Lueders: Crew science will double to 80 hours a week. Shortest downmass handover time ever.
Someone needs to question this claim. 3 USOS crews members are averagomg 40 hours total right now. 1 additional person doubling that total means that 4th person will spend almost no time doing the maintenance, repair, and trouble-shooting tasks that dominate their days today. When you subtract wake-up, exercise, and sleep prep that 4th crew member will have to spend almost all their awake time doing science which is hard to believe given years of actual experience with the ISS.
One question no one asked is what is the Atlas plan for CST? We know it is not manned rated, and we know ULA has their NGLV plan in late 2019 or later.
The plan has not changed. The path to certification continues, Dual Engine Centaur hit PDR in 2013, once it and CST hit CDR soon they all get built along with the LC-41 mods.
In the company-provided videos, I was struck by how cramped the Boeing capsule was, and how complex its control panel, in comparison with the Dragon.
Agreed, I noticed the same.
I think Spacex are on a winner with their main console. Also as we get further into the 21st century, I also wonder whether tablets may find their way in as a backup or secondary access to mission-critical spacecraft monitoring & control functions. This would essentially require hardware selection plus lots of software development and validation.
I do wonder though - it's been said that both companies will fly cargo in addition to four astronauts.
We haven't yet seen what the interior of Dragon 2 looks like when ready to actually fly 4 or 7 astronauts plus cargo, unless all cargo space is under the floor panels. We've seen the pressure vessel of Dragon 2 containing (as far as I could tell) 7 seats plus the main console.
Lueders: Crew science will double to 80 hours a week. Shortest downmass handover time ever.
Someone needs to question this claim. 3 USOS crews members are averagomg 40 hours total right now. 1 additional person doubling that total means that 4th person will spend almost no time doing the maintenance, repair, and trouble-shooting tasks that dominate their days today. When you subtract wake-up, exercise, and sleep prep that 4th crew member will have to spend almost all their awake time doing science which is hard to believe given years of actual experience with the ISS.
Actually 3 crew are sometimes bumping up in the 60s. Calculations show that a 7th should be able to devote their full work day (~6-8 hours) to science since the others can handle the other work to keep things going. Even if off by 50% you still have a huge addition.
I don't see NASA allowing its Astronauts on Dragon powered landings. Maybe at the EOL of ISS. Just not something NASA is comfortable with nor needs. There a things Musk wants, things NASA wants, and the two occasionally overlap. SpaceX is trying to please two customers at once, but one requires certifications plus an established culture.
If designed, tested, certified - it will definitely happen.
Is there anything (apart from technical) that prevents Space X from flying their own crew on test flights prior to any Nasa requested one. Obviously not to the ISS but if you successfully fly a couple of un-manned test fights why not stick a crew on one and go?
Great bragging right!
Houston Chronicle: When will NASA pick first provider?
Lueders: First mission Authority To Proceed will be Boeing mission.
Can someone who can parse NASA-ese better than I confirm this means NASA has already chosen Boeing for the first crewed mission? It seems really early for this choice, if so. I suppose such a decision is non-binding if Boeing were to encounter significant delays.
I caught that too and for the life of me it makes no sense at all for Boeing to be the 1st crew provider if SpaceX is ready to rotate a crew to the ISS a full year before them. That is just plain pure unadulterated popy-cock!
Whoever is ready first should fly first - period. I don't really care which one it is. Sounds to me like some people from Boeing and some people from NASA went into a smoky room and closed the doors and then 2 hours later came out with a "deal". I won't go into my suspected details.
they can fly all the manned missions they want. However, the first flight to ISS will have ONE astronaut of SpaceX's choosing and ONE NASA astronaut if they ever want to get certified. Part of the insight process and Joint Test Team. And because NASA astronauts didn't like the idea of people going into space and it wasn't them. Really.
Lueders: Crew science will double to 80 hours a week. Shortest downmass handover time ever.
Someone needs to question this claim. 3 USOS crews members are averagomg 40 hours total right now. 1 additional person doubling that total means that 4th person will spend almost no time doing the maintenance, repair, and trouble-shooting tasks that dominate their days today. When you subtract wake-up, exercise, and sleep prep that 4th crew member will have to spend almost all their awake time doing science which is hard to believe given years of actual experience with the ISS.
Of course the 4th USOS crew member won't be doing 100% science work. Who claimed that?
Think of it this way - currently the 3 USOS crew spends 1/3rd of their work time on science, and rest on maintenance tasks. The 4th USOS crew member will simply allow them to even that out to 50% of all of them - something I'm sure they would all appreciate.
2. Gwynne quite clearly said that the Dragon's normal landing mode will be in water, she never said a thing about parachute onto land and use LAS to cushion it.
WTF? This is like the most disappointing bait and switch ever.
Why did they waste years working on the SuperDracos?
I would believe that powered landings on land will be a future feature for SpaceX. NASA want's the ability to transport crew to the ISS as quickly and safely as possible. SpaceX is doing what the customer wants, NASA. Doing standard water landings for SpaceX's bid was probably a easier path to achieve a buy off from NASA. Who knows the normal landing might have been originally powered landing's on dry land but someone took Elon aside and explained to him if he wanted to have a greater chance of getting his bid chosen it was smarter to drop this mode for the NASA bid. I am sure Elon would have loved for the first landing attempt to come dropping into to land at Hawthorne Airport to a massive press conference and party with loud rock music and fog machines.
Lueders: Crew science will double to 80 hours a week. Shortest downmass handover time ever.
Someone needs to question this claim. 3 USOS crews members are averagomg 40 hours total right now. 1 additional person doubling that total means that 4th person will spend almost no time doing the maintenance, repair, and trouble-shooting tasks that dominate their days today. When you subtract wake-up, exercise, and sleep prep that 4th crew member will have to spend almost all their awake time doing science which is hard to believe given years of actual experience with the ISS.
I think the disconnect here is that you seem to be assuming the 40 hours is per crew member. It's not. The current 40 hours of science is total, by all the crew members, per week. So all the additional crew member has to add is 40 hours a week to make the total go to 80.
Houston Chronicle: When will NASA pick first provider?
Lueders: First mission Authority To Proceed will be Boeing mission.
Can someone who can parse NASA-ese better than I confirm this means NASA has already chosen Boeing for the first crewed mission? It seems really early for this choice, if so. I suppose such a decision is non-binding if Boeing were to encounter significant delays.
I caught that too and for the life of me it makes no sense at all for Boeing to be the 1st crew provider if SpaceX is ready to rotate a crew to the ISS a full year before them. That is just plain pure unadulterated popy-cock! Whoever is ready first should fly first - period. I don't really care which one it is.
It says here
http://news.yahoo.com/boeing-first-carry-us-astronauts-space-201613955.htmlthat "Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders said at a press conference in Houston, Texas that Boeing would be the first to make two contracted missions to carry NASA astronauts, since it has completed two milestones so far, and SpaceX just one".
- Ed Kyle
Houston Chronicle: When will NASA pick first provider?
Lueders: First mission Authority To Proceed will be Boeing mission.
Can someone who can parse NASA-ese better than I confirm this means NASA has already chosen Boeing for the first crewed mission? It seems really early for this choice, if so. I suppose such a decision is non-binding if Boeing were to encounter significant delays.
I caught that too and for the life of me it makes no sense at all for Boeing to be the 1st crew provider if SpaceX is ready to rotate a crew to the ISS a full year before them. That is just plain pure unadulterated popy-cock! Whoever is ready first should fly first - period. I don't really care which one it is.
It says here
http://news.yahoo.com/boeing-first-carry-us-astronauts-space-201613955.html
that "Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders said at a press conference in Houston, Texas that Boeing would be the first to make two contracted missions to carry NASA astronauts, since it has completed two milestones so far, and SpaceX just one".
- Ed Kyle
She never said that. That isn't a direct quote and it is incorrect.
Too lazy to quote from above posts, but two points:
1. Spacex said their crewed test flight is early 2017. Boeing said theirs is July 2017. That's a few months, not a year.
2. Gwynne quite clearly said that the Dragon's normal landing mode will be in water, she never said a thing about parachute onto land and use LAS to cushion it.
She said at first, Dragon 2 will land in water.
Is there anything (apart from technical) that prevents Space X from flying their own crew on test flights prior to any Nasa requested one. Obviously not to the ISS but if you successfully fly a couple of un-manned test fights why not stick a crew on one and go?
Great bragging right!
Houston Chronicle: When will NASA pick first provider?
Lueders: First mission Authority To Proceed will be Boeing mission.
Can someone who can parse NASA-ese better than I confirm this means NASA has already chosen Boeing for the first crewed mission? It seems really early for this choice, if so. I suppose such a decision is non-binding if Boeing were to encounter significant delays.
I caught that too and for the life of me it makes no sense at all for Boeing to be the 1st crew provider if SpaceX is ready to rotate a crew to the ISS a full year before them. That is just plain pure unadulterated popy-cock!
Whoever is ready first should fly first - period. I don't really care which one it is. Sounds to me like some people from Boeing and some people from NASA went into a smoky room and closed the doors and then 2 hours later came out with a "deal". I won't go into my suspected details.
they can fly all the manned missions they want. However, the first flight to ISS will have ONE astronaut of SpaceX's choosing and ONE NASA astronaut if they ever want to get certified. Part of the insight process and Joint Test Team. And because NASA astronauts didn't like the idea of people going into space and it wasn't them. Really.
Yes, I think that NASA promised the astronaut office that any flight going to the ISS should have a NASA astronaut. It might be a different story if the test flight wasn't going to the ISS. But neither SpaceX nor Boeing have proposed such a test flight.
I don't see NASA allowing its Astronauts on Dragon powered landings. Maybe at the EOL of ISS. Just not something NASA is comfortable with nor needs. There a things Musk wants, things NASA wants, and the two occasionally overlap. SpaceX is trying to please two customers at once, but one requires certifications plus an established culture.
The source selection document identifies the water landing as a weakness of SpaceX compared to the airbags of Boeing I understand. I think SpaceX feared they would be considered as unsafe if they offer fully propulsive landing. I suspect they may go for the middle way method of parachute landing with propulsive assist for soft touchdown, maybe even before the first manned landing. With fully propulsive precision landing a while later. All depending on the Firefly program.
I don't see NASA allowing its Astronauts on Dragon powered landings. Maybe at the EOL of ISS. Just not something NASA is comfortable with nor needs. There a things Musk wants, things NASA wants, and the two occasionally overlap. SpaceX is trying to please two customers at once, but one requires certifications plus an established culture.
The source selection document identifies the water landing as a weakness of SpaceX compared to the airbags of Boeing I understand. I think SpaceX feared they would be considered as unsafe if they offer fully propulsive landing. I suspect they may go for the middle way method of parachute landing with propulsive assist for soft touchdown, maybe even before the first manned landing. With fully propulsive precision landing a while later. All depending on the Firefly program.
I think you mean DragonFly.
Lueders: Crew science will double to 80 hours a week. Shortest downmass handover time ever.
Someone needs to question this claim. 3 USOS crews members are averagomg 40 hours total right now. 1 additional person doubling that total means that 4th person will spend almost no time doing the maintenance, repair, and trouble-shooting tasks that dominate their days today. When you subtract wake-up, exercise, and sleep prep that 4th crew member will have to spend almost all their awake time doing science which is hard to believe given years of actual experience with the ISS.
I think the disconnect here is that you seem to be assuming the 40 hours is per crew member. It's not. The current 40 hours of science is total, by all the crew members, per week. So all the additional crew member has to add is 40 hours a week to make the total go to 80.
Thanks for the several responses and I fully understand the 4th crew member won't do all the science and that the current output is between the 3 crew members. My point is that stating flat out that science will double with the current systems having 3 more years of wear and tear and carrying a increased load (CO2 removal and the bathroom especially come to mind) seems wishful at best.
Thanks for the several responses and I fully understand the 4th crew member won't do all the science and that the current output is between the 3 crew members. My point is that stating flat out that science will double with the current systems having 3 more years of wear and tear and carrying a increased load (CO2 removal and the bathroom especially come to mind) seems wishful at best.
IMO It is. Having watched the press-conference twice now I can't help but notice that it was full of overly-optimistic statements, coming from all parties. When are those folks gonna learn that, particularly in spaceflight, projected schedules (almost) never hold up?
2. Gwynne quite clearly said that the Dragon's normal landing mode will be in water, she never said a thing about parachute onto land and use LAS to cushion it.
WTF? This is like the most disappointing bait and switch ever.
Why did they waste years working on the SuperDracos?
The only thing I can think of is there's been serious developmental or reliability issues with the SuperDracos. Good enough for launch abort but not good enough for landing.
2. Gwynne quite clearly said that the Dragon's normal landing mode will be in water, she never said a thing about parachute onto land and use LAS to cushion it.
WTF? This is like the most disappointing bait and switch ever.
Why did they waste years working on the SuperDracos?
The only thing I can think of is there's been serious developmental or reliability issues with the SuperDracos. Good enough for launch abort but not good enough for landing.
For aborts they have to use parachutes as all of the fuel will be used up in abort mode. Once they have got in to space without aborting they can use the fuel to land. They have always said this.
It says here
http://news.yahoo.com/boeing-first-carry-us-astronauts-space-201613955.html
that "Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders said at a press conference in Houston, Texas that Boeing would be the first to make two contracted missions to carry NASA astronauts, since it has completed two milestones so far, and SpaceX just one".
- Ed Kyle
She never said that. That isn't a direct quote and it is incorrect.
AP AFP fumble?
What she said on review of the "tape" was something like Boeing will be first because of the differences in lead time and the need to start having commercial crew services in late 2017 early 2018. Gwynne Shotwell sort of nodded when Kathy made this statement. It can only mean that Boeing plans to be ready before SpaceX plans to be ready, or that NASA expects Boeing to be ready before SpaceX is ready, PR aside. They should be ready first, because they are getting more funding.
Kathy also noted, when she started answering the "who's first" question, that the providers were only guaranteed a minimum of two crew missions, and as many as six. This makes me wonder if NASA isn't really planning to have a primary carrier (CST-100) with a well-tested, but less-flown backup (Dragon 2).
- Ed Kyle