Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2  (Read 521090 times)

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Canada
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 649
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #740 on: 12/22/2014 04:28 am »
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.

NASA is looking for a service, delivering and returning cargo from the ISS. Not paying for development of yet another vehicle. Unless Boeing, LMart or ULA does the vehicle development on their own dime, NASA will not be interested.

Offline Garrett

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1108
  • France
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #741 on: 12/22/2014 09:12 am »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo
(i.e. two crew members at the controls)
- "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." - Indiana Jones

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2643
  • Canada
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 649
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #742 on: 12/22/2014 05:19 pm »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo
(i.e. two crew members at the controls)

IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.

It puzzle me why you need 2 pilots to monitor an autonomous automatic docking, unless you are proposing manual docking to the ISS.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #743 on: 12/22/2014 05:23 pm »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo
(i.e. two crew members at the controls)

IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.

It puzzle me why you need 2 pilots to monitor an autonomous automatic docking, unless you are proposing manual docking to the ISS.


CST-100 ISS version has 5 seats.

Offline TrevorMonty

Here is presentation on CST100 (6 Feb 13)

http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/archivelist.htm

They deliberately took a low cost (internal cost), low technology risk approach. Using as much existing in in-house technology they had ie  what can we use from our extensive parts bin.
CST-100 is only designed for LEO there is no BLEO capabilities built into it.

NASA were not after new technology just reliable transport to ISS that will be built on schedule and to a fix cost.
NASA definitely didn't want another Spaceship Two where it is always 2yrs away from flying.

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1289
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #745 on: 12/24/2014 12:43 am »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo
(i.e. two crew members at the controls)

IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.

It puzzle me why you need 2 pilots to monitor an autonomous automatic docking, unless you are proposing manual docking to the ISS.

The commercial companies may design a vehicle that can carry whatever they want - seems both are targeting about 7.  However, NASA requires to be able to send 1, 2, 3 or 4.    There are no requirements or official plans to have it as a lifeboat for 7. 

Manual docking is also a requirement for the CCP.  The big debate is that means different things to different people - for example, does it mean fully taking the stick and piloting under 6 degrees of freedom?  On top of the fault tolerance of an autonomous vehicle that is a pretty hefty addition (cost, complexity).  But even then, NASA will train a backup person for piloting the vehicle.  If for no other contigency, deconditioned crews may need the help on returning.

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #746 on: 12/24/2014 01:21 am »
The 1+6 seating in that photo looks like 6 are passengers and only one gets to work the knobs.
That's the "commercial" concept for seven passengers. The version for NASA will likely carry only four crew members and the seating layout will look more like what's shown in the attached photo
(i.e. two crew members at the controls)

IIRC commercial crew vehicles is suppose to be lifeboat for 7 personnel. So seating will be needed for 7.
They're not. They're only required to serve as a lifeboat for a crew of four.
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline fast

  • Member
  • Posts: 66
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #747 on: 12/25/2014 09:49 am »
What are the engines Boeing is planning to use for CST abort system?
I mean those 4 big nozzles at the bottom of SM, I suppose those are abort motors?

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 10087
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #748 on: 12/25/2014 01:47 pm »
 It seems like capability to evacuate 7 would be a good thing to have. If something major requiring evacuation caused Soyuz to be unavailable it would be kind of rude to just leave three people behind.
 Two qualified pilots would be because they want piloted mode to be redundant in itself and not just a redundancy for automatic operation.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 487
  • Likes Given: 230
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #749 on: 12/25/2014 03:08 pm »
It seems like capability to evacuate 7 would be a good thing to have. If something major requiring evacuation caused Soyuz to be unavailable it would be kind of rude to just leave three people behind.
Seats and carrying capacity in an emergency are two different things. Apollo was determined to be able to carry 6 people back from Skylab in an emergency, despite only having 3 seats. A couple people may not have a comfortable ride back, but they'll have a ride back.

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 #750 on: 12/25/2014 03:15 pm »
One issue I've just now realized, is that a catastrophic failure that required the crew to leave in a matter of minutes, might prevent to ago across the station. Thus, having your crewed crafts on each side might be an important security consideration. From that point of view, current Commercial Crew seems like a good solution. Regrettably, the RS won't have enough Soyuzes once the Americans start using their own vehicles. Of course that current situation is worse with all escape vehicles on one side.

Offline brihath

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 878
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #751 on: 12/25/2014 03:19 pm »
The plan with Apollo was to add 2 couches and launch with a crew of 2 to rescue the 3 crew onboard Skylab.  This option was considered in 1974 during the third Skylab mission due to a failed thruster quad.  Vance Brand and Don Lind were selected as the rescue crew, but further analysis of the failure determined that a rescue was not necessary.

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1289
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #752 on: 12/25/2014 04:39 pm »
It seems like capability to evacuate 7 would be a good thing to have. If something major requiring evacuation caused Soyuz to be unavailable it would be kind of rude to just leave three people behind.
 Two qualified pilots would be because they want piloted mode to be redundant in itself and not just a redundancy for automatic operation.

Yes, that would be nice, but it is not required.  The cost of keeping a spare spacecraft for an extremely unlikely event is not practical.   Equipment and procedures are designed to not be rude to anyone.  There is always some risk in space so unless you have a spare 7 seater on both ends there is still a chance you could cut someone off.  Most likely such a catastrophic event (e.g., MMOD hit) will kill the crew but we hope to give every advantage possible.    Even the idea of being able to launch a spare empty spacecraft to rescue the crew is not required - it would be a nice capabilitya nd hopefully with two companies, one is always ready for that sort of case but no one is planning that hard for that contingency (bigger fish to worry about frying).

Two pilots help for redudnancy and to assist each other.  If you are having a bad day where you are manually flying the vehicle, having two sets of eyes to check each other and offload each other is very useful, especially when you are coming home after 6 months.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13121
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4378
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #753 on: 12/25/2014 08:46 pm »
What are the engines Boeing is planning to use for CST abort system?
I mean those 4 big nozzles at the bottom of SM, I suppose those are abort motors?
RS-88 by Aerojet-Rocketdyne.  N2O4/MMH so that propellant can be used during mission (retro burn primarily) if not for abort.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/25/2014 08:49 pm by edkyle99 »

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4725
  • California
  • Liked: 4419
  • Likes Given: 2684
Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #754 on: 12/26/2014 04:55 am »
What are the engines Boeing is planning to use for CST abort system?
I mean those 4 big nozzles at the bottom of SM, I suppose those are abort motors?
RS-88 by Aerojet-Rocketdyne.  N2O4/MMH so that propellant can be used during mission (retro burn primarily) if not for abort.

 - Ed Kyle

I thought it was a modified RS-88 that uses KeroLox? Or I could be mistaken.
« Last Edit: 12/26/2014 04:56 am by Lars-J »

Offline USFdon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 123
  • SF Bay Area
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #755 on: 12/26/2014 06:13 am »
The original RS-88 Bantam ran on Ethanol/LOX. This variant runs on hypergolics with an ablative nozzle if I'm not mistaken.

Offline tesla

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • PhD Student
  • State College, PA, USA
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #756 on: 01/23/2015 09:03 am »
Does anyone have a link to a data sheet of general CST 100 properties? Like how is it powered? How long can it stay under its own LSS. How does the integrated LAS work? Propellants used? etc. And maybe some launch vehilce data would be nice too.

THANK YOU!!!!  :D
Go SLS and Orion! God bless America.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #757 on: 01/23/2015 04:49 pm »
Does anyone have a link to a data sheet of general CST 100 properties? Like how is it powered? How long can it stay under its own LSS. How does the integrated LAS work? Propellants used? etc. And maybe some launch vehilce data would be nice too.

THANK YOU!!!!  :D

Old, but probably most comprehensive: http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Reiley_2-6-13/

Power: Batteries with solar panel "mission kit" to help maintain charge

Nominal Endurance: 48 hours.

LAS is a pusher setup using 4 modified RS-88 motors mounted in the Service module along with attitude control thrusters mounted in "doghouse" pods around the SM. Propellants are NTO/MMH.

Launch Vehicle is Atlas V 422. Usually lots of information about Atlas available, but this will be a new variant so not as much data out there.

Offline tesla

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • PhD Student
  • State College, PA, USA
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #758 on: 01/24/2015 10:38 am »
Does anyone have a link to a data sheet of general CST 100 properties? Like how is it powered? How long can it stay under its own LSS. How does the integrated LAS work? Propellants used? etc. And maybe some launch vehilce data would be nice too.

THANK YOU!!!!  :D

Old, but probably most comprehensive: http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Reiley_2-6-13/

Power: Batteries with solar panel "mission kit" to help maintain charge

Nominal Endurance: 48 hours.

LAS is a pusher setup using 4 modified RS-88 motors mounted in the Service module along with attitude control thrusters mounted in "doghouse" pods around the SM. Propellants are NTO/MMH.

Launch Vehicle is Atlas V 422. Usually lots of information about Atlas available, but this will be a new variant so not as much data out there.

Thanks! And so it is solar powered? But where are the solar panels in all the CST 100 pictures? Or is it only battery powered in the initial config?
Go SLS and Orion! God bless America.

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5330
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2632
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Boeing's CST-100 capsule updates & discussion THREAD 2
« Reply #759 on: 01/24/2015 02:14 pm »
The arrays are a mission kit applied on the underside of the service module, between the abort thrusters.  Bottom right on the attached image,

« Last Edit: 01/24/2015 02:19 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Tags: