Author Topic: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 1  (Read 656532 times)

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #860 on: 12/28/2016 04:35 pm »
A presentation by Phil McAlister:


Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #861 on: 12/28/2016 09:38 pm »
Here is a presentation by Gerst on commercializing LEO:

« Last Edit: 12/28/2016 09:39 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #862 on: 12/29/2016 09:50 pm »
During the Q&A session (at 23m30s), one of the thing that Gerst mentionned is the possibility of having a guest researcher (i.e. a commercial research specialist) as an astronaut on board of a commercial crew flight. This guest astronaut would help with the commercial research experiment.
« Last Edit: 12/29/2016 09:53 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #863 on: 01/03/2017 09:02 pm »
Mission Awards Secure Commercial Crew Transportation for Coming Years:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/mission-awards-secure-commercial-crew-transportation-for-coming-years

Both SpaceX and Boeing get 4 more post-certification missions each which means that NASA is set for commercial crew until 2024.
« Last Edit: 01/03/2017 09:24 pm by yg1968 »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10438
  • US
  • Liked: 14356
  • Likes Given: 6148
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #864 on: 01/17/2017 04:46 pm »
Ars Technica: As leadership departs, NASA quietly moves to buy more Soyuz seats
Eric Berger wrote an article about NASA planning to buy more Soyuz seats for early 2019, as well as extra seats available in 2017 and 2018. 

He provides a link to the solicitation: PROCUREMENT OF CREW TRANSPORTATION AND RESCUE SERVICES FROM BOEING.  Apparently Boeing bought the rights to the available Soyuz seats and is going to resell them to NASA.

Here are some excerpts from the solicitation:
Quote
NASA is considering contracting with The Boeing Company (Boeing) for crew transportation services to and from the International Space Station (ISS) on the Russian Soyuz vehicle. This transportation would be for one crewmember in the Fall of 2017 and one crewmember in the Spring of 2018. NASA is considering purchasing these services from Boeing, without competition, because no other vehicles are currently capable of providing these services in Fall 2017 or Spring 2018. NASA has contracts with two U.S. commercial companies for crew transportation to the ISS. However, these vehicles are still in the developmental stage, and not expected to begin fully operational flights to the ISS until 2019. NASA also is considering an option to acquire crew transportation from Boeing for three crewmembers on the Soyuz in 2019, to ensure the availability of back-up transportation capability in the event the U.S. commercial contractor vehicles are delayed or to augment future ISS operations and research.
...
An agreement was recently reached between the Boeing Company and S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Public Corporation, Energia ("RSC Energia"), who is the manufacturer of the Soyuz spacecraft and has the legal rights to sell the seats and associated services. As a part of this agreement, Energia agreed to provide to Boeing two specifically identified seats on the Soyuz spacecraft for long-duration travel to and from the ISS, one on a flight to occur in the Fall 2017 timeframe and another on a flight to occur in the Spring 2018 timeframe. Additionally, Energia provided Boeing three additional specifically identified seats in the Spring 2019 timeframe on two Soyuz spacecraft. Finally, Boeing and RSC Energia agreed that each of these five seats will include a launch of an individual to and from the ISS, including all services normally provided during launches to ISS. Boeing and RSC Energia have represented that Boeing has the full rights to these seats and can sell them to any third party.

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1492
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 573
  • Likes Given: 541
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #865 on: 01/17/2017 04:54 pm »
Any chance these are the same seats that Boeing received as payment for the Sea Launch obligations?



edited spelling
« Last Edit: 01/17/2017 05:16 pm by Kansan52 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #866 on: 01/17/2017 05:07 pm »
Any chance these are the same seats that Boeing received as payment for the Sea Launch obligations?

If you have L2, see this post:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29664.msg1631561#msg1631561
« Last Edit: 01/17/2017 05:11 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #867 on: 01/17/2017 05:41 pm »
Here are some excerpts from the solicitation:
Quote
NASA also is considering an option to acquire crew transportation from Boeing for three crewmembers on the Soyuz in 2019, to ensure the availability of back-up transportation capability in the event the U.S. commercial contractor vehicles are delayed or to augment future ISS operations and research.

I wonder if the text in bold above means that an astronaut would be replacing a cosmonaut for that period?
« Last Edit: 01/17/2017 05:46 pm by yg1968 »

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2469
  • Liked: 609
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #868 on: 01/17/2017 07:13 pm »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
  • Liked: 7280
  • Likes Given: 3119
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #869 on: 01/18/2017 12:26 am »
More details can be found in this article on the extra Soyuz seats:
http://spacenews.com/nasa-considering-boeing-offer-for-additional-soyuz-seats/

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #870 on: 01/18/2017 02:03 am »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.
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 jbenton

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 704
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #871 on: 01/19/2017 05:13 am »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.

Are the solids on Atlas V less dangerous than the SLS boosters? I was pretty sure that Starliner uses the 422 configuration.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12192
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18492
  • Likes Given: 12560
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #872 on: 01/19/2017 06:23 am »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.

Are the solids on Atlas V less dangerous than the SLS boosters? I was pretty sure that Starliner uses the 422 configuration.
Theoretically the Atlas V solids should be less dangerous. Their cases are one-piece structures, as opposed to the segmented boosters on SLS. And yes, for Starliner Atlas V will have two SRB's and a dual-engine Centaur upper stage.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7298
  • Liked: 2791
  • Likes Given: 1466
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #873 on: 01/19/2017 10:07 am »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.

Are the solids on Atlas V less dangerous than the SLS boosters? I was pretty sure that Starliner uses the 422 configuration.
Theoretically the Atlas V solids should be less dangerous. Their cases are one-piece structures, as opposed to the segmented boosters on SLS.

Empirical evidence backs up the theoretical conclusion:  according to the Futron reliability study (attachment to this post), small, monolithic solids (like those of the Atlas V, but unlike those of the Delta IV [which have TVC] or of the Titans, the Shuttle or SLS [TVC and segments]) have an excellent track record.  Out of 1260 such solids flown on US launches to orbit or beyond during the 20 years to September 2004, there was one failure (on a Delta II in 1997), excluding one case in which a solid burned properly but failed to separate.  I also would guess that the relatively small size of Atlas V's solids corresponds to a lesser explosive potential should something go catastrophically wrong.

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2469
  • Liked: 609
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #874 on: 01/19/2017 12:28 pm »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.

I doubt the LAS can rely on the engines being properly shut down, solid or liquid. The Saturn V did not have solids anyway.

It is possible of course that it's just a compromise to enable a pusher LAS.
« Last Edit: 01/19/2017 12:29 pm by Oli »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39359
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25388
  • Likes Given: 12164
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #875 on: 01/19/2017 01:26 pm »
This may have been asked before, but how does commercial crew "get away" with 6g launch abort while Apollo/Orion had/have 17/16g?
Orion's got a couple of huge SRBs nearby which can't be turned off. And if you have solids, it's not hard to be high thrust. With liquids, it's tougher to be high thrust.

I doubt the LAS can rely on the engines being properly shut down, solid or liquid....
According to Jim (if I remember correctly), you definitely can for liquids.
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 baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8371
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2555
  • Likes Given: 8365
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #876 on: 01/19/2017 03:04 pm »
Let me add the fact that the 2 SRB will have a T/W<1 if the RD-180 shutdown, for most of its flight. I haven't played with the propellant depletion, but the two SRB have a thrust of 335tnf and the Atlas V422 (without the CST-100) weights 424 tonnes.
If mass loss is lineal, then there's a little window before SRB shutdown, where the SRB will give the rocket a T/W slightly higher than 1, peaking at 1.1. That's basically nothing for a capsule aborting at 6G. In practical terms the rocket is not that different for aborts from a non solid augmented one.
As I understand it, even a catastrophic failure would not be worse than an RD-180 one. And is far enough from the capsule not to be such an issue. In any case everything would still be a deflagration and not an explosion.
« Last Edit: 01/19/2017 03:49 pm by baldusi »

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3864
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 946
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #877 on: 01/19/2017 03:17 pm »
Let me add the fact that the 2 SRB will have a T/W<1 if the RD-180 shutdown, for most of its flight. I haven't played with the propellant depletion, but the two SRB have a thrust of 335tnf and the Atlas V422 (without the CST-100) weights 424 tonnes.
If mass loss is lineal, then there's a little window before SRB shutdown, where the SRB will give the rocket a T/W slightly higher than 1, peaking at 1.1. That's basically nothing for a capsule aborting at 6G. In practical terms the rocket is not that different for aborts from a non solid augmented one.
As I understand it, even a catastrophic failure would not be worse than an RD-180 one. And is fart enough from the capsule not to be such an issue. In any case everything would still be a deflagration and not an explosion.
Well, it would be an explosion if powered by methane...

(this - for those who may not have my sense of humor - is a joke based upon a rather unfortunate typo by Baldusi. So please don't go down the rabbit hole stating things such as the Atlas is not a methane powered rocket, or pointing out how it's a deflagration not an explosion, or...)
« Last Edit: 01/19/2017 04:34 pm by Johnnyhinbos »
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7298
  • Liked: 2791
  • Likes Given: 1466
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #878 on: 01/19/2017 10:12 pm »
I doubt the LAS can rely on the engines being properly shut down, solid or liquid. The Saturn V did not have solids anyway.

Why?  Per the argument in this post, it appears to me that engine shut-down was envisioned for Apollo-Saturn aborts.  Though I can't find it now, there is also a paper from circa 1968 suggesting that on of the Saturn V's engines might need to be kept running during an abort, because shutting down all engines could lead to break-up of the stack.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10438
  • US
  • Liked: 14356
  • Likes Given: 6148
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #879 on: 01/20/2017 07:44 pm »
Quote
NASA: 17 Commercial Crew Things to Track in 2017
By Steven Siceloff,
NASA's Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Throughout 2017, NASA and its commercial crew partners, Boeing and SpaceX, will make major steps touching every area of space system development and operations, from completing flight-worthy spacecraft and rockets to putting the finishing touches on launch pads to performing detailed countdown and flight rehearsals.

Here is a look at 17 things you should track for in 2017:

1.    Structural Test Article: Boeing begins 2017 with its CST-100 Starliner Structural Test Article at the company’s Huntington Beach, California, facility for testing that will push, pull and apply pressure to the spacecraft, qualifying that the design will be able to withstand the intense conditions encountered during spaceflights.
2.    Structural Qualification: SpaceX is on pace to complete structural qualification of the Crew Dragon capsule and trunk in early 2017. The company built the Crew Dragon Qualification Vehicle to prove its design will hold up to the rigors of spaceflight.
3.    Starliner Prototype: Boeing will wrap up assembly of its Starliner prototype, Spacecraft 1, which is slated to go through ground verification testing before flying in a pad abort test from White Sands, New Mexico. Production of two additional Starliners will ramp up in 2017 in preparation for two test flights – first without a crew to the International Space Station and then with one Boeing and one NASA astronaut on board. All three spacecraft are being manufactured in the Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
4.    Complete Manufacturing: SpaceX also will complete manufacturing of three Crew Dragons that are currently in early phases of assembly. These spacecraft will perform Demonstration Mission 1, flight test without crew, Demonstration Mission 2, flight test with a crew aboard, and the company’s first crew rotation mission.
5.    Software Systems: Both companies' robust autonomous software systems will continue to be put to the test to ensure everything works exactly as planned throughout all phases of the mission.
6.    Starliner Thrusters: The Starliner thrusters – from small maneuvering jets to large engines that would fire in an emergency to push the spacecraft and astronauts out of danger – will be qualified and acceptance tested in the fall during the service module hot fire test.
7.    Draco and SuperDraco: The Draco and SuperDraco thrusters for SpaceX's Crew Dragon are on pace to complete static-fire qualification testing in the first few months of 2017. SpaceX produces both thrusters in-house. The smaller Draco thrusters maneuver the spacecraft while it's in orbit and provide small adjustments. The SuperDracos, which are 3D printed, are much larger and produce enough thrust to lift the Crew Dragon out of danger in case of an abort situation. The company expects to complete propulsion system validation testing by demonstrating capability in all phases of flight using a dedicated module by the second half of 2017.
8.    Parachute Tests: Boeing will start off 2017 with its parachute qualification test series in New Mexico and more advanced drop testing at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia. Boeing plans to place an instrument-laden human-like test dummy inside its mockup for drop tests that will verify that the Starliner's airbags will absorb enough of the force of landing to keep astronauts safe. The landing tests will be performed using a gantry that drops the mockup onto a dirt pad.
9.    Parachute Development: SpaceX plans to finish development testing of its Crew Dragon parachute systems in early 2017. The Crew Dragon will use a four-parachute configuration for landing in the water. The company plans to complete qualification testing of the parachutes after the summer.
10.    Spacesuits: Boeing and SpaceX each designed their own spacesuits for flight, based on the systems of their respective spacecraft and NASA’s stringent requirements. Throughout 2017, both companies will subject their suits to rigorous testing in multiple circumstances that might be encountered in space. SpaceX has completed spacesuit development testing and will build the training and flight suits for its crewed demonstration flight and first crew rotation mission after astronauts are assigned to missions. The spacesuits are not designed for spacewalking, but are meant to fill the role of the orange partial-pressure suits astronauts wore during space shuttle launches and returns. They are meant to keep air flowing to the astronaut in case of depressurization and meet a host of special capabilities.
11.    Starliner Factory: Boeing will add to its Starliner manufacturing complex at Kennedy early in 2017 when it opens a Hazardous Processing Facility that will allow for the safe fueling of Starliner spacecraft with maneuvering system propellants before the spacecraft is taken to the launch pad for liftoff.
12.    Crew Access Tower: Work is nearing completion on a new structure built specifically for the needs of astronauts climbing into Boeing's Starliner as it stands atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket at Space Launch Complex 41 in Florida. In 2017, the 200-foot-tall Crew Access Tower and Crew Access Arm will see installation and testing of emergency escape systems. ULA's complex is one of the most active on the Space Coast, and construction of the systems needed to support crew launches has taken place between launches.
13.    Launch Complex 39A: SpaceX has overhauled the historic Launch Pad 39A at Kennedy and built new support structures for the company's line of Falcon rockets. The Crew Access Arm, currently under construction, will be connected in the spring to provide a bridge from the fixed service structure to the Crew Dragon spacecraft so astronauts can board before launch. The launch pad will be put to the test when SpaceX launches its Falcon 9 from the pad in early 2017. It will mark the first flight off of Pad 39A since the final space shuttle mission in 2011.
14.    Atlas V Production: United Launch Alliance will continue production of the two Atlas V rockets that will lift Starliners into orbit on flight tests with and without crews aboard. Building its rockets at a plant in Decatur, Alabama, the company will begin building the boosters for operational Starliner missions, as well.
15.    Falcon 9 Production: SpaceX will build up the Falcon 9 rockets that will launch Crew Dragons into orbit for the flight tests of its systems. SpaceX builds its rockets, Merlin engines and Crew Dragon spacecraft at the company's factory and headquarters in Hawthorne, California.
16.    Flight Test: SpaceX is slated to make its first flight test – without a crew – in November 2017. Flying to the space station using its automated guidance and navigation systems, the Crew Dragon will dock there on its own and remain for a time before detaching and parachuting back to Earth and landing in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Cape Canaveral. The mission will be a dress rehearsal for a later flight test that will include astronauts.
17.    Space Station: The advances are not limited to Earth, either. Astronauts on the International Space Station will continue modifications in 2017 tailored for new vehicles, including commercial crew spacecraft.
« Last Edit: 01/20/2017 07:50 pm by gongora »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0