"Used" Dragons

[dasmoth]

Because if they refurbish a Dragon and fly it again for CRS, that's one new Dragon they don't get to have NASA pay for.
So while NASA is paying for new Dragons, build new Dragons. Every new one is an additional Dragon in the barn that they don't have to pay for themselves. It's pure economics - nothing more.

It's a fixed price contract, right?  So a reused Dragon == spare cash for Raptor development or whatever.

So it comes down to whether or not they want that many dragons in the barn.  And/or how much it costs to refurbish one after salt water immersion.

[Rocket Science]

Because if they refurbish a Dragon and fly it again for CRS, that's one new Dragon they don't get to have NASA pay for.
So while NASA is paying for new Dragons, build new Dragons. Every new one is an additional Dragon in the barn that they don't have to pay for themselves. It's pure economics - nothing more.

It's a fixed price contract, right?  So a reused Dragon == spare cash for Raptor development or whatever.

So it comes down to whether or not they want that many dragons in the barn.  And/or how much it costs to refurbish one after salt water immersion.

A good metric may be when they begin to perform propulsive landings and avoiding any salt water immersion...

[aero]

Maybe SpaceX should start transporting cargo to the ISS using crew Dragons. That way they get to test fly the crew Dragons and end up with a more valuable/versatile Dragon when it is recovered, paid for by the current contract. Of course it would cost them money now based on the nature of the contract.

[meekGee]

All NASA said to Spacex was to bid the costs of new vehicles since refurb costs were unknown at the time.  And since they did, NASA gets a new Dragon each mission.

Interesting.  If that's ALL that NASA said, than I read it differently.

I read it that NASA told SpaceX to bid the *costs* of new vehicles, since given the financial unknowns, a bid that already takes capsule reuse into account my turn out to be such a losing proposition that SpaceX will not be able to uphold the contract.   Also maybe, cost-wise, NASA also wanted to compare apples to apples.

But if the contract doesn't specify new Dragons,  and SpaceX can perform the tasks using used Dragons, than I don't see why NASA would object.

[MP99]

It is to SpaceX's advantage therefore to supply a new Dragon for each CRS mission and keep the already flown (and paid for) reusable spacecraft for their own developing in-house spaceflight program.

It's also to their advantage to refurbish a Dragon and fly it again, if it costs less than a new Dragon. Assuming mission success, they get paid the same either way. So why haven't they? Surely, making a bigger profit on a signed contract makes a lot more sense than building up a supply for some unspecified future business. Maybe they're not so certain of mission success with a refurbished Dragon?

I agree. And I'd expect it tried sometime before CRS-12.

But maybe they want to build up the fleet a bit or the design hasn't stabilised yet? (why reuse one you know is wrong when a better one is in the wings). Or maybe they're just too busy right now and wil have time in a flight or 3... So ya, I think they will, just not next flight.

A little bit of upgrades each flight as they learn more.
They will want them quick turn around and at as little cost as possible. That should be after the first land-landing.

They might reuse one for a Dragon Lab mission, less to risk and  no risk for CRS/ISS.

Elon has said they didn't really know what they were doing when they designed Dragon, which they will fix with a later iteration. Not really sure if this is v2 or DragonRider, or in fact those will be much the same thing. [Edit: see below.]

We know there were mods to the CRS-3 dragon (increased freezer power, waterproofing, etc), which probably contributed to the delay of that flight.

I suspect they'll not want to re-fly their current stock, unless maybe for some form of DragonLab.

Edit:-

@elonmusk  Apr 29
Sounds like this might be a good time to unveil the new Dragon Mk 2 spaceship that @SpaceX has been working on with @NASA. No trampoline needed

‏@elonmusk
Cover drops on May 29. Actual flight design hardware of crew Dragon, not a mockup.

cheers, Martin

[meekGee]

I suspect they'll not want to re-fly their current stock, unless maybe for some form of DragonLab.

Very much so.
SpaceX doesn't cling.

[manboy]

Maybe SpaceX should start transporting cargo to the ISS using crew Dragons. That way they get to test fly the crew Dragons and end up with a more valuable/versatile Dragon when it is recovered, paid for by the current contract. Of course it would cost them money now based on the nature of the contract.

That wouldn't be possible until the first International Docking Adapter (IDA) gets launched, which is currently slated for April 2015 on SpX CRS-7. Also the NASA Docking Adapter has a smaller passthrough diameter than the Common Berthing Mechanism (which is what Cargp Dragon uses), which would limit the size of volumetrically larger payloads that could be delivered.

[clongton]

Maybe SpaceX should start transporting cargo to the ISS using crew Dragons. That way they get to test fly the crew Dragons and end up with a more valuable/versatile Dragon when it is recovered, paid for by the current contract. Of course it would cost them money now based on the nature of the contract.

There will be no differences between cargo Dragon and crew Dragon except that crew accommodations are removed to make room for cargo accommodations. I expect there to be a single manufacturing line for Dragon, with 2 final destination stations; 1 for crew and 1 for cargo for appropriate outfitting, which would include the appropriate docking or birthing mechanism. They are and will be the same basic vehicle. SpaceX will not be building or flying 2 different spacecraft.

[swervin]

WRT possible reuses of a Dragon spacecraft: how high of an orbit can a F9 get the spacecraft, in a 'mostly empty' state? Seems a possible useful test would be to test a very FAST re-entry (similar to what NASA is going to do, I think, with Orion) to gather more data on just how much the PICA-X heat shield can take?

I definitely agree with most postings above though, why not build new spacecraft for each mission. This builds up not only add'l capsules, but the processes and knowledge gained by producing more capsules can streamline said process in later iterations with lessons learned.

I think it will be some time until reuse occurs, however, as their manifest is way to packed to take on another 'experiment' right now, IMO -- regardless of how much I want to see it! :-) Possible contender for an early FH test launch, however... if they do not find a commercial company willing to be the first to ride along?

Cheers,
Splinter

[CraigLieb]

I want one!
 They should put one of these on a truck and tour every high school and college in the nation! Will cause a surge in science and math not to mention aerospace education desires in young people.

[Lars_J]

Maybe SpaceX should start transporting cargo to the ISS using crew Dragons. That way they get to test fly the crew Dragons and end up with a more valuable/versatile Dragon when it is recovered, paid for by the current contract. Of course it would cost them money now based on the nature of the contract.

There will be no differences between cargo Dragon and crew Dragon except that crew accommodations are removed to make room for cargo accommodations. I expect there to be a single manufacturing line for Dragon, with 2 final destination stations; 1 for crew and 1 for cargo for appropriate outfitting, which would include the appropriate docking or birthing mechanism. They are and will be the same basic vehicle. SpaceX will not be building or flying 2 different spacecraft.

No, the modifications on Crew Dragon appear to be incompatible with a CBM berthing port. The parachutes have been shifted around, and the drogues will now be situated around the docking ring. (No room for a CBM ring)

See image #1 - and compare with image #2, which shows the size of the CBM ring.

This assumes that the test article was using accurate drogue placement, but presumably it was, otherwise the test was not as representative as it could have been.

[docmordrid]

This cropped freeze frame from the 'chute test shows the early deployment.

[MickQ]

Prime candidates for Mars EDL test/Red dragon missions. IMHO.

Mick.

[clongton]

SpaceX is not going to build 2 different Dragons. That goes against the fundamental design concept of the vehicle. Musk has stated many times that there will be only 1 spacecraft, with appropriate mods for mission definition (cargo v.s. crew).

[swervin]

Slightly OT, but still on the same theme of re-usability. Are any parts reused between flights?

Specifically:
a) The grapple fixture
b) The CBM ring
c) Any internal fixtures, racks, ECS's, etc

Seems some of these parts would be easier reused and just make sense to do so. Is the CBM ring supplied by NASA?

Thanks,
Splinter

[Lars_J]

SpaceX is not going to build 2 different Dragons. That goes against the fundamental design concept of the vehicle. Musk has stated many times that there will be only 1 spacecraft, with appropriate mods for mission definition (cargo v.s. crew).

I'm glad you seem to know that with such "certainty". Because it goes against all evidence so far.

When has he stated that "there will only be 1 spacecraft"?

[Llian Rhydderch]

SpaceX is not going to build 2 different Dragons. That goes against the fundamental design concept of the vehicle. Musk has stated many times that there will be only 1 spacecraft, with appropriate mods for mission definition (cargo v.s. crew).

I'm glad you seem to know that with such "certainty". Because it goes against all evidence so far.

When has he stated that "there will only be 1 spacecraft"?

I took clongton's statement just a bit diffferently.  Not that there are not now, currently, two different models of Dragon.  There clearly are:  the cargo crew Dragon currently flying on CRS-3 (which is a "Dragon v2" with upgraded power and avionics), and perhaps with others in the production pipeline (as we've seen) for future CRS flights); and the new SuperDraco-included Dragons that will be unveiled late this month, and will participate in the ground-abort test and launch-abort test in the coming months.

I took his statement simply to mean that once the newer crew Dragons are development complete, and fully qualified, that SpaceX would likely have just a single Dragon production line, with a single base model Dragon, that could then be set up with or without seats, and with or without SuperDracos, depending on mission.


^{Edited:  changed "crew" to "cargo"; right thought in my head, didn't make it to phosphor.   Now fixed!   Thanks LarsJ!}

 

[Lars_J]

What? CRS-3 is not a crew dragon. The dragon that will be unveiled later this month is crew dragon - aka "dragon 2".

[InfraNut2]

I took clongton's statement just a bit diffferently.  Not that there are not now, currently, two different models of Dragon.  There clearly are:  the crew Dragon currently flying on CRS-3 (which is a "Dragon v2" with upgraded power and avionics), and perhaps with others in the production pipeline (as we've seen) for future CRS flights); and the new SuperDraco-included Dragons that will be unveiled late this month, and will participate in the ground-abort test and launch-abort test in the coming months.

Dragon V2 is the docking and land-landing capable dragon initially intended for crew transport. CRS-3 dragon is upgraded but not a new main version. It have been called Dragon v1.5 on one occasion, but that seems a bit high a version number, since the only confirmed changes are improved power system that can provide much more power to payloads and more waterproof solutions for electronics boxes in the unpressurized but internal part of dragon. Perhaps the upgrades are much more extensive than what is confirmed -- It would probably be smart to "backport" much of the minor v1.x compatible changes intended for V2 back into v1.x cargo dragons to get them tested early, spread out the risks on more than one flight and avoid unnecessary parallel versions of subsystems.

edit: typos etc.

[yg1968]

SpaceX is not going to build 2 different Dragons. That goes against the fundamental design concept of the vehicle. Musk has stated many times that there will be only 1 spacecraft, with appropriate mods for mission definition (cargo v.s. crew).

I'm glad you seem to know that with such "certainty". Because it goes against all evidence so far.

When has he stated that "there will only be 1 spacecraft"?

It has been stated that Cargo Dragon will eventually have propulsive landing.