EDIT: I listened to the recorded version, and the "velocity vector" issue was the Russian concern about what would happen if the single (redundant) C&C box for Dragon-2 died during its approach to ISS.
On the thrusters, there's a portion of the thruster that can actually break free, and liberate, and come out of the thruster. I think we understand why that occurs. We can control that by operating the thrusters in a certain manner, keeping temperatures at a certain temperature, keeping the propellant conditions exactly the right way. In the future, we'd like to understand, to maybe make a change to that. To either keep the thermal system, keep the propellant warm in the vehicle without having to do attitude control to keep the propellant warm. So that'll be another change that's coming in the propulsion system.
Quote from: eeergo on 02/22/2019 11:01 pmEDIT: I listened to the recorded version, and the "velocity vector" issue was the Russian concern about what would happen if the single (redundant) C&C box for Dragon-2 died during its approach to ISS.Single redundant ...... sounds interesting. Anyway it is a legitimate question, but I think with good answers. This multiple dissimilar approach has drawbacks as well which have been shown in some testing. I looked back to see if I could find the papers but couldn't find them. I think some go back a couple decades actually.
HiI didn't understand what Bill Gerstenmaier said about warm propellant during Post FRR Press Conference.QuoteOn the thrusters, there's a portion of the thruster that can actually break free, and liberate, and come out of the thruster. I think we understand why that occurs. We can control that by operating the thrusters in a certain manner, keeping temperatures at a certain temperature, keeping the propellant conditions exactly the right way. In the future, we'd like to understand, to maybe make a change to that. To either keep the thermal system, keep the propellant warm in the vehicle without having to do attitude control to keep the propellant warm. So that'll be another change that's coming in the propulsion system.Could someone explain?
Gerstenmaier mentioned a need/desire for a 24 hour docking time due to thermal constraints (presumably on Dragon). Since this is the first use of an IDA on-orbit, I’m curious what the contingency plans are for dealing with any issues that arise - how many attempts are possible, amount of “loiter time” available to diagnose/work issues, etc.
I wonder if the thermal issue mentioned is related to the Draco low temp issue mentioned at the FRR debrief as a concern?
Is there a list of tracking facilities that participate in the tracking of DM-1 at launch and in orbit? Does SpaceX use NASA, USAF and/or commercial tracking facilities to get data to Hawthorne mission control?Thanks in advance for any information.
Has the SpaceX DM-1 logo been released yet? Usually happens after the static fire but I haven't seen one.
Which "dragon" logo - wings or no wings - is associated with the Crew Dragon? I have seen both in articles.
In answer to a question about the drone ship landing, Hans said they were reserving performance and flying a lofted trajectory. He added that they may return to lz landings for future dragon 2 flights. To me this implies that the booster will be landing with a lot of unused propellant if the flight goes well. Should we watch for a bit more crush core movement on landing, or does SpaceX have a way of using up that extra propellant on the way down by adjusting the landing burn on the fly?