Author Topic: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread  (Read 438890 times)

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18705
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 6701
  • Likes Given: 924
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1160 on: 05/10/2018 11:24 am »
If NASA decides that the current fuelling procedure is a no go for their astronauts and SpaceX decides that it is not worth the effort to satisfy NASA's requirement, could SpaceX still sell seats on Dragon 2 to other customers?
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5206
  • Liked: 3094
  • Likes Given: 1554
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1161 on: 05/10/2018 12:20 pm »
If NASA decides that the current fuelling procedure is a no go for their astronauts and SpaceX decides that it is not worth the effort to satisfy NASA's requirement, could SpaceX still sell seats on Dragon 2 to other customers?

There's no law stopping them from flying passengers, even without NASA's approval. That's a strictly commercial activity and regulated by the FAA.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8789
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3788
  • Likes Given: 896
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1162 on: 05/10/2018 01:27 pm »
There's no law stopping them from flying passengers, even without NASA's approval. That's a strictly commercial activity and regulated by the FAA.

To the ISS? Totally NASA's decision and last I heard the answer was "don't even ask". With a change of administration, let's hope that changes.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 258
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1163 on: 05/10/2018 01:42 pm »
There's no law stopping them from flying passengers, even without NASA's approval. That's a strictly commercial activity and regulated by the FAA.

To the ISS? Totally NASA's decision and last I heard the answer was "don't even ask". With a change of administration, let's hope that changes.

I think orbital tourism for a couple of hours is the more likely possibility in the near future.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8789
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3788
  • Likes Given: 896
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1164 on: 05/10/2018 01:46 pm »
I think orbital tourism for a couple of hours is the more likely possibility in the near future.

You think SpaceX is going to fly Dragon 2 on anyone else's dime but NASA's? I don't. If there's seats available, it'll be on a flight to the ISS, or nothing at all.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1402
  • Liked: 418
  • Likes Given: 750
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1165 on: 05/10/2018 01:55 pm »
If NASA tells SpaceX that they must change the loading procedure to be certified and SpaceX refuses to do it what is the result?   Or to put it legally, If NASA requests a contract modification and SpaceX chooses not to do it are there any penalties involved?
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but thatís the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1166 on: 05/10/2018 02:45 pm »
If NASA tells SpaceX that they must change the loading procedure to be certified and SpaceX refuses to do it what is the result?   Or to put it legally, If NASA requests a contract modification and SpaceX chooses not to do it are there any penalties involved?

It would trigger contract default clauses and all the penalties associated therewith.

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1203
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 389
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1167 on: 05/10/2018 02:52 pm »
If NASA decides that the current fuelling procedure is a no go for their astronauts and SpaceX decides that it is not worth the effort to satisfy NASA's requirement, could SpaceX still sell seats on Dragon 2 to other customers?

The answer is tied up in regulations. Earlier posts say NASA will nix any traffic to the ISS. So, is there a market for a trip around the block (orbit) again and again and then come back to Earth? If Yes, then the FAA seems likely to say Yes (IMHO).

Offline MaxTeranous

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1168 on: 05/10/2018 02:57 pm »
If NASA tells SpaceX that they must change the loading procedure to be certified and SpaceX refuses to do it what is the result?   Or to put it legally, If NASA requests a contract modification and SpaceX chooses not to do it are there any penalties involved?

It would trigger contract default clauses and all the penalties associated therewith.

Penalties for whom tho?

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8789
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3788
  • Likes Given: 896
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1169 on: 05/10/2018 03:00 pm »
The answer is tied up in regulations. Earlier posts say NASA will nix any traffic to the ISS. So, is there a market for a trip around the block (orbit) again and again and then come back to Earth? If Yes, then the FAA seems likely to say Yes (IMHO).

The question isn't whether there's a market for orbital flights... the question is whether Dragon 2 is a viable market to service that market and whether SpaceX has any interest in being in that market. I don't think either of those questions have an affirmative answer. Hope I'm wrong, of course.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • Antibes
  • Liked: 528
  • Likes Given: 581
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1170 on: 05/10/2018 03:03 pm »
If NASA tells SpaceX that they must change the loading procedure to be certified and SpaceX refuses to do it what is the result?   Or to put it legally, If NASA requests a contract modification and SpaceX chooses not to do it are there any penalties involved?

It would trigger contract default clauses and all the penalties associated therewith.
Only if the original contract stipulated the new loading method. If the contact was agreed with the current loading then spacex could contract is no longer valid and walk away with no penalties

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1119
  • United States
  • Liked: 610
  • Likes Given: 1176
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1171 on: 05/10/2018 05:26 pm »


Unique new software and procedures for 1-2 flights per year actually increases risk compared to using the same F9 that has a long flight history and flies 30 times a year.

I agree.  However NASA is the customer and they have final say. 
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5206
  • Liked: 3094
  • Likes Given: 1554
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1172 on: 05/10/2018 05:28 pm »
There's no law stopping them from flying passengers, even without NASA's approval. That's a strictly commercial activity and regulated by the FAA.

To the ISS? Totally NASA's decision and last I heard the answer was "don't even ask". With a change of administration, let's hope that changes.

I was thinking just a few days in space, or maybe to a future private station. NASA would obviously have a say in flights to ISS.

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1173 on: 05/10/2018 06:28 pm »
If NASA tells SpaceX that they must change the loading procedure to be certified and SpaceX refuses to do it what is the result?   Or to put it legally, If NASA requests a contract modification and SpaceX chooses not to do it are there any penalties involved?

It would trigger contract default clauses and all the penalties associated therewith.
Only if the original contract stipulated the new loading method. If the contact was agreed with the current loading then spacex could contract is no longer valid and walk away with no penalties

The contracts don't have design details in them, they have requirements, among them being Loss of Crew requirements.  NASA has to sign off on whether the delivered hardware meets the requirements.  If a provider cannot provide data to support signing that particular verification closure, the hardware won't be accepted.  At that point, they can attempt to request waivers or variances, but that's at NASA's discretion.

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1753
  • Liked: 1232
  • Likes Given: 1131
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1174 on: 05/10/2018 06:32 pm »
The question isn't whether there's a market for orbital flights... the question is whether Dragon 2 is a viable market to service that market and whether SpaceX has any interest in being in that market. I don't think either of those questions have an affirmative answer. Hope I'm wrong, of course.
The answer to the question is BFS, not Dragon.  Without NASA, Dragon2 ceases to exist.

IMHO.

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1203
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 389
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1175 on: 05/10/2018 06:48 pm »
Without NASA, Dragon2 ceases to exist.

IMHO.

Wasn't D2 Cargo and Crew? So maybe only D2 cargo.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
  • United States
  • Liked: 173
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1176 on: 05/10/2018 07:12 pm »
Elon believes that this flight will count toward commercial crew (7 before crew).

Just a curious question: does 7 flights before crew require 7 new cores? or will NASA be satisfied with just a few cores doing 7 flights?

Considering that NASA will probably want a new core, they might want to see 7 new cores before crew?

Sorry if this has already been discussed 17 times, just point me in the right direction.
« Last Edit: 05/10/2018 07:12 pm by mn »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4340
  • US
  • Liked: 3860
  • Likes Given: 2208
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1177 on: 05/10/2018 07:32 pm »
Tweets from Brendan Byrne:
Quote
Musk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.

Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1753
  • Liked: 1232
  • Likes Given: 1131
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1178 on: 05/10/2018 08:08 pm »
Without NASA, Dragon2 ceases to exist.

IMHO.

Wasn't D2 Cargo and Crew? So maybe only D2 cargo.
That's a great point.  That would be a really weird ending...

Sounds like Musk is not concerned, so this is all probably wasted thought exercises anyway.

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #1179 on: 05/10/2018 08:21 pm »
Tweets from Brendan Byrne:
Quote
Musk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.

Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5

Nothing like a good old NSF forum "tempest in a teapot" based on incomplete information...

Tags: