SpaceX Falcon 9 / Dragon 2 : SpX-DM2 : May 27, 2020 : DISCUSSION

[Eric Hedman]

Update on when first crew to fly on CNBC likely in Q2

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/19/elon-musk-spacex-first-launch-with-nasa-astronauts-in-second-quarter.html?recirc=taboolainternal

[Sesquipedalian]

That article is sourced from the same press conference that was already covered here on NSF.

[mulp]

Why is mission creep putting the commercial crew program at risk?

Is SpaceX unable to deliver hardware for USCV-1?

Is SpaceX unable to execute the USCV-1 mission before July, a two month slip from May?

Why isn't 100% of the focus on testing to prove SpaceX has all the safety 100% nailed, operations 99% nailed, hardware 99% nailed, by completing DM2 as planned a year ago and more?

There will be improvements continuously to improve things for "civilians",  while test pilots and the first mission crew are trained by experience to handle. Eg, if launch vibration/noise sets up a resonance in the helmets that makes hearing audio difficult, this will not be a problem for those who will have experienced much worse before and are trained to integrate visual displays. If test dummies were complete substitutes for humans,  "Boe-OFT would have docked at ISS".

[joek]

Why is mission creep putting the commercial crew program at risk?
...

Extended ISS crew mission for initial flights may involve additional training-delays (NASA's choice), but does not put the commercial crew program as a whole at risk.  Where are you getting that from?

[Chris Bergin]

Why is mission creep putting the commercial crew program at risk?

Is SpaceX unable to deliver hardware for USCV-1?

Is SpaceX unable to execute the USCV-1 mission before July, a two month slip from May?

You lost me on most of your post, but this part is an easy one.

As you will - or should - be aware the main driver for commercial crew schedule is NASA review level, not provider hardware.

This time of year will tell you all you need to know about why NASA reviews and reviews and reviews crew vehicles.

Do not bring "why not sooner??" into a debut of a crew vehicle, I'd say.

[mgeagon]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

[AndrewRG10]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

[Ghoti]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

[woods170]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

Emphasis mine.

Not very surprising. The only thrusters - that are mounted on the ISS itself - are on the Russian part of the ISS. Most times that the thrusters of docked spacecraft are used, it concerns thrusters on Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. Which are also under control of the Russians.

[Alexphysics]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

Emphasis mine.

Not very surprising. The only thrusters - that are mounted on the ISS itself - are on the Russian part of the ISS. Most times that the thrusters of docked spacecraft are used, it concerns thrusters on Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. Which are also under control of the Russians.

It's not like NASA can't ask Roscosmos to fire the thrusters to position the ISS in the proper orbit for one of those short rendezvous the russians do. The question is: can either one of the two american crew providers stick to that date that has to be planned a few months in advance? If they delay it for some reason the opportunity for short rendezvous is lost. They'll most probably stick with 24h long rendezvous which happens at least every two or three days.

[SDSmith]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

Emphasis mine.

Not very surprising. The only thrusters - that are mounted on the ISS itself - are on the Russian part of the ISS. Most times that the thrusters of docked spacecraft are used, it concerns thrusters on Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. Which are also under control of the Russians.

It's not like NASA can't ask Roscosmos to fire the thrusters to position the ISS in the proper orbit for one of those short rendezvous the russians do. The question is: can either one of the two american crew providers stick to that date that has to be planned a few months in advance? If they delay it for some reason the opportunity for short rendezvous is lost. They'll most probably stick with 24h long rendezvous which happens at least every two or three days.

Why does the station have to move to speed up docking? Why can't the spacecraft do it? Does the station have to move doing cargo docking if it is a two day docking process?

[Alexphysics]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

Emphasis mine.

Not very surprising. The only thrusters - that are mounted on the ISS itself - are on the Russian part of the ISS. Most times that the thrusters of docked spacecraft are used, it concerns thrusters on Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. Which are also under control of the Russians.

It's not like NASA can't ask Roscosmos to fire the thrusters to position the ISS in the proper orbit for one of those short rendezvous the russians do. The question is: can either one of the two american crew providers stick to that date that has to be planned a few months in advance? If they delay it for some reason the opportunity for short rendezvous is lost. They'll most probably stick with 24h long rendezvous which happens at least every two or three days.

Why does the station have to move to speed up docking? Why can't the spacecraft do it? Does the station have to move doing cargo docking if it is a two day docking process?

It's not that the ISS "moves" to speed up the rendezvous time it is that if you adjust its orbit weeks ahead in time you can make that the day of launch makes the ISS be at the right phasing for a short rendezvous. As said, this is done weeks in advance. You can move the spacecraft as much as you want but if the phasing angle is too high you would take up a lot of fuel to modify the orbit of the spacecraft to get to the station on time. It is a complex thing, not very easy to understand if you can't imagine it.

[SDSmith]

Has the time from launch to docking been established yet? Is it going to be a matter of hours like Soyuz or days like cargo? Do we know what the minimum time for Crew Dragon is, even though DM-2 will almost certainly take a more methodical duration to approach and dock?

DM-1 took 27 hours, I assume as it's a test flight again it'll take 27 hours. Capsule is bigger than Soyuz so shouldn't be too much of a hassle. They should be able to do 6 hours theoretically as well.

I think Baikanur is at a latitude that makes it easier to match phasing with the ISS for shorter orbit rendezvous. Also I recall a comment from a US ISS director about Russia controlling the station thrusters so it is easier for them to get permission to adjust station phasing to match

Emphasis mine.

Not very surprising. The only thrusters - that are mounted on the ISS itself - are on the Russian part of the ISS. Most times that the thrusters of docked spacecraft are used, it concerns thrusters on Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. Which are also under control of the Russians.

It's not like NASA can't ask Roscosmos to fire the thrusters to position the ISS in the proper orbit for one of those short rendezvous the russians do. The question is: can either one of the two american crew providers stick to that date that has to be planned a few months in advance? If they delay it for some reason the opportunity for short rendezvous is lost. They'll most probably stick with 24h long rendezvous which happens at least every two or three days.

Why does the station have to move to speed up docking? Why can't the spacecraft do it? Does the station have to move doing cargo docking if it is a two day docking process?

It's not that the ISS "moves" to speed up the rendezvous time it is that if you adjust its orbit weeks ahead in time you can make that the day of launch makes the ISS be at the right phasing for a short rendezvous. As said, this is done weeks in advance. You can move the spacecraft as much as you want but if the phasing angle is too high you would take up a lot of fuel to modify the orbit of the spacecraft to get to the station on time. It is a complex thing, not very easy to understand if you can't imagine it.

Thanks for the answer. It's a starting point to learn. Thanks.

[baldusi]

The phasing thing is because you have two variables on the trajectory:
1) When the ISS orbit overflies the launch site.
2) Where the ISS is on that circular orbit. It might happen the station is on the other side of the planet when the ring that is the orbit passes over the launch site.
You have to launch when that ring goes over the launch site. Else, you would spend too much fuel.
But once you are on that plane, you might end up anywhere on that place. If you watch it as a clock face, the station might be at 12’ and you at 5’. And remember that at the same orbit altitude you go at the same speed.
Until you teach orbital speed, you really can’t adjust anything. And after that, waiting for the capsule to catch up by staying at lower orbit is what might take days.
So, if you adjust a bit the altitude (and thus the speed) of the station weeks in advance, the slight speed difference will have it be just at the right phase of the orbit when you launch so using the optimal speeds, the capsule catches the station right when it reaches its altitude.

[Comga]

Given what we have heard about Boeing's OFT, their CFT is likely to be a long way out.
NASA has talked about extending DM2's stay at the ISS[/size] like they had planned to extend the duration of CFT.
Is there any reason not to take the two NASA astronauts trained as ISS crew and transfer them to DM-2?
Extra training for the SpaceX's DM2 astronauts is a different issue.

[quagmire]

Given what we have heard about Boeing's OFT, their CFT is likely to be a long way out.
NASA has talked about extending DM2's stay at the ISS[/size] like they had planned to extend the duration of CFT.
Is there any reason not to take the two NASA astronauts trained as ISS crew and transfer them to DM-2?
Extra training for the SpaceX's DM2 astronauts is a different issue.

Training the CFT crew on how to operate the Dragon capsule will probably take longer than the extra training for the DM-2 crew for an extended mission.

[Comga]

Given what we have heard about Boeing's OFT, their CFT is likely to be a long way out.
NASA has talked about extending DM2's stay at the ISS[/size] like they had planned to extend the duration of CFT.
Is there any reason not to take the two NASA astronauts trained as ISS crew and transfer them to DM-2?
Extra training for the SpaceX's DM2 astronauts is a different issue.

Training the CFT crew on how to operate the Dragon capsule will probably take longer than the extra training for the DM-2 crew for an extended mission.

But they would be passengers.
Isn’t that how Commercial Crew works?
They would have to learn the SpaceX suits, how to operate the hatch, find the emergency supplies, etc
Hurley and Behnken will operate Dragon, if necessary.
The CFT riding ISS astronauts are already trained for the main mission, working on the ISS.

[freddo411]

I a bit perplexed that NASA doesn't already have a pool of astronauts trained up for ISS and Dragon2 already.   And also a pool trained up for ISS and Starliner.    We've been anticipating these vehicles for almost 10 years now.    At the very least, there must have been astronauts scheduled to fly on the Dragon and Starliner after DM-2 and CFT which have been on the planning calendar for 2020.

It seems like unimaginable poor planning in 2020 to say "oh, it will take $x months to get the astronauts trained".   What about the 2010's?   What happened then?

I realize that the hardware isn't completely certified, but I'm sure there's training sim that are complete.  Both Dragon and Starlink have actually flown.    Astronaut training could have been happening.  I'm sure it must have been happening for the "test flight" astronauts.

[Alexphysics]

At the very least, there must have been astronauts scheduled to fly on the Dragon and Starliner after DM-2 and CFT which have been on the planning calendar for 2020.

When they announced the crews for DM-2 and CFT they also announced the crews for USCV-1 and USCV-2. Mike Hopkins and Victor Glover for Crew Dragon's first operational mission and Sunita Williams and Josh Cassada for Starliner's first operational mision. The reason why they haven't announced the crew for the other missions is because they are at least a year and a half away from launch and we don't really know how much training the other astros are taking. We have seen in some NASA promo videos other astros training on Crew Dragon and Starliner mockups so you shouldn't rule out the fact that there may actually be astronauts already training on Crew Dragon and Starliner and we just don't see that "behind the scenes" work.

[freddo411]

At the very least, there must have been astronauts scheduled to fly on the Dragon and Starliner after DM-2 and CFT which have been on the planning calendar for 2020.

When they announced the crews for DM-2 and CFT they also announced the crews for USCV-1 and USCV-2. Mike Hopkins and Victor Glover for Crew Dragon's first operational mission and Sunita Williams and Josh Cassada for Starliner's first operational mision. The reason why they haven't announced the crew for the other missions is because they are at least a year and a half away from launch and we don't really know how much training the other astros are taking. We have seen in some NASA promo videos other astros training on Crew Dragon and Starliner mockups so you shouldn't rule out the fact that there may actually be astronauts already training on Crew Dragon and Starliner and we just don't see that "behind the scenes" work.

My comment was intended to lay out the reasoning why NASA has everything it needs to make DM-2 a long duration mission.    It's apparently got trained crew for USCV-1, and the dragon2 is a long duration craft.   It could chose to fly DM-2 at full duration using the USCV-1 crew, and then use the DM-2 astros on the next flight (with plenty of time for any additional ISS training).

This would essentially be running the same plan using Dragon as had been mentioned for Boeings SL CFT flight.