SpaceX Crewed Dragon Circumlunar Mission

[Lars-J]

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

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

Short answer - if they really can do it, they will accelerate and do it.

If they can't, they'll be some noise, and it'll gradually vanish.

These guys have always been able to reach the moon, for more than 40 years. Ask yourself why they don't bring off what clearly they are capable of doing. The answer has always been "not now".

Just like with NASA post Apollo/Saturn. "Not now".

So ... "now"?

It would be incorrect to state that the Russians would have been able to reach the moon anytime in the past 40 years if they wanted to. It would have (and still) would require a LOT of time and budget for them to re-develop a technology they barely had in the first place. The current Soyuz is not designed for lunar flights.

[Rocket Science]

My take is that of this flight goes well, a commercial lunar landing won't be too far behind...

[WulfTheSaxon]

SLS program managers can not be happy about this.  This will only up the pressure for a crewed EM-1 mission. 

SpaceX is stepping on some pretty big toes with this announcement.  We knew it was going to happen eventually, though. 

Having said all that...whoa.  Talk about a test under fire.  Guidance, comms, ECLSS, hot return, plus the very real risk of death.  If anyone can pull it off SpaceX can, but...woof.

I’m thinking this will actually reduce the pressure for a crewed EM-1…

[Darkseraph]

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.

By that line of thinking, they shouldn't do LEO either....

It probably would have been better if this was tourists to LEO, after several operational flights of the Dragon 2 on Block 5 F9. The backlash from an accident in that case would be a lot less than what they're planning to do here. I'm hoping there is at least going to be an ummanned test of this mission between now and whenever it really flies.

[butters]

The NASA response reads a bit like: we'll do everything we can to ensure that SpaceX checks all the contractual boxes before we'll let them launch our astronauts, but we can't hold them back from launching private individuals.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

I think I'd give even money on Cameron being behind this. He's already been deeper than anybody else. Time the mission right and he'll have been higher than anybody else. (Not counting Jefferson Airplane parties)

I thought so too but Elon is quoted as saying that the two people are not Hollywood people. I think Steve Jurvetson is possible as one of the two.

[Stan-1967]

I wonder about the gender and ethnicity of these two people. Although I'm happy to see someone, anyone, go back to the Moon (it's been a long wait, especially if you've lived through it! ), I'd like to see some diversity, since all of the 24 people who've been to the Moon have been white men.

SpaceX say the two crew know each other, so perhaps they're a (mixed-gender) couple? They're probably rich tech people though, and they're overwhelmingly white male (at least among US citizens, which I'm assuming they are). If they are both white men, I anticipate public pressure on NASA via Congress to send its own astronauts to ensure one of the first people to return to the Moon is a woman and one is from an ethnic minority (SpaceX has the defences of 'we'll take anyone willing to pay' and 'first come, first served').

The suggestion that the skin color of these adventurer's has any relevance to celebrating achievements in space is depressing.  Even more depressing is the loathesome thought that NASA would need to select from its astronauts corps based on countering too much "whiteness" on a SpaceX mission.  If such was the case, humanity should abandon space altogether.

When I watched SpaceX's first successful RTLS on the live webcast, I saw young & old,  men & women, & many different races & religions celebrating together for what they worked so hard for.  I think they represent the future quite well, without any need for the interjection of racial politics.   

[Rocket Science]

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.

By that line of thinking, they shouldn't do LEO either....

It probably would have been better if this was tourists to LEO, after several operational flights of the Dragon 2 on Block 5 F9. The backlash from an accident in that case would be a lot less than what they're planning to do here. I'm hoping there is at least going to be an ummanned test of this mission between now and whenever it really flies.

Loss of crew is, a loss of crew... If it happened on a ISS mission in LEO, think of the backlash of contracting flights to the commercial side. These would be private individuals doing what they want with their spare time and cash... I fly and race cars as much as I please and can afford. I take the calculated risks and no one stops me from doing so as long as I don't endanger the general public...
As some on NSF already know, back in 2002 I took a calculated risk when I applied to the Astronaut office and months later we lost another crew. It has happened on the ground and going to and from orbit. BEO adds a few more failure modes and all one can do is to remember the phrase "do good work"... Words to live by...

[Space Ghost 1962]

SLS program managers can not be happy about this.  This will only up the pressure for a crewed EM-1 mission. 

SpaceX is stepping on some pretty big toes with this announcement.  We knew it was going to happen eventually, though. 

Having said all that...whoa.  Talk about a test under fire.  Guidance, comms, ECLSS, hot return, plus the very real risk of death.  If anyone can pull it off SpaceX can, but...woof.

I’m thinking this will actually reduce the pressure for a crewed EM-1…

It changes the landscape. You're right - the pressure comes off because it will seem to compete with commercial efforts.

However, they now have to justify themselves as a program with scope.

Both EM-1/2 have always been extremely expensive "joke" missions. But that's what the politics around SLS have wanted, not NASA.

So its the Congress that really bites it in the rear if EM 1/2 are exposed as the bad jokes they have always been.

And Congress hasn't been overly fond of Musk either. So if he brings it off, there will be a lot of "WTF" directed at them.

They are then well and truly screwed.

[MATTBLAK]

I think I'd give even money on Cameron being behind this. He's already been deeper than anybody else. Time the mission right and he'll have been higher than anybody else. (Not counting Jefferson Airplane parties)

People keep forgetting - Cameron now lives in New Zealand; not all that far from me, as it happens - and is spending the next five years making an 'Avatar' sequel trilogy here, largely in New Zealand. The cameras roll very soon - I find it nearly impossible to believe that he'll drop all that to go train for the next 6 or 12 months for this Lunar mission. He might do it after the films, for his 70th birthday or something, still...

[montyrmanley]

SLS program managers can not be happy about this.  This will only up the pressure for a crewed EM-1 mission. 

SpaceX is stepping on some pretty big toes with this announcement.  We knew it was going to happen eventually, though. 

Having said all that...whoa.  Talk about a test under fire.  Guidance, comms, ECLSS, hot return, plus the very real risk of death.  If anyone can pull it off SpaceX can, but...woof.

I’m thinking this will actually reduce the pressure for a crewed EM-1…

That's my read as well. The only reason for a crewed EM-1 is to prove America can still get humans into space on "home grown" rockets. If SpaceX can accomplish this mission successfully, there's no reason to duplicate the mission with SLS. (Though that will then force NASA to come up with an actual mission for SLS....)

All the same, I'm wary of getting too keyed up about this. Let's remember that the FH hasn't even flown once yet, in any configuration; nor has the Dragon 2 (except in a pad-abort and hover test). A lot -- A LOT -- of stuff has to happen between now and the end of 2018 if this adventure is actually going to take place. Applying the usual multiplier to "Elon time", I think a more reasonable timeframe for this mission is probably going to be 2019 or 2020 (which still puts it ahead of the realistic SLS timeline).

[MATTBLAK]

SLS program managers can not be happy about this.  This will only up the pressure for a crewed EM-1 mission. 

SpaceX is stepping on some pretty big toes with this announcement.  We knew it was going to happen eventually, though. 

Having said all that...whoa.  Talk about a test under fire.  Guidance, comms, ECLSS, hot return, plus the very real risk of death.  If anyone can pull it off SpaceX can, but...woof.

I’m thinking this will actually reduce the pressure for a crewed EM-1…

It changes the landscape. You're right - the pressure comes off because it will seem to compete with commercial efforts.

However, they now have to justify themselves as a program with scope.

Both EM-1/2 have always been extremely expensive "joke" missions. But that's what the politics around SLS have wanted, not NASA.

So its the Congress that really bites it in the rear if EM 1/2 are exposed as the bad jokes they have always been.

And Congress hasn't been overly fond of Musk either. So if he brings it off, there will be a lot of "WTF" directed at them.

They are then well and truly screwed.

SLS/Orion's only hope now is for dual-launch of Block 1B's, doing heavy-spacecraft Lunar landing missions lasting 2 or 3 weeks each. Or maybe a variation of the 'Inspiration Mars' flyby mission in 2021... But since a big funding boost is unlikely, then...   However, don't expect much to happen until if and when the Moon Dragon mission flies successfully. If it does, the countdown to true SLS cancellation will start.

[obi-wan]

To misquote Han Solo, "Doing a hypervelocity entry ain't like dusting crops, boy!" Entry heating rate goes like the cube of velocity...

I believe RobotBeat once said to the eighth power according to a complex formula. That's far more than cubed.

If you're talking about stagnation point heating rate that would not be correct (there are some heuristics for laminar flow that have V^3.15), but there may be some disconnect on the exact equation and parameter of interest.

[RobW1]

"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.

If and when this is successful - I really hope that a Pad 39C is deemed necessary at last and sees the light of day! Launching dual Falcon 9s and Falcon Heavies from Pads 39A & C could do Lunar landing missions, with the right spacecraft and departure stage combinations.

I agree. I could never understand NASA's rationale for leasing out 39A when they're planning on a dual launch architecture for their future deep space crewed missions, when the single pad they're left with would require six months of repair and refurbishment between launches. That to me is like giving the first spacecraft an extra six months for things to start going wrong up there before you launch a crew to fly it. Having the capability to do a quick one-two launch, as in the Gemini rendezvous and docking missions, just seemed to make much more sense.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see where SpaceX takes this before their interplanetary spacecraft is up and running. How often will they fly? Will they build a lunar orbit and then landing capability if the demand is there, or will they see it as detracting from their Mars vision? I'm guessing sufficient demand = yes, but what would I know?

[yg1968]

The NASA response reads a bit like: we'll do everything we can to ensure that SpaceX checks all the contractual boxes before we'll let them launch our astronauts, but we can't hold them back from launching private individuals.

It's more than that. It indicates that this is the kind of stuff that private companies should be focusing on while NASA focuses on "beyond the Moon" destinations (i.e. Mars).

[mme]

Question: Is the Falcon Heavy human rated? Would the FAA allow this flight?

No, FH is not human rated.  The flight as described would require an FAA license because: (a) it is not a USG acquired launch and spacecraft/payload; (b) SpaceX is being paid (for-profit); and (c) individuals on the flight include persons who do not qualify as "crew".[1]


[1] Crew has a very specific meaning: (a) employed by the provider (SpaceX) and qualified to perform crew functions; or (b) in the special case of commercial crew, designated USG personnel qualified to perform crew functions; and (c) not a "spaceflight participant" (i.e., anyone other than "crew").  Not sure how they're going to get away without a "crew", but maybe the exception made for commercial crew is being expanded.

My reading on it is that Commercial Space has a lot of leeway on these matters as long as the "space flight participant" has appropriate training, passed medical, does NOT pilot the craft and has been sufficiently informed that that the U.S. Government has not certified the launch vehicle as safe.

They explicitly allow non-certified launch vehicles.

See:
New Regulations Govern Private Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants

PDF attached.
 

[craigcocca]

My take is that of this flight goes well, a commercial lunar landing won't be too far behind...

Don't forget that the delta-V to brake into lunar orbit and for TEI for the return, plus the delta-V to land and ascend from the moon will not be part of the proposed 2018 mission. 

Essentially the 2018 mission is doing something that SpaceX has done before a few times, which is putting a massive payload into a highly elliptical orbit...one that just so happens to intersect the moon's position at apogee.  Beyond that, there is a long way to go to get from there to a lunar landing which will probably require a couple of additional missions (perhaps one to go into lunar orbit and then return to Earth, and then another with an unmanned Dragon 2 landing on the lunar surface).

[Chris Bergin]

My article on this all:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/02/spacex-two-citizens-dragon-2-lunar-mission/

[Space Ghost 1962]

SLS program managers can not be happy about this.  This will only up the pressure for a crewed EM-1 mission. 

SpaceX is stepping on some pretty big toes with this announcement.  We knew it was going to happen eventually, though. 

Having said all that...whoa.  Talk about a test under fire.  Guidance, comms, ECLSS, hot return, plus the very real risk of death.  If anyone can pull it off SpaceX can, but...woof.

I’m thinking this will actually reduce the pressure for a crewed EM-1…

It changes the landscape. You're right - the pressure comes off because it will seem to compete with commercial efforts.

However, they now have to justify themselves as a program with scope.

Both EM-1/2 have always been extremely expensive "joke" missions. But that's what the politics around SLS have wanted, not NASA.

So its the Congress that really bites it in the rear if EM 1/2 are exposed as the bad jokes they have always been.

And Congress hasn't been overly fond of Musk either. So if he brings it off, there will be a lot of "WTF" directed at them.

They are then well and truly screwed.

SLS/Orion's only hope now is for dual-launch of Block 1B's, doing heavy-spacecraft Lunar landing missions lasting 2 or 3 weeks each.

Logistics chain for SLS/Orion does not support that, and it would take 2-5 years to change. It can't launch at that cadence.

But you are right about mission duration - Orion is designed for more duration, and SLS payload is underutilized.

However, neither Dragon or Orion have duration down yet. Dragon has been on the ISS for extended time, so its in the lead.

Or maybe a variation of the 'Inspiration Mars' flyby mission in 2021...

That will take years to get the needed ECLSS proof before flying.

But since a big funding boost is unlikely, then...   However, don't expect much to happen until if and when the Moon Dragon mission flies successfully. If it does, the countdown to true SLS cancellation will start.

Think it will "bumble along" in the mean time.

Again, what SLS/Orion needs is a lander on short notice. What Congress does not yet know is that they need it even worse, so they can declare SLS/Orion a victory in returning to the lunar surface and move on ...

[Rocket Science]

My take is that of this flight goes well, a commercial lunar landing won't be too far behind...

Don't forget that the delta-V to brake into lunar orbit and for TEI for the return, plus the delta-V to land and ascend from the moon will not be part of the proposed 2018 mission. 

Essentially the 2018 mission is doing something that SpaceX has done before a few times, which is putting a massive payload into a highly elliptical orbit...one that just so happens to intersect the moon's position at apogee.  Beyond that, there is a long way to go to get from there to a lunar landing which will probably require a couple of additional missions (perhaps one to go into lunar orbit and then return to Earth, and then another with an unmanned Dragon 2 landing on the lunar surface).

I was actually thinking that some other entity my be doing a lander, not necessarily SpaceX. Think the "Golden Spike" lander...