. 
If it selects three companies, won't NASA then end up paying three times the price?

 - Ed Kyle

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9773
  • Liked: 1460
  • Likes Given: 887
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #736 on: 12/20/2014 05:48 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle

We will see. I don't see why NASA would be willing to pay twice the price for the same service for cargo. It is possible that NASA would select three companies for cargo. 
If it selects three companies, won't NASA then end up paying three times the price?

 - Ed Kyle

What I meant by my twice the price comment is that I don't think that Boeing will win an award if their price is twice as much as SpaceX's (as was the case for commercial crew).

In any event, I don't think that the economies of scale are that large. If one proposal is much more expensive then I would go with the two that are the least expensive. But if they are all roughly the same price, there is some logic in selecting 3 companies for CRS2 (e.g., Boeing, SpaceX and Orbital).
« Last Edit: 12/20/2014 05:55 pm by yg1968 »

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #737 on: 12/20/2014 06:14 pm »
my "dark horse" musing for CRS II was a Boeing/ULA "big transfer vehicle." Basically an American HTV clone (if not simply a Japanese built HTV). If US-built, the service module would have some CST-100 commonality. Really big 4.5m diameter pressurized module on the front with a CBM. Boeing would offer 1 of these per year starting in 2018, but launched on an Atlas 541/551 or even a DIV-H and carrying 7+ tons of cargo. It would give NASA a way to get more cargo to station without adding more flights. In this scenario, Cynus probably goes away.

In light of Orbital's recent trouble I think NASA would be very interested.

Seems like they're offering some kind of cargo optimized CST-100, which I don't think will be competitive.

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 #738 on: 12/20/2014 06:21 pm »
News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle

We will see. I don't see why NASA would be willing to pay twice the price for the same service for cargo. It is possible that NASA would select three companies for cargo. 
If it selects three companies, won't NASA then end up paying three times the price?

 - Ed Kyle
It really depends. Having a third supplier with a low launch rate (say 1/yr), could be done by CST-100, adding some redundancy for down mass and helping spread the fixed costs of the crewed capsule. Thus, NASA might pay 3X for one flight, but on the overall line of CSR2, it might be just an extra 25%. If it doesn't pays 3X, but more like 1.5X (compared to Dragon, that's probably 200M/mission), then on the overall budget it would be around +10%. Personally, if they are going to do a "third" supply I would select DreamChaser. But I could see them adding the CST-100, too.

Offline sublimemarsupial

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #739 on: 12/20/2014 08:12 pm »

News today that Boeing is offering CST-100 for the cargo contract as well.  Having an essentially identical craft working both contracts would seem to be a big advantage compared to SpaceX, which is using basic Dragon for cargo and is working on a more elaborate Dragon 2 for crew.  The CST-100 synergy may also make tough competition for Cygnus.

 - Ed Kyle

What says SpaceX didn't bid for CRS2 with Dragon 2 as their cargo vehicle rather than Dragon 1?

Tags: