SpaceX Falcon 9 : CRS-14 : April 2, 2018 - Discussion

[deruch]

Which suggests that the mass was about 435 kg (not sure if an empty passive FRAM was left in the trunk when it was dropped, so that mass may need to be further adjusted).  But, they were planning to launch with a certain number of the sample carrier slots already filled (7 on SpX-13).  So, if you're interested in strictly the Flight Facility and not including any of the sample carriers and samples' mass, it will be less.  If you're just interested in the launching mass of the whole experiment in launch configuration then it's probably pretty good.  Though it may be minorly different from the launch configuration mass on SpX-14 because the number of filled slots during launch will likely be different.  The number of filled slots is determined by trunk packing geometry and separations to the other trunk cargo.

If I understand this correctly, the MISSE-FF will be launched with empty slots, and the first five MSC will be installed by SSRMS shortly after arrival. Maybe I didn´t read it correct.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/2531.html

<snip explanation about 5 carriers being loaded after arrival on station>

I just remembered that in the Updates thread there was a picture of the Dragon's Trunk with the payloads already integrated: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45224.msg1803164#msg1803164

It's launching with at least 1 Sample Carrier slot already filled. [MISSE-FF is the payload in the upper right.  The sample carrier is the blue box hanging off the bottom left corner.  The two similar boxes in the middle of the payload are the payload avionics boxes.]  The 5 additional sample carriers mentioned in that NASA explanation are being transported in the pressurized section of the Dragon, in CTBs.  They will be transferred out through the JEM A/L and robotically installed on the Flight Facility after that is on the ELC.

[jcm]

There is a MISSE-FF overview in the CRS-13 thread if anyone isn't already familiar with it:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42775.msg1707908#msg1707908

Alas none of this gives a mass for MISSE-FF.  Total external cargo is 926 kg per the mission overgview.
ASIM is 314 kg per their website. PFCS is 111 kg although it presumably has a FRAM as well, usually about
45 kg I believe.  That would leave 456 kg from MISSE-FF which seems on the high side.

The original planned NASA SpX-13 unpressurized payload mass (as shown in the ISS planning doc gongora linked) including MISSE-FF: 1080 kg 

The actual flown mass of the unpressurized payload mass of SpX-13 (once MISSE-FF was dropped from the manifest):  645 kg

Which suggests that the mass was about 435 kg (not sure if an empty passive FRAM was left in the trunk when it was dropped, so that mass may need to be further adjusted).  But, they were planning to launch with a certain number of the sample carrier slots already filled (7 on SpX-13).  So, if you're interested in strictly the Flight Facility and not including any of the sample carriers and samples' mass, it will be less.  If you're just interested in the launching mass of the whole experiment in launch configuration then it's probably pretty good.  Though it may be minorly different from the launch configuration mass on SpX-14 because the number of filled slots during launch will likely be different.  The number of filled slots is determined by trunk packing geometry and separations to the other trunk cargo.

Good catch!! I remember those figures changing but I was not smart enough to apply the obvious inference for this mission.

[RocketLover0119]

Thanks Chris G for asking my question I pm'ed to you during the pre-launch conference!

[BradyKenniston]

A few photos from the "What's on Board" science briefing.

[Norm38]

This booster is expendable is to test landing procedures/practices that push the bounds. This booster has already flown.  trade between land or do demonstration to fly a trajectory toward the limits to collect data for the future.

Does that essentially mean fly until out of fuel? They could just burn to depletion, true depletion to find the margin. Or are they still tuning aero simulations and can’t fully predict performance so they need the data not for fuel margin but for lift/drag?

[OneSpeed]

This booster is expendable is to test landing procedures/practices that push the bounds. This booster has already flown.  trade between land or do demonstration to fly a trajectory toward the limits to collect data for the future.

Does that essentially mean fly until out of fuel? They could just burn to depletion, true depletion to find the margin. Or are they still tuning aero simulations and can’t fully predict performance so they need the data not for fuel margin but for lift/drag?

They already have a good idea of propellant margin from residuals on previous landings. They also have good data for L/D for AoA they have already flown. Perhaps they will try more extreme AoA to find the thermal and structural limits of the F9 fuselage. The higher AoA they can fly, in general, the more fuel they can save.

[marsbase]

Who funded Dragon?  The first statement by Jessica Jensen at the CSR-14 Pre-launch Presser was careful to emphasize that SpaceX paid its own development cost: 
Reusability is really important for the future of spaceflight. It's the only way we're going to get thousands of people to space to explore the stars, the moon, Mars, and to make life multi-planetary. Otherwise, it's just going to be a cost-prohibitive dream. So we want to make a note that while SpaceX has put in all our own money, we developed all this technology on our own. We did have guidance from our partners.   https://gist.github.com/theinternetftw/fc34833bb504da2018031477a813dbdb

But the NasaSpaceFlight.com article written by William Graham and posted today says that:
Dragon first flew in December 2010, with a short test mission that ended with the spacecraft being recovered successfully in the Pacific Ocean. The spacecraft’s first two flights were made under NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program, which funded development of Dragon and Cygnus ahead of the operational CRS resupply contracts being awarded.   https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/04/crs-14-spacex-falcon-9-second-flight-previously-flown-dragon/

It's obviously important to SpaceX to be seen as funding its own tech.  It matters politically.  So what's the actual story here?  Did SpaceX fund all its own tech or did Nasa pay for developement of the Dragon?

[rockets4life97]

Who funded Dragon?  [snip]

I think Jessica Jensen is saying that SpaceX funded Dragon re-usability. It is clear NASA funded Dragon development (although perhaps SpaceX would have done that development anyway). However, NASA wasn't asking for reusability at the time (not sure if they are now).

[intrepidpursuit]

Who funded Dragon?  [snip]

I think Jessica Jensen is saying that SpaceX funded Dragon re-usability. It is clear NASA funded Dragon development (although perhaps SpaceX would have done that development anyway). However, NASA wasn't asking for reusability at the time (not sure if they are now).

This is the distinction that makes so many fans for SpaceX. The contract was to develop a spacecraft, SpaceX added the additional goal of making it reusable. Same for Falcon. No doubt they could have made more money in the short term by going expendable, but they were thinking longer term.

[gongora]

Who funded Dragon?  [snip]

I think Jessica Jensen is saying that SpaceX funded Dragon re-usability...

And Falcon reusability.  (Who funded what portion of the initial development is a debate we really don't need to start again.)

[yg1968]

So IDA-3 is not going up on this one is it?

I think it goes up on CRS-16

Yes, Spaceflight 101's ISS Calendar shows it being installed in December, during SpX/CRS-16's visit.  They don't give a source, but I assume they are working from the ISS FPIP.

Edit: Is there a recent public source (beyond SF101's calendar) for IDA-3 being on the SpX/CRS-16 manifest?
SpaceNews, 16 July 2016:

NASA is developing a third IDA to replace the one lost in last year’s launch failure. That third adapter is tentatively scheduled to launch on SpaceX’s CRS-16 cargo mission in 2018, said Kirk Shireman, NASA ISS program manager, during a July 13 briefing at the ISS Research and Development Conference in San Diego.

Yes, IDA-3 was initially planned for CRS-14 but was later pushed to CRS-16 in July of 2016. See here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29401.msg1681173#msg1681173

[gongora]

So IDA-3 is not going up on this one is it?

I think it goes up on CRS-16

Yes, Spaceflight 101's ISS Calendar shows it being installed in December, during SpX/CRS-16's visit.  They don't give a source, but I assume they are working from the ISS FPIP.

Edit: Is there a recent public source (beyond SF101's calendar) for IDA-3 being on the SpX/CRS-16 manifest?
SpaceNews, 16 July 2016:

NASA is developing a third IDA to replace the one lost in last year’s launch failure. That third adapter is tentatively scheduled to launch on SpaceX’s CRS-16 cargo mission in 2018, said Kirk Shireman, NASA ISS program manager, during a July 13 briefing at the ISS Research and Development Conference in San Diego.

Yes, IDA-3 was initially planned for CRS-14 but was later pushed to CRS-16 in July of 2016. See here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29401.msg1681173#msg1681173

There was a recent FPIP shown at last month's NASA Advisory Council meeting (it still shows the IDA on SpX-16):
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45328.msg1803456#msg1803456

[EspenU]

Does anyone have an overview of how far behind ISS Dragon will be after launch?

Station should be visible over Europe from where I am 3 min after launch. So hopefully there is a chance to see Dragon trailing behind a couple of minutes later.

[northenarc]

 It was noted by Chris Gebhardt in the update thread that 'Blast Danger Area (BDA)' was clear. How large is that area? I ask because in a clip I saw of the static fire it appeared (and appearances can be deceiving) as though vehicles were still passing 'fairly', though not outrageously, close to the pad. 

[Tomness]

Really enjoyed Dan Huot & Randy Bresnik, its been awhile since Ive seen an astronaut with Randy's enthusiasm, I am sure PAO was like let Randy keep talking,  this is really good stuff

[Lar]

Coverage has a couple slipups.

Commentator said "coming up on the final 2 minutes of the mission" instead of countdown (I am glad the mission went more than just 2 minutes more!)

Display tracking map had a Drone Ship location on the globe.

Maybe this is so routine that they aren't double checking things?

[Ronsmytheiii]

Cool screenshot from the tracking camera, "just cause"

[rsdavis9]

I could have sworn that the spacex commentor said 3rd burn for the 2nd stage. As far as I know it just has 2 burns on this mission.

EDIT: I guess these missions are going so well and boringly that we have to pick on the small stuff.
At least we got to see the earth from orbit this time...

[Steven Pietrobon]

Congratulations to SpaceX and NASA for the successful launch!

The onboard camera footage looked a bit lower in resolution compared to previous flights. Perhaps a requirement from NOAA?

[JFARNS]

He said the third burn would put the second stage into the Indian Ocean.