...I have looked but cannot find....What happens if DM-1 fails it's tests?Does SpaceX have to re-fly on their own dime? Does NASA pay some/all?I know they won't fly the crew mission unless it passes all objectives. Just curious. If it has been posted, just point me to it.
2018-10-11 ASAP Public Meeting Transcript Pg. 2:Quoterecent parachute testing, both during the CCP qualification (qual) testing regimen and with some anomalies witnessed in the resupply contract (also handled by SpaceX), show difficulties and problems with parachute designs. Clearly, crew cannot be risked without complete confidence in the parachute design. It is an integral part of capsule return for both providers and a crucial element of crew safety.
recent parachute testing, both during the CCP qualification (qual) testing regimen and with some anomalies witnessed in the resupply contract (also handled by SpaceX), show difficulties and problems with parachute designs. Clearly, crew cannot be risked without complete confidence in the parachute design. It is an integral part of capsule return for both providers and a crucial element of crew safety.
Quote from: kdhilliard on 11/30/2018 12:14 am2018-10-11 ASAP Public Meeting Transcript Pg. 2:Quoterecent parachute testing, both during the CCP qualification (qual) testing regimen and with some anomalies witnessed in the resupply contract (also handled by SpaceX), show difficulties and problems with parachute designs. Clearly, crew cannot be risked without complete confidence in the parachute design. It is an integral part of capsule return for both providers and a crucial element of crew safety. Thank you. IMO that is a valid reason to delay the flight of DM-1. It has nothing to do with trying to set up Boeing to fly first (conspiracy theory). If SpaceX has anomalies with parachutes, even on Cargo Dragon, I agree these need to be adjudicated before crew risks their lives on them. Because DM-2 will be crewed, DM-1 is the correct vehicle to demonstrate the anomaly mitigation. Delay the flight, install the mitigated systems and only then should it fly.
Quote from: ulm_atms on 11/29/2018 11:39 pmI consider this one of the times that Elon should send a tweet as to what the heck is going on (if possible, all though I can't see why not currently unless he is afraid to piss off NASA by making them look bad).A tweet is fundamentally no different than a press release. You don't issue random press releases that impact customers without their involvement. It's called "being a good partner"; it's part of doing business, and has been since the stone age.QuoteSorry if this sounds rant'ish...but I can't fathom the delays after delays for "safety" and other things and then pile into a capsule/rocket that has had two issues in a row. And for the kicker....DM-1 HAS NO CREW!!! So the safety notion is out the window for this delay. My notion is that NASA can't get out of NASA's way either politically or other.A more disciplined examination of what DM-1 is intended to accomplish and demonstrate might be in order. It is intended to demonstrate key aspects required for safe transport of crew and docking with ISS. The fact that it has no crew is irrelevant to the goal of demonstrating a safe system.
I consider this one of the times that Elon should send a tweet as to what the heck is going on (if possible, all though I can't see why not currently unless he is afraid to piss off NASA by making them look bad).
Sorry if this sounds rant'ish...but I can't fathom the delays after delays for "safety" and other things and then pile into a capsule/rocket that has had two issues in a row. And for the kicker....DM-1 HAS NO CREW!!! So the safety notion is out the window for this delay. My notion is that NASA can't get out of NASA's way either politically or other.
I didn't say for Elon to go "@$^$ing NASA can't do anything right and the delays are because of that!!!" But, why can't he say "The reason for the delay is because NASA thinks X and we need to work on Y" It's NASA putting out all the info about safety reviews and DM-1 delays(or at least Bridenstine..anyone else from NASA say anything?)....and not one single iota from SpaceX. It's not like them to be quite while everyone else is talking about them...they are a very "public" company.
But politically....SpaceX is bad and needs to go away....that's what all of this feels like. That's why I find it weird that only Bridenstine is saying things and that he seems to not be on the same page as the rest of NASA.
Except that we have been told by those in the know that the anomalies were within the design parameters and still provided adequate margin per the design. ...
...My notion is that NASA can't get out of NASA's way either politically or other.
I have searched for images or video of the Crew Dragon at KSC, but apparently SpaceX hasn't released anything since the thermal vac photos from Ohio. Any ideas on the current state of the vehicle? I assume it's essentially in a clean room environment with little work being done to it at the moment, with all interior components and flight software in place, but waiting on things like parachute installment. I was hoping we might see some pre-mission PR footage of processing, roll out to the pad, etc. but I guess that'll depend on this latest news.
QuoteThe administrator attributed the delay to challenges with several components, including landing parachutes.Haven't the parachutes already been tested and certified?
The administrator attributed the delay to challenges with several components, including landing parachutes.
Quote from: cppetrie on 11/30/2018 12:39 amExcept that we have been told by those in the know that the anomalies were within the design parameters and still provided adequate margin per the design. ...Unless you cannot explain the anomalies. In which case, you better go back and figure out how to explain those anomalies so that some unknown does not come back and bite you in the a**.edit: And let's differentiate between "anomaly" and "within the error bars". The former suggests an unexpected and unexplained behavior; the latter suggests behavior within modeled-predicted behaviors. If we have an anomaly that needs to be addressed. If the behavior is within modeled-predicted behaviors, then you may be correct in suggesting this is a canard.
Thank God NASA isn‘t involved in Starship, and I bloody well hope it stays that way 😠
Quote from: zodiacchris on 11/30/2018 03:49 amThank God NASA isn‘t involved in Starship, and I bloody well hope it stays that way 😠Elon would be extremely well-advised to keep NASA folks away from any aspect of ITS/BFR/BFS/Starship, at all times.Because if he doesn't it will either launch never at all or at least a decade late. Not to mention that it won't be financially viable due to all the "features" added to satisfy NASA's demands.
Couldn't agree more. It would be the death of the project and I think you're being a little generous to Nasa when you say a decade late. I suspect it would be a lot, lot more.Quote from: woods170 on 11/30/2018 06:51 amQuote from: zodiacchris on 11/30/2018 03:49 amThank God NASA isn‘t involved in Starship, and I bloody well hope it stays that way 😠Elon would be extremely well-advised to keep NASA folks away from any aspect of ITS/BFR/BFS/Starship, at all times.Because if he doesn't it will either launch never at all or at least a decade late. Not to mention that it won't be financially viable due to all the "features" added to satisfy NASA's demands.
And even now, with a margin of safety that is greater than on any other existing, or soon to exist, crew transportation system, NASA is still getting cold feet.Finally: it's not just SpaceX that is having trouble in convincing NASA that their parachute system is safe.
Quote from: woods170 on 11/30/2018 06:46 amAnd even now, with a margin of safety that is greater than on any other existing, or soon to exist, crew transportation system, NASA is still getting cold feet.Finally: it's not just SpaceX that is having trouble in convincing NASA that their parachute system is safe.You may recall that SpaceX wanted to use propulsive landing with Crew Dragon (Red Dragon) for exactly this reason (and so the manned capsule could land on planets without oceans.