SpaceX Falcon 9 / Dragon 2 : SpX-DM1 : March 2, 2019 : DISCUSSION

[Comga]

Do we know why the DM! keeps slipping? I now believe Boeing's crewed Starliner will be first to the ISS because they have always projected a short time between demo and maned flights and SpaceX has to have their in flight abort test.

There's a post on NASA's website about it and if you look at Boeing's dates they're worse than SpaceX.

I know, I just don't believe SpaceX can retrieve DM1, refurbish it for the in flight abort test, perform the test, and get NASA to sign off on all the data in 6 months. DM2 will slip a lot.

No one is making you believe those dates if you don't want to. Just saying that Boeing, in terms of hardware and testing, is way behind SpaceX... more than people think. Apart from that, they also have to do a pad abort test that you seemed to forget on your comment and they have to do that before their crewed mission. I wish the best for both companies but reality is reality and they're behind. Anyways, this topic is not very much related to this thread and mission, maybe it's better placed on the Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis thread.

Boeing did a Starliner pad abort years ago.
Are they really close committed to another?
Edit: Or are you referring to SpaceX’s in-flight abort that will use the DM-1 capsule?
I certainly share Roy_H’s pessimism.
QG’s signature line asks about Zeno’s paradox which seems so appropriate for Commercial Crew:
Every week or so they check off something that covers 10% of the remaining requirements
And always will....
I really want to see SpaceX fly people!

[Alexphysics]

Do we know why the DM! keeps slipping? I now believe Boeing's crewed Starliner will be first to the ISS because they have always projected a short time between demo and maned flights and SpaceX has to have their in flight abort test.

There's a post on NASA's website about it and if you look at Boeing's dates they're worse than SpaceX.

I know, I just don't believe SpaceX can retrieve DM1, refurbish it for the in flight abort test, perform the test, and get NASA to sign off on all the data in 6 months. DM2 will slip a lot.

No one is making you believe those dates if you don't want to. Just saying that Boeing, in terms of hardware and testing, is way behind SpaceX... more than people think. Apart from that, they also have to do a pad abort test that you seemed to forget on your comment and they have to do that before their crewed mission. I wish the best for both companies but reality is reality and they're behind. Anyways, this topic is not very much related to this thread and mission, maybe it's better placed on the Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis thread.

Boeing did a Starliner pad abort years ago.
Are they really close committed to another?
Edit: Or are you referring to SpaceX’s in-flight abort that will use the DM-1 capsule?
I certainly share Roy_H’s pessimism.
QG’s signature line asks about Zeno’s paradox which seems so appropriate for Commercial Crew:
Every week or so they check off something that covers 10% of the remaining requirements
And always will....
I really want to see SpaceX fly people!

Nope, Boeing has not done any pad abort test or something like that. They were trying to do it this summer but that leaky valve on one of the abort engines was the cause for the slip and they now plan it on spring next year. You may confused it with SpaceX's pad abort test which happened more than 3 years ago and have tested the escape system many many times on the ground. Only item left is IFA test. Boeing, as I said, goes behind in hardware and testing and more than peole think. Rockets don't fly on papers...

[meekGee]

Do we know why the DM! keeps slipping? I now believe Boeing's crewed Starliner will be first to the ISS because they have always projected a short time between demo and maned flights and SpaceX has to have their in flight abort test.

There's a post on NASA's website about it and if you look at Boeing's dates they're worse than SpaceX.

I know, I just don't believe SpaceX can retrieve DM1, refurbish it for the in flight abort test, perform the test, and get NASA to sign off on all the data in 6 months. DM2 will slip a lot.

No one is making you believe those dates if you don't want to. Just saying that Boeing, in terms of hardware and testing, is way behind SpaceX... more than people think. Apart from that, they also have to do a pad abort test that you seemed to forget on your comment and they have to do that before their crewed mission. I wish the best for both companies but reality is reality and they're behind. Anyways, this topic is not very much related to this thread and mission, maybe it's better placed on the Commercial Crew Schedule Analysis thread.

Boeing did a Starliner pad abort years ago.
Are they really close committed to another?
Edit: Or are you referring to SpaceX’s in-flight abort that will use the DM-1 capsule?
I certainly share Roy_H’s pessimism.
QG’s signature line asks about Zeno’s paradox which seems so appropriate for Commercial Crew:
Every week or so they check off something that covers 10% of the remaining requirements
And always will....
I really want to see SpaceX fly people!

Nope, Boeing has not done any pad abort test or something like that. They were trying to do it this summer but that leaky valve on one of the abort engines was the cause for the slip and they now plan it on spring next year. You may confused it with SpaceX's pad abort test which happened more than 3 years ago and have tested the escape system many many times on the ground. Only item left is IFA test. Boeing, as I said, goes behind in hardware and testing and more than peole think. Rockets don't fly on papers...

Maybe confusing it with Orion?

-----
ABCD: Always Be Counting Down

[Comga]

Maybe confusing it with Orion?

That was probably it.
My apologies.
Carry on

[meekGee]

Maybe confusing it with Orion?

That was probably it.
My apologies.
Carry on

Too many vehicles, not enough flights, easy to mix them up...

"You know, the one that's been in development since my kid was in middle school"... 

"sorry you'll have to be more specific"

-----
ABCD: Always Be Counting Down

[rpapo]

Too many vehicles, not enough flights, easy to mix them up...

But that's sure a nice problem to have.

[woods170]

Too many vehicles, not enough flights, easy to mix them up...

But that's sure a nice problem to have.

The first part is. The second part is not.

[woods170]

Maybe confusing it with Orion?

That was probably it.
My apologies.
Carry on

Overview of performed and planned abort tests, per vehicle:

Orion:
- Pad abort test (PA-1). Was performed on May 6, 2010.
- In-flight abort test (Ascent Abort test - AA-2). Planned for April, 2019

Crew Dragon:
- Pad abort test. Was performed on May 6, 2015. (Exactly 5 years to the day after Orion's PA-1)
- In-flight abort test. Planned for March/April 2019.

CST-100 Starliner
- Pad abort test. Was planned for June/July 2019. However, the vehicle's service module suffered a mishap during a hotfire-test (prior to the actual pad abort test), requiring re-design of abort propellant valves. New planning date TBD.
- No in-flight abort test will be performed for Starliner.

[crandles57]

Crew Dragon:
- In-flight abort test. Planned for March/April 2019.

Last I saw was

Lueders said Friday that the Demo-2 crew test flight will be preceded by about a month by an in-flight abort demonstration

https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/08/09/nasa-signs-off-on-spacexs-load-and-go-procedure-for-crew-launches/
dated Aug 9,2018

and with
SpaceX Demo-2 (crewed): June 2019 per Oct 4 CCP dates

I would say in-flight abort test is unlikely to be before May 2019 but perhaps 'March/April 2019' is still plausible (potentially last slippage could be increase in time between abort test and DM1).

[Ben the Space Brit]

With today's launch abort on Soyuz MS-10 and the previous as-yet-unexplained 'sabotage' on Soyuz MS-09, I have the feeling that these bottlenecks, delays and other problems are no longer going to be acceptable to the Administrator. I expect a few fires lit under a few feet and pressure to get the launch schedule both for Dragon-2 and for Starliner trending leftwards on a dramatic scale.

[AbuSimbel]

With today's launch abort on Soyuz MS-10 and the previous as-yet-unexplained 'sabotage' on Soyuz MS-09, I have the feeling that these bottlenecks, delays and other problems are no longer going to be acceptable to the Administrator. I expect a few fires lit under a few feet and pressure to get the launch schedule both for Dragon-2 and for Starliner trending leftwards on a dramatic scale.

How so with a limited crew on the ISS (or even no crew)?

[Ben the Space Brit]

How so with a limited crew on the ISS (or even no crew)?

To end the 'no crew' issue as swiftly and as reliably as possible.

It may be necessary to vary some of the missions (maybe using a recycled and modified Cargo Dragon as a docking target for DM2) before sending a recovery crew to the ISS.

This is all assuming that Soyuz has an indefinite stand-down and I suspect that these plans will be crystallising even as we speak as a contingency. I hope that long-term stand down doesn't happen but, even if it doesn't, I think that the recent Soyuz issues would make everyone more comfortable if Commercial Crew was operational sooner rather than later.

[AbuSimbel]

I suppose we will see if DM-1 was really delayed just because of ISS scheduling issues.
If that's the case having it launch as soon as possible, before the crew may be forced to come back is a no-brainer.

[woods170]

I suppose we will see if DM-1 was really delayed just because of ISS scheduling issues.
If that's the case having it launch as soon as possible, before the crew may be forced to come back is a no-brainer.

How so? Launching DM-1 ASAP doesn't solve the problem of a Soyuz stand-down because it doesn't necessarily speed up DM-2 .

[Nightstalker89]

The easy answer here is that the the Russians could just launched an empty soyuz to the space station as a lifeboat. Without a crew at risk the benefits to keep the ISS manned would be high. They would just extend the current crews missions.

[AbuSimbel]

I suppose we will see if DM-1 was really delayed just because of ISS scheduling issues.
If that's the case having it launch as soon as possible, before the crew may be forced to come back is a no-brainer.

How so? Launching DM-1 ASAP doesn't solve the problem of a Soyuz stand-down because it doesn't necessarily speed up DM-2 .

To me the Soyuz stand down for this particular accident is the just the tip of the iceberg. It's more and more clear that the russian space program has growing QC issues and I think NASA (and the Congress) will want to have their new carefully scrutinized, safety oriented vehicles ready to replace Soyuz as soon as possible.

Launching DM-1 as soon as possible doesn't necessarily speed up DM-2, but not launching it necessarily delays crewed flights.

[clongton]

Trying to move DM-1 and 2 schedules to the left isn't going to happen. What will happen is the Administrator will have a conversation with SpaceX and Boeing about making sure there are no more delays.

What happened this morning is a Russian problem. They have the resources to mitigate the problem and will likely at least fly an empty MS-11 to the station to replace MS-09 before its expiration date. That is, of course, the Russians determine the problem quickly and learn that it is an easy fix which also satisfies NASA.

[woods170]

Trying to move DM-1 and 2 schedules to the left isn't going to happen. What will happen is the Administrator will have a conversation with SpaceX and Boeing about making sure there are no more delays.

What happened this morning is a Russian problem. They have the resources to mitigate the problem and will likely at least fly an empty MS-11 to the station to replace MS-09 before its expiration date. That is, of course, the Russians determine the problem quickly and learn that it is an easy fix which also satisfies NASA.

Emphasis mine.

More like SpaceX and Boeing having a conversation with the Administrator to make clear that a mountain of review paper work, to be done by NASA (as pointed out repeatedly by ASAP and GAO), is quite literally in the way of SpaceX and Boeing flying their vehicles.

[TrevorMonty]

Sooner DM-1 flys, the more time SpaceX has to resolve any issues that flight may show up. So flying it sooner reduces slippage of DM-2.

[gongora]

The Implications of Soyuz MS-10 launch failure on ISS, crew rotation,Commercial Crew thread might be a more appropriate place for today's discussions.