Quote from: woods170 on 09/06/2016 04:12 pmQuote from: yg1968 on 09/01/2016 09:43 pmMore delays:Quote from: OIGThe Commercial Crew Program continues to face multiple challenges that will likely delay the first routine flight carrying NASA astronauts to the ISS until late 2018 – more than 3 years after NASA’s original 2015 goal. While past funding shortfalls have contributed to the delay, technical challenges with the contractors’ spacecraft designs are now driving the schedule slippages. For Boeing, these include issues relating to the effects of vibrations generated during launch and challenges regarding vehicle mass. For SpaceX, delays resulted from a change in capsule design to enable a water-based rather than ground-based landing and related concerns about the capsule taking on excessive water.https://oig.nasa.gov/audits/reports/FY16/IG-16-028.pdfAnd the delayed write-up by SN: http://spacenews.com/report-warns-of-additional-commercial-crew-delays/By the sound of it is primarily the NASA mandated switch to ocean landings that is causing much trouble for SpaceX. It is what drove the addition of a fourth parachute and the associated additional drop testing, as well as having a lot of components changed to withstand a (sustained) wet landing.Nothing mandated about it. SpaceX's aborts always assumed ocean landing.
Quote from: yg1968 on 09/01/2016 09:43 pmMore delays:Quote from: OIGThe Commercial Crew Program continues to face multiple challenges that will likely delay the first routine flight carrying NASA astronauts to the ISS until late 2018 – more than 3 years after NASA’s original 2015 goal. While past funding shortfalls have contributed to the delay, technical challenges with the contractors’ spacecraft designs are now driving the schedule slippages. For Boeing, these include issues relating to the effects of vibrations generated during launch and challenges regarding vehicle mass. For SpaceX, delays resulted from a change in capsule design to enable a water-based rather than ground-based landing and related concerns about the capsule taking on excessive water.https://oig.nasa.gov/audits/reports/FY16/IG-16-028.pdfAnd the delayed write-up by SN: http://spacenews.com/report-warns-of-additional-commercial-crew-delays/By the sound of it is primarily the NASA mandated switch to ocean landings that is causing much trouble for SpaceX. It is what drove the addition of a fourth parachute and the associated additional drop testing, as well as having a lot of components changed to withstand a (sustained) wet landing.
More delays:Quote from: OIGThe Commercial Crew Program continues to face multiple challenges that will likely delay the first routine flight carrying NASA astronauts to the ISS until late 2018 – more than 3 years after NASA’s original 2015 goal. While past funding shortfalls have contributed to the delay, technical challenges with the contractors’ spacecraft designs are now driving the schedule slippages. For Boeing, these include issues relating to the effects of vibrations generated during launch and challenges regarding vehicle mass. For SpaceX, delays resulted from a change in capsule design to enable a water-based rather than ground-based landing and related concerns about the capsule taking on excessive water.https://oig.nasa.gov/audits/reports/FY16/IG-16-028.pdf
The Commercial Crew Program continues to face multiple challenges that will likely delay the first routine flight carrying NASA astronauts to the ISS until late 2018 – more than 3 years after NASA’s original 2015 goal. While past funding shortfalls have contributed to the delay, technical challenges with the contractors’ spacecraft designs are now driving the schedule slippages. For Boeing, these include issues relating to the effects of vibrations generated during launch and challenges regarding vehicle mass. For SpaceX, delays resulted from a change in capsule design to enable a water-based rather than ground-based landing and related concerns about the capsule taking on excessive water.
In the event of an abort the capsule would be in the water for a short time only and the crew probably even shorter given that the capsule lands close to shore and rescue units are close by and on standby during the launch.
Quote from: woods170 on 09/07/2016 01:23 pmIn the event of an abort the capsule would be in the water for a short time only and the crew probably even shorter given that the capsule lands close to shore and rescue units are close by and on standby during the launch.In the case of a launch pad abort, but what about an abort late in the ascent?
I have missed, where the concerns about water landing comes from. Cargo Dragon always lands in water and early problems with water intrusion have long been solved.
"this is the last year, really. We mean it now"Does anyone still remember when post-Shuttle gap was going to be a big deal and Adm. Craig Steidle's CEV spiral development for fly-offs was called "too slow" and brushed out?
Quote from: savuporo on 09/30/2016 12:53 am"this is the last year, really. We mean it now"Does anyone still remember when post-Shuttle gap was going to be a big deal and Adm. Craig Steidle's CEV spiral development for fly-offs was called "too slow" and brushed out?Yes. But seriousness, HSF, and the Congress haven't ever been a good combination for timely programs.
Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, STS weren't nearly as bad. I think something very important has gotten lost in the 80-90 wave of aerospace consolidations, and there is a continuity gap in rebuilding the collective organizational and technical skills to do anything.
Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 09/30/2016 01:18 amQuote from: savuporo on 09/30/2016 12:53 am"this is the last year, really. We mean it now"Does anyone still remember when post-Shuttle gap was going to be a big deal and Adm. Craig Steidle's CEV spiral development for fly-offs was called "too slow" and brushed out?Yes. But seriousness, HSF, and the Congress haven't ever been a good combination for timely programs.Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, STS weren't nearly as bad. I think something very important has gotten lost in the 80-90 wave of aerospace consolidations, and there is a continuity gap in rebuilding the collective organizational and technical skills to do anything.
After an initial delay from late 2017 into early 2018, Boeing has acknowledged a second slippage of its schedule for the first commercial crew flights of its Starliner spacecraft. According to a report in Aviation Week, the company now says it will not be ready to begin operational flights until December 2018, a full year after NASA had originally hoped its commercial crew providers would be ready.
Boeing delays Starliner again, casting doubt on commercial flights in 2018QuoteBoeing's second delay appears to have been caused by supply chain issues and other factors, which Boeing Program Manager for Commercial Crew John Mulholland said have been largely resolved.
Boeing's second delay appears to have been caused by supply chain issues and other factors, which Boeing Program Manager for Commercial Crew John Mulholland said have been largely resolved.
Quote from: Dante80 on 10/11/2016 08:04 pm Boeing delays Starliner again, casting doubt on commercial flights in 2018QuoteBoeing's second delay appears to have been caused by supply chain issues and other factors, which Boeing Program Manager for Commercial Crew John Mulholland said have been largely resolved.Guy Norris's article Aviation Week article includes additional information (well worth creating a free account if you don't already have one). According to the primary source, the schedule shift is driven by supply chain production delays, a production flaw that scrapped the lower dome of the crew module pressure shell for Spacecraft 2, and issues with qualification tests fof minor components.Source: Boeing Delays CST-100, Still Targets 2018 ISS Mission
Quote from: Navier–Stokes on 10/11/2016 09:05 pmQuote from: Dante80 on 10/11/2016 08:04 pm Boeing delays Starliner again, casting doubt on commercial flights in 2018QuoteBoeing's second delay appears to have been caused by supply chain issues and other factors, which Boeing Program Manager for Commercial Crew John Mulholland said have been largely resolved.Guy Norris's article Aviation Week article includes additional information (well worth creating a free account if you don't already have one). According to the primary source, the schedule shift is driven by supply chain production delays, a production flaw that scrapped the lower dome of the crew module pressure shell for Spacecraft 2, and issues with qualification tests fof minor components.Source: Boeing Delays CST-100, Still Targets 2018 ISS MissionFurther information also available here: http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/10/11/boeing-delays-cst100-starliner-operational-flight-december-2018/
