SpaceX Crewed Dragon Circumlunar Mission

[jpo234]

Shotwell: no updates on plans announced early this year for a crewed circumlunar Dragon flight. Surprising that there are as many people as there are who want to fly such a mission and can afford it. #NewSpaceEurope

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/931089167764869120

This chimes with a previous comment from her, that this might be a viable business.

[cscott]

Shotwell: expect we’ll do BFR/BFS missions to the Moon before Mars, given administration’s interest. Hope it will be for a permanent settlement. #NewSpaceEurope

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/931089584640884737

That is, they think they might be able to get the government to pay for a (significant fraction of the cost of a) lunar mission.

Like with CRS, Shotwell is adept at working the funding available to accomplish SpaceX goals, even if that means tweaking SpaceX plans (like F1 or "Mars first").

[Negan]

Also the "operational flight environment" for Dragon on a FH launch and in cis-lunar space is significantly different than Dragon on F9 launch or in LEO.

The operational flight environment in cis-lunar is different, but very well understood. Why is a test flight to cis-lunar the only way to prove a Dragon can operate successfully there?

It might be nice for Dragon's computers to be tested outside of LEO, even if it doesn't go all the way to the moon.

Another reason why I find this hard to believe as necessary is due to the 210 day on orbit attached to station requirement. Why is 7 days beyond LEO so different than 210 days in LEO?

Edit: We're talking about the affect on computers.

[gongora]

Another reason why I find this hard to believe as necessary is due to the 210 day on orbit attached to station requirement. Why is 7 days beyond LEO so different than 210 days in LEO?

The Van Allen Belts?

[nacnud]

And thermal environment, and outside the magnetosphere and longer range comms. Etc. All well understood but different to LEO

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Consumables. That includes prop for 3 axis stabilization which is not used for its time connected to the ISS. Also food water and air. The 7 day value probably has a 3X or even 5X margin on these items.

[Negan]

Another reason why I find this hard to believe as necessary is due to the 210 day on orbit attached to station requirement. Why is 7 days beyond LEO so different than 210 days in LEO?

The Van Allen Belts?

So a couple of passes through the Van Allen Belts are worse than 210 days in LEO?

Edit: Maybe they can copy Apollo and avoid the worst of the belts.

Edit: From the Moon mission conspiracy debunking sights, I don't see how this would be a consideration since the time in the belts is so short.

[Negan]

And thermal environment, and outside the magnetosphere and longer range comms. Etc. All well understood but different to LEO

True. Apollo proved one spacecraft could be designed to operate in both environments, and that was before all the knowledge spacecraft designers have today. Heck they were even thinking of using Gemini for a circumlunar mission.

[gongora]

Another reason why I find this hard to believe as necessary is due to the 210 day on orbit attached to station requirement. Why is 7 days beyond LEO so different than 210 days in LEO?

The Van Allen Belts?

So a couple of passes through the Van Allen Belts are worse than 210 days in LEO?

Edit: Maybe they can copy Apollo and avoid the worst of the belts.

The environment is different outside the Van Allen belts.

[Negan]

Another reason why I find this hard to believe as necessary is due to the 210 day on orbit attached to station requirement. Why is 7 days beyond LEO so different than 210 days in LEO?

The Van Allen Belts?

So a couple of passes through the Van Allen Belts are worse than 210 days in LEO?

Edit: Maybe they can copy Apollo and avoid the worst of the belts.

The environment is different outside the Van Allen belts.

And Dragon 2 is designed to operate in both environments (with the exception of communications) like Apollo was.

Edit: Added quote from article https://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2017/02/spacex-private-moon-mission-2018/

"Musk said Dragon 2 could come back from the Moon, too. "The heat shield is quite massively over-designed," he said. Musk also said the vehicle was sufficiently hardened against radiation to keep its crew safe beyond the Earth's protective radiation belts. Dragon 2's systems are "triple redundant," Musk added, and the only major upgrade needed would be in communications systems."

https://nepp.nasa.gov/files/24815/GOMAC2003_LaBel_HBD_Validation_pres.pdf

[Space Ghost 1962]

Shotwell: no updates on plans announced early this year for a crewed circumlunar Dragon flight. Surprising that there are as many people as there are who want to fly such a mission and can afford it. #NewSpaceEurope

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/931089167764869120

More than a half hundred confirmable. Now, how many of those ... want to beat US/China/Russia governments(!) to a very public visit to the vicinity of the moon?


Keep in mind the impact of Apollo 8. While far from "flag and footprints" of Apollo 11, everyone on earth knew that America was certain to land on the moon.

But ... adventurers on a free return won't have such a presumption. It may take a decade more before a single one of them can touch the surface.

What's it worth to buy "bragging rights" to "pwn" all of the earth's governments ... for more than a decade?

That's what will power the economics of lunar free return adventurer flights.

I'm certain that even with Jeff Bezos considerable pride, the first time adventurers return from a SX Dragon 2 free return flight safe, he'll not be able to wait for it. Knowing him, he'd dare Musk to do it himself, and somehow work out a means "to make it so" for both.

It's increasingly likely to happen. Whether that causes anything else to follow as a result, who knows?

[Ludus]

Shotwell: no updates on plans announced early this year for a crewed circumlunar Dragon flight. Surprising that there are as many people as there are who want to fly such a mission and can afford it. #NewSpaceEurope

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/931089167764869120

More than a half hundred confirmable. Now, how many of those ... want to beat US/China/Russia governments(!) to a very public visit to the vicinity of the moon?

Is there some confirmation of 50 people with the money who want to fly around the moon?

[MATTBLAK]

Although the first couple of circumlunar 'tourist' flights would likely only have two people aboard, the internal volume of a Dragon 2 could allow 4 people to fly a mission like this with about the same usable volume per person as 3x in an Apollo CM. Slightly more, even.

I could imagine a follow-up mission to this that could have SpaceX testing Dragons in 'deep space' at either DRO orbits or even L-2. Two Dragons docked 'nose to nose' would have enough internal volume for two or even three folk to loiter out there with supplies for more than a month. Part stunt; part deep space shakedown, testing life support systems, radiation mitigation, communications and navigation. Hey - I'm gonna use that idea for my next story...

[nacnud]

Why go to the expense of two dragons, take a BEAM instead. Add an extended duration pallet to the trunk too, if needed... Could make for some interesting stories.

[MATTBLAK]

Yes - or a reused Dragon 1.0 module. Or even base a Bigelow with a basic propulsion bus out at DRO or L-2. The idea is increased habitable volume for living, supply storage and experiments. It would have to be 'Beam 2.0' version. But even that wouldn't launch prefabricated with all the needed equipment. The Beam could be packed on top of the Falcon upper stage and after the TLI burn; it inflates and the crew docks with it and extracts it from the upper stage. The Dragon with crew of 2 could be packed to the eyeballs with supplies and equipment, which the crew could transfer to the Beam to free up lots of room in the capsule. The Beam - filled with water and food supplies - could then become the solar storm shelter for the crew. At the end of the mission, the Dragon burns back towards Earth. Filled with trash and uneeded equipment; the Beam is then jettisoned to burn up on re-entry.

[nacnud]

A modern Soyuz.

[MATTBLAK]

Even just the Orbital module, packed with supplies, would fit the bill. Dragon 2 life support system could probably support the additional module.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz_bo.html

[nacnud]

BEAM and the Orbital Module are a comparable mass, though beam is nearly three times the size, 16m2 vs 6m2.

[MATTBLAK]

BEAM has proven itself to be a viable future option. Though on ISS; they tend to keep the hatch to it shut most times and only go in there a few times per year. Future versions will need to be open a lot longer than that to be viable for regular and long term crewed space operations. I remember the 'Inspiration Mars' guys looked at BEAM derivative to have extra Habitation space for the 500 day Mars flyby mission. For such a Mars mission, other options include having the Dragon docked to either an enhanced Cygnus as a habitat, or a refurbished and used Dragon 1.0 pressure vessel. Another idea of mine is to have the Dragon docked to 2x inline Soyuz Orbital modules. One would be the Habitat and the other could be a storm shelter lined with polyethylene sheeting and water tanks.

But I digress...

[AncientU]

Yes - or a reused Dragon 1.0 module. Or even base a Bigelow with a basic propulsion bus out at DRO or L-2. The idea is increased habitable volume for living, supply storage and experiments. It would have to be 'Beam 2.0' version. But even that wouldn't launch prefabricated with all the needed equipment. The Beam could be packed on top of the Falcon upper stage and after the TLI burn; it inflates and the crew docks with it and extracts it from the upper stage. The Dragon with crew of 2 could be packed to the eyeballs with supplies and equipment, which the crew could transfer to the Beam to free up lots of room in the capsule. The Beam - filled with water and food supplies - could then become the solar storm shelter for the crew. At the end of the mission, the Dragon burns back towards Earth. Filled with trash and uneeded equipment; the Beam is then jettisoned to burn up on re-entry.

Try this approach without destroying hardware on each trip... only way it will be repeatable at any significant cadence.  Maybe leave the Beam or Beam derivative with station-keeping capability in Lunar orbit (suggest EML-1 or 2 better than DRO), either bring back the trash(like good backpackers do) or temporarily stow it in an expendable 'trash bag' which is sent on course to burn up in atmosphere.