SpaceX's Reisman ready for the next giant leap with Dragon V2

[RocketmanUS]

And yes, the downselect isn't an immediate threat and it's good they are holding back on that as much as possible. It's going to come at some point, however, sadly.

Yes, I agree. I am hoping that they will not downselect until they award CRS2. CRS2 awards were originally planned for February 2015 but it might get pushed by a few months (probably to mid-2015).  The logic for delaying downselection until at least mid-2015 would be to provide continuity for new CRS2 entrants (Boeing and SNC).

P.S. The due date for the proposals for CRS2 was pushed by 4 months. So it's logical to assume that the award date for CRS2 will also get pushed by 4 months. See this thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34093.msg1203648#msg1203648

That would be pretty good, but it's been intimated to me that they would rather downselect and increase funding as the IOC date is the priority.

And they'd be right. Why part fund three when they could look to accelerate two.

Why down select when they could just increase funds. Less risk to get at least one launching crew sooner than later. Better PR if they want to show they are really planning on having American LEO crew capability. Instead of a down select choose one to get more funding to be ready sooner! ( At least that would be a good investment of American dollars compared to other uses by Congress. )

Dragon v2 lab ( crewed )?

Dragon v2 ( cargo ) CRS2
Dragon v2 ( crewed ), minimum one launch a year for ISS.
One of the other two for the other crew launch out of the two minimum needed.  Possible other crewed missions to LEO for NASA.

Then there is the commercial side.

[MP99]

Very good info. 

I still tend to think that Elon plans to push the schedule up as much as humanly possible, in order to take advantage of the current Russian issues. 
I think I remember a quote from Elon awhile back that said once the crew version of Dragon was ready, they'd retire the old Dragon so they could fly just one craft, in a cargo and crew version.  The animation showed a v1 Dragon at the ISS when the V2 gets there, but that could just be for reference.  So you can see how the two are different.  Especially since the V1 dragon still has it's pop out solar panels which I though they were planning on going away from in the near future?

So, I wonder if we'll see a V2 dragon on a COTS mission in the near future, rigged with a life support system, and landing propulsively.  Then a presser where Elon comes out and says something like, "That Dragon V2 that just landed was fully capable of carrying a crew and returning them safely to Earth.  As soon as we finish adding the crew access arm to the tower at LC-39A, and finish our pad abort test of the LAS system (in X-amount of time) , there'd be absolutely no reason for another US crew to fly on a Russian Soyuz." 
Which would undoubtedly cause a flurry of press and political questions to start being asked.  And none of the other two commercial crew condendors could be ready that soon, as they are chugging along at the rate of the NASA milestone awards.

Elon seems to like to stir the pot like that.

Elon mentioned, post D2 announcement I believe, that they do intend to phase out D1 over the next few years and have D2 provide both functions. Until D2 is ready though, they will continue to develop both D1 & D2 separately.

Elon said they'd overlap v1 cargo with crew v2 crew for a few years, at the Q&A.

Presumably for the larger cargo possible via berthing?

Cheers, Martin

[Don Mc0]

A really brilliant article, as was the first on V2. Really impressed with this vehicle, and the people involved.

Nice respect from Reisman in wanting another Commercial Crew company to make to test flights.

[Will]

Very good info. 

I still tend to think that Elon plans to push the schedule up as much as humanly possible, in order to take advantage of the current Russian issues. 
I think I remember a quote from Elon awhile back that said once the crew version of Dragon was ready, they'd retire the old Dragon so they could fly just one craft, in a cargo and crew version.  The animation showed a v1 Dragon at the ISS when the V2 gets there, but that could just be for reference.  So you can see how the two are different.  Especially since the V1 dragon still has it's pop out solar panels which I though they were planning on going away from in the near future?

So, I wonder if we'll see a V2 dragon on a COTS mission in the near future, rigged with a life support system, and landing propulsively.  Then a presser where Elon comes out and says something like, "That Dragon V2 that just landed was fully capable of carrying a crew and returning them safely to Earth.  As soon as we finish adding the crew access arm to the tower at LC-39A, and finish our pad abort test of the LAS system (in X-amount of time) , there'd be absolutely no reason for another US crew to fly on a Russian Soyuz." 
Which would undoubtedly cause a flurry of press and political questions to start being asked.  And none of the other two commercial crew condendors could be ready that soon, as they are chugging along at the rate of the NASA milestone awards.

Elon seems to like to stir the pot like that.

Elon mentioned, post D2 announcement I believe, that they do intend to phase out D1 over the next few years and have D2 provide both functions. Until D2 is ready though, they will continue to develop both D1 & D2 separately.

Elon said they'd overlap v1 cargo with crew v2 crew for a few years, at the Q&A.

Presumably for the larger cargo possible via berthing?

Cheers, Martin

Also, greater maximum payload and best use of finite US docking and berthing stations. Also, the owners of some unique payloads would prefer to fly on the most mature spacecraft.

[JBF]

I think you are misinterpreting what Elon said.  There will be 2 variants of the D2 a cargo one with a berthing hatch and a crew one with the docking hatch. 

[411rocket]

I think you are misinterpreting what Elon said.  There will be 2 variants of the D2 a cargo one with a berthing hatch and a crew one with the docking hatch.

Listen to Elon's interview again....... After a few years, there will be a cargo variant of D2.

[QuantumG]

Listen to Elon's interview again....... After a few years, there will be a cargo variant of D2.

So, around the time the ISS is retired?

[411rocket]

Listen to Elon's interview again....... After a few years, there will be a cargo variant of D2.

So, around the time the ISS is retired?

Maybe, to service other destinations, be it LEO, moon or elsewhere. I can only go by, what Elon has stated. Things may change in the meantime, so for now it is wait & see, on what transpires.

[JBF]

I think you are misinterpreting what Elon said.  There will be 2 variants of the D2 a cargo one with a berthing hatch and a crew one with the docking hatch.

Listen to Elon's interview again....... After a few years, there will be a cargo variant of D2.

yes a cargo variant, that means with the berthing hatch to allow large objects.  The crew variant can already carry cargo since the seats are removable.

[Razvan]

I agree. The DV2 is technically superior to the cargo one, and, besides, even the manned capsule will allow a double purpose: seats and cargo, as the case may be. In the end both alternatives, manned and cargo, will have to be reusable and super-draco needs to fit both.

It would be interesting, though, to investigate multiple destination capsules launch by one Launcher, say Heavy Falcon. I wonder, would SpaceX consider a common landing module, too. Something like: Lunar-, Asteroid-, Mars-Dragons, etc. would be parked in one Low orbit station and assembled together and attached to a more powerful Landing Module...

[Roy_H]

...And none of the other two commercial crew contenders could be ready that soon, as they are chugging along at the rate of the NASA milestone awards.

All are proceeding as fast as they can. If you look at the facts, it is SpaceX who has slipped the most behind their schedule. SpaceX originally scheduled the pad abort to Dec 2013 and maxQ abort about this time. SpaceX got the time extended to August, and now Elon states next year for maxQ abort test. Must have gotten another time extension.

[QuantumG]

All are proceeding as fast as they can. If you look at the facts, it is SpaceX who has slipped the most behind their schedule. SpaceX originally scheduled the pad abort to Dec 2013 and maxQ abort about this time. SpaceX got the time extended to August, and now Elon states next year for maxQ abort test. Must have gotten another time extension.

It's almost like doing paperwork isn't their forte.

[Chris Bergin]

...And none of the other two commercial crew contenders could be ready that soon, as they are chugging along at the rate of the NASA milestone awards.

All are proceeding as fast as they can. If you look at the facts, it is SpaceX who has slipped the most behind their schedule. SpaceX originally scheduled the pad abort to Dec 2013 and maxQ abort about this time. SpaceX got the time extended to August, and now Elon states next year for maxQ abort test. Must have gotten another time extension.

They've all slipped to be fair. December 2017 for USCV-1 says that.

[woods170]

...And none of the other two commercial crew contenders could be ready that soon, as they are chugging along at the rate of the NASA milestone awards.

All are proceeding as fast as they can. If you look at the facts, it is SpaceX who has slipped the most behind their schedule. SpaceX originally scheduled the pad abort to Dec 2013 and maxQ abort about this time. SpaceX got the time extended to August, and now Elon states next year for maxQ abort test. Must have gotten another time extension.

Respectfully, I disagree. Boeing has slipped just as much. PDR slipped 8 months. CDR for CST-100 was a full year late.
The pad abort test for CST-100 was planned for Q3-2013. But as of right now, it isn't even part of CCiCap milestones for Boeing; it will be deferred to the next phase (CCtCap) meaning that it will slip at least a year.
Stating that one Commercial Crew partner is slipping more than the others is pointless. It is as Chris pointed out: they are all slipping.

[Elmar Moelzer]

I think the lack of funding is in part responsible for the slips. Less money for milestones in a timeframe means less milestones achieved in the timeframe.
That's the way it is. Bolden has said as much too. Don't blame the commercial crew providers, blame congress!

[InfraNut2]

I think the lack of funding is in part responsible for the slips. Less money for milestones in a timeframe means less milestones achieved in the timeframe.
That's the way it is. Bolden has said as much too. Don't blame the commercial crew providers, blame congress!

I agree that funding is the main reason, but it is not the only one.

Big development projects like this invariable encounters many problems that need solving and always needs more time to finish than the sum of the tasks known at the outset. Experienced engineers can usually roughly estimate the magnitude of such delays and build appropriate margins into the estimates, unless there are large unresolved uncertainties remaining from the pre-project (spec and prelim design), in which case all bets are off.

In the case of Commercial Crew (and COTS) aggressive schedules (low margins) were intentionally set to avoid complacency and keep up pressure to move forward at high speed. Some milestone delays had to result from this that could have been avoided if more realistic schedules were set, but by doing it this way, overall progress has been faster than it would have been otherwise.

So to sum up: there are delays from the development side too, but they have mostly (*) been expected results from the way this program is run with a strategy expected to optimize overall progress.

(*) The degree to which the encountered delays has been expected from the process (after accounting for the founding shortfall) vs being less-than-expected competitor performance is of course subjective to a large degree unless you have deep in sight into the process.

And while talking about subjectivity: I subjectively think that while there are a few tasks that need(ed) some extra effort to work through, the overall performance of the competitors and the C3PO have been impressive. Besides: they have had to deal with expectations that were much higher than for comparative programs, especially after COTS, and its partially their own fault for setting such aggressive program goals and project deadlines.

[Rocket Science]

I think the lack of funding is in part responsible for the slips. Less money for milestones in a timeframe means less milestones achieved in the timeframe.
That's the way it is. Bolden has said as much too. Don't blame the commercial crew providers, blame congress!

The funding is there, it’s just going to Russia for Soyuz instead of being spent at home. Kind of coincidental that Russia wants to pull out of ISS not too long after the US Commercial Crew vehicles come on line. They know that the aerospace welfare program is over so they’re leaving...

[JasonAW3]

Guys,  I'm really glad that SpaceX has got the Dragon 2 ready for testing, but dang it HURRY UP!

I wanna go to Mars and I ain't getting any younger... Yet!

[sghill]

I'm surprised not to see this posted already:

https://twitter.com/astro_g_dogg/status/474253985193271296

Dragon is coming to DC!

Twitter: approx. 2:30 pm
Garrett Reisman
‏@astro_g_dogg
"Heads up to all of you in the DC area- our Crew Dragon spaceship is headed your way for public display!"

[Sean Lynch]

I think the lack of funding is in part responsible for the slips. Less money for milestones in a timeframe means less milestones achieved in the timeframe.
That's the way it is. Bolden has said as much too. Don't blame the commercial crew providers, blame congress!

The funding is there, it’s just going to Russia for Soyuz instead of being spent at home. Kind of coincidental that Russia wants to pull out of ISS not too long after the US Commercial Crew vehicles come on line. They know that the aerospace welfare program is over so they’re leaving...

Rogozin has said as much in that Russia won't be seeing profits from ISS.
Bolden told the House Space Subcommittee that had Commercial Crew had full funding requested all along that Astronauts would be launching from US soil in 2015. I recall him also mentioning that sequestration/budget delays impacted payment schedules as well.