Author Topic: SpaceX Crewed Dragon Circumlunar Mission (Read 515424 times)

CJ · « **Reply #160 on:** 02/27/2017 10:12 pm »

This is IMHO huge. No human being has gone past LEO in my lifetime - so anything beyond Earth Orbit is an enormous step forward IMHO.

I'm even more excited by the nature of the funding; private passengers. That is truly wonderful, because paying passengers (Space tourism) are a potential huge driver of space infrastructure.

Is there a market for manned lunar landings too? If so, this is the gateway to it - and if there is a market, we'll see the capability created - which will then be available, at comparatively cheap cost, for other purposes as well.

As a side benefit, I have a hunch that a potential market like this might speed up the development of Dragon 2 and FH.

QuantumG · « **Reply #161 on:** 02/27/2017 10:13 pm »

That was not boring!

raketa · « **Reply #162 on:** 02/27/2017 10:13 pm »

Quote from: Ronsmytheiii on 02/27/2017 09:47 pm

Wonder if this will torpedo Russia's lunar tourism program:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20311.360

No private person will fly on SLS or Atlas V, if they could achieve the same trip for 10 times less. When there was a plan to use Soyuz, price was around 200 million. This trip will be around 20-30 milion, this is a big difference.
SLS will cost at least billion and with Atlas V at least 500 million. To see private person flight this hardware is pipe dream. The only, who could afforded, will be NASA astronauts sucking 1/3 of NASA yearly budget. I am hoping Trump will stop such waste.

MATTBLAK · « **Reply #163 on:** 02/27/2017 10:16 pm »

I hope this speeds up the prospect for a small 'Mini-Mir' Lunar orbit space station - a great place to park a reusable lunar lander; send crews there by either upgraded Dragon or Orion on Vulcan/ACES or... SLS (if it survives now).

eric z · « **Reply #164 on:** 02/27/2017 10:22 pm »

Could NASA offer use of the DSN and TDRSS networks, etc in return for a seat? As long as the flight is not bogged down with even more bureaucracy-addled requirements than CC? Maybe offer Jack Schmidt a slot as capcom as they slide around the moon?

raketa · « **Reply #165 on:** 02/27/2017 10:22 pm »

Quote from: toruonu on 02/27/2017 08:44 pm

Quote from: Welsh Dragon on 02/27/2017 08:44 pm
Quote from: matthewkantar on 02/27/2017 08:41 pm
Space tourism is a side show. I hope these stunt persons paid full price for this. Seems to have little upside and many possible pitfalls. This make SpaceX seem less serious.

Matthew
It provides them with 'deep' space tracking and control experience, long-ish term ECLSS experience, BEO reentry experience and brings in hard cash. Can't see how this is anything but a win-win-win-win situation.

Well the Lose part comes when they somehow manage to die on the mission

1/Launch failure will cover by escape system.
2/Failing to enter free moon return trajectory will be very low, it is not so difficult, they showing ability with every launch to control this part very precisely
3/Provide air for 1 week of trip sounds trivial
4/Landing they are able to control right now Dragon with offset point center gravity pretty preciously, I didn't see it as big deal. Their heat shield looks very robust.
5/Parachute landing was demonstrated without any issue.
6/The only new piece is F9H

jpo234 · « **Reply #166 on:** 02/27/2017 10:23 pm »

Quote from: vapour_nudge on 02/27/2017 10:06 pm

Perhaps some wealthy Sheikhs from Saudi Arabia or UAE

Time for Chris Bergin to create another predictions thread regarding "who are the two customers?"

The announcement says "two private citizens", which probably means US citizens.

mme · « **Reply #167 on:** 02/27/2017 10:27 pm »

Quote from: Johnnyhinbos on 02/27/2017 08:53 pm

I'm somehow glum about this announcement. I mean, it's great that this move is happening - that the technology and processes will be developed to further humanity into space. But at the same time - to have that first great leap in 50 year go to ... tourists!?. This hurts and makes me a bit angry. People with extreme amounts of money are yet again able to buy their way though life. I would have been happier if the announcement read: "Wealthy private individuals donate significant money to SpaceX to train and launch two engineering citizen scientists on a free return orbit of the moon. The two future private astronauts will be chosen based on merit, education, and their ability to stimulate and captivate the future generation of space explorer..." (you get the idea).

Am I alone in this?

It's SpaceX. They will absolutely find ways to use this flight to add to their knowledge of HSF beyond LEO. I don't begrudge the lucky billionaires funding the flight.

DOCinCT · « **Reply #168 on:** 02/27/2017 10:28 pm »

Quote from: raketa on 02/27/2017 10:13 pm

Quote from: Ronsmytheiii on 02/27/2017 09:47 pm
Wonder if this will torpedo Russia's lunar tourism program:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20311.360
No private person will fly on SLS or Atlas V, if they could achieve the same trip for 10 times less. When there was a plan to use Soyuz, price was around 200 million. This trip will be around 20-30 milion, this is a big difference.

How did you arrive at the 20-30million? Seems the operative figure was something inline with a crewed ISS mission. Best estimate would be that of the Red Dragon figures floated last year ($300 million).

NWade · « **Reply #169 on:** 02/27/2017 10:28 pm »

Quote from: Johnnyhinbos on 02/27/2017 08:53 pm

This hurts and makes me a bit angry. People with extreme amounts of money are yet again able to buy their way though life.

I've seen some other responses on this thread and I just want to point out that there are people in this world who have gotten rich by being smart and working hard. Yes, there are people who cheat the system or have gained success by being cruel to others; but let's not brand them all with the same label. Having money carries some benefits in our current society, and you can argue that they are perhaps outsized or unfairly applied... But having money does not make one evil (or lazy or stupid or anti-science).

Until we know who is paying for this, it could be anyone. And that means that it could be people who are smart and wealthy engineering-types or big science buffs or promoters of advanced technology who simply want an experience in return for "investing" a couple-hundred-million $ into SpaceX.

--Noel

Kansan52 · « **Reply #170 on:** 02/27/2017 10:29 pm »

Yes to adventurers. No to tourists.

I am neither mad nor sad. Not mad because this isn't instead of something that someone without money would have. This wouldn't happen without people paying their own costs.

Well, maybe a little sad that it took so long and it won't be me.

There is still a chance that the people going have a scientific background and can accomplish some science on the way. Because without something to do it will be a long road trip locked in a van with latrine smells.

change spelling

montyrmanley · « **Reply #171 on:** 02/27/2017 10:30 pm »

Elon says lots of stuff, and we all know enough by now to add a "s**t Elon says" multiplier to any timeline he throws out. Still, if SpaceX can pull this off, it would be literally awesome. It's still just a baby step, but at long last, it's another human venture beyond LEO after all these years! God knows if I had the money, I'd spend my last dime to take such a journey -- even given the non-negligible possibility that I'd die in the effort. It would be worth it.

Also, if SpaceX succeeds in this effort, there'll be so much investor money flowing into NewSpace (not just SpaceX) that it'll be mind-boggling. BO, ULA, and Boeing can only benefit from this.

Elon is already rich, but if this works he'll be so rich that he'll be able to burn money just to keep his other money warm.

philw1776 · « **Reply #172 on:** 02/27/2017 10:34 pm »

Quote from: jsgirald on 02/27/2017 09:36 pm

Quote from: JamesH65 on 02/27/2017 09:24 pm
I dunno. There are some pretty smart people out there - you generally don't acquire large amounts of cash without some level of intelligence (unless you inherit it - Trump?). Did the training the Apollo guys get enable them to duct tape containers together? Or is that something any intelligent person could do. Of course, there are lots of switches in Apollo to learn - that's not the case in Dragon where everything is automated, or computer controlled.

Well, it's not about duct taping things, it's more about not panicking and keeping focus on the situation.
As a D-day veteran put it: 'Training is what makes you do the correct things when people are shooting at you'

In space, no one can hear you scream

RobW1 · « **Reply #173 on:** 02/27/2017 10:35 pm »

Quote from: Jdeshetler on 02/27/2017 10:03 pm

"The passengers were “nobody from Hollywood”, Musk said."

Matt Damon and Jimmy Kimmel?

You do NOT send Matt Damon. He needed rescuing in "The Martian"; he needed rescuing in "Interstellar". Putting him on a real mission around the Moon is just asking for trouble. You only even begin to think of sending him after you have built Pad 39C and have a Rescue Dragon standing by, all checked out and ready to go.

Kansan52 · « **Reply #174 on:** 02/27/2017 10:37 pm »

My guess, full reuse of the the FH. ISS trip now $35 mill (if memory serves). So $35 million US times 2 so $70 million.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #175 on:** 02/27/2017 10:42 pm »

Quote

Alan Boyle‏ @b0yle 2m2 minutes ago

.@SpaceAdventures has an intriguing comment on @SpaceX's circumlunar mission, saying it can't comment on its clients' plans prematurely.

https://twitter.com/b0yle/status/836359916730245120

Darkseraph · « **Reply #176 on:** 02/27/2017 10:42 pm »

In a clear minority here, but I have similar reservations about this idea that I had about the recent idea to put a crew on EM1: It's a dangerous stunt that superficially demonstrates progress in BLEO flight. A fatal accident on such a flight wouldn't just be tragic to the passengers and their families, it could set back SpaceX by years or worse.

MATTBLAK · « **Reply #177 on:** 02/27/2017 10:42 pm »

An adaptation of the the most basic Lunar Soyuz mission paradigm once touted: a slightly modified Soyuz is launched on a Soyuz 2 booster (has slightly more payload capability over the previous version). Soyuz has a high-gain antenna, a thicker 'Zond' type heatshield and 1x extra propellant and 1x extra oxidizer tanks. Second launch is a Proton - or Angara A5 - with a Blok-DM upperstage with a second, spherical Soyuz Orbital module-based Hab module mounted on it - albeit one with a couple large 'picture' windows. The Soyuz docks with the Blok-DM & Hab stage and departs on a low energy, free return trip around the Moon...

This mission honestly could have been done years ago - they even had financial incentive from interested parties, apparently. Never mind - the time is finally here for a similar alternative, I suppose.

jongoff · « **Reply #178 on:** 02/27/2017 10:43 pm »

Quote from: Kansan52 on 02/27/2017 10:37 pm

My guess, full reuse of the the FH. ISS trip now $35 mill (if memory serves). So $35 million US times 2 so $70 million.

I'm skeptical they can do a FH + DV2 flight for $70M. I haven't seen the original quote so far, but I find the interpretation that it's similar to the cost of an ISS mission (ie ~$140M divided by 2 passengers, so $70M *each*) to be more realistic. It would still be an awesome price point, and one that's likely to get several takers.

~Jon

DigitalMan · « **Reply #179 on:** 02/27/2017 10:45 pm »

Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/27/2017 09:24 pm

Looking forward to hear those words again... "You are GO for TLI"...

This brings tears to my eyes.