Quote from: John Alan on 09/13/2018 09:10 pm...early passenger planes were not safe in the sense of what we know today and yet people got in them and flew... and died... none of this changes the definition of negligence, lack of due diligence and demonstrated error.
...early passenger planes were not safe in the sense of what we know today and yet people got in them and flew... and died...
Quote from: TripleSeven on 09/13/2018 09:25 pmQuote from: John Alan on 09/13/2018 09:10 pm...early passenger planes were not safe in the sense of what we know today and yet people got in them and flew... and died... none of this changes the definition of negligence, lack of due diligence and demonstrated error.Except there is are legal clauses that highlight the customer has affirmed an "assumption of risk". All SpaceX and others essentially have to say is that "YOU MAY DIE IF YOU FLY WITH US!".These types of legal clauses are hidden in many risky things we do where we assume there is little risk, but there is still risk. And of course there are many activities human partake in that have high risk - and they do that knowingly too.I'm sure SpaceX has smart lawyers, and I'm sure the training manual will include many points in the training process where the customer has to reaffirm they know about the risk but are proceeding anyways. And it won't reduce the potential size of the market they are going after, since everyone with the money to fly to space will know there is a risk of dying.
SpaceX has said they aren't planning to develop propulsive landing for D2. The vehicle as designed is no longer capable of propulsive landing on land. So why are we having this discussion again?
Quote from: envy887 on 09/14/2018 12:47 pmSpaceX has said they aren't planning to develop propulsive landing for D2. The vehicle as designed is no longer capable of propulsive landing on land. So why are we having this discussion again?Because some folks believe that SpaceX will back-thread on a developmental dead-end and develop it anyway.
Quote from: woods170 on 09/14/2018 01:17 pmQuote from: envy887 on 09/14/2018 12:47 pmSpaceX has said they aren't planning to develop propulsive landing for D2. The vehicle as designed is no longer capable of propulsive landing on land. So why are we having this discussion again?Because some folks believe that SpaceX will back-thread on a developmental dead-end and develop it anyway.Not to be obtuse, but what’s “back-thread”?
Dad just finished a case on bunji jumping where such a waiver was signed...
VG is on the verge of flying passengers.
At the AIAA panel, Reed said SpaceX still had plans to reuse its Crew Dragon vehicles, as it does now with the cargo version of the spacecraft. “Crew Dragon, just like Cargo Dragon, was designed from the beginning to be a fully reusable vehicle, and it’s certainly still our intent” to reuse them. That includes the vehicle flying the first, uncrewed demo mission, which will be quickly turned around for use on an in-flight abort test that will take place before the crewed flight test.For the operational commercial crew missions, Reed said SpaceX plans to use new vehicles for each mission initially as it builds up a “stable” of vehicles. The company would then work with NASA on how to certify those vehicles for reuse.That approach, he said, is similar to the cargo version of Dragon, where SpaceX initially used new vehicles for all its flights but, after discussions with NASA, won approval for reuse of vehicles, which now account for all recent Dragon cargo missions. “That was a very successful approach,” he said. “We’re following the same basic plan.”Reed said that, given SpaceX’s experience with cargo Dragons, landing in water was not a major obstacle to reusability. “It is different, for sure,” he said of water landings. “I don’t know if it’s much more difficult, though.”
Except there is are legal clauses that highlight the customer has affirmed an "assumption of risk". All SpaceX and others essentially have to say is that "YOU MAY DIE IF YOU FLY WITH US!".
Wonder how gentle the d2 could land (on land) with the chutes and firing the SD's as the last moment. that way you come down nominally just like a sea splashdown - that will be slow enough and then a quick blast of the SD's to take the last m/s out of it. I know you still have to deal with hypergolics and potential damage to the heatshield on but it would take a lot of the refurbishment out of the equation. You also wouldn't need legs and the complications that they bring.
2018 AIAA Space Forum: Commercial crew: The newest ride to LEO:https://livestream.com/AIAAvideo/Space2018/videos/180468218
Commercial Crew Teams Practice Triage and Medical EvacuationNASA and the Department of Defense Human Space Flight Support (HSFS) Office have a long history in preparing for human spaceflight missions. As NASA’s Commercial Crew Program prepares to begin launching astronauts once again from American soil, it is vital teams prepare for launch day operations, including possible but unlikely emergency scenarios, and simulations are key to getting teams as ready as possible.Today, teams from NASA, HSFS and SpaceX are conducting a joint medical triage and medical evacuation (medevac) training exercise at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This is the second of two emergency medical services simulations to be performed before commercial crew flight tests, which are scheduled for 2019. The first exercise was conducted at Space Launch Complex 41 and integrated teams from NASA, Boeing and United Launch Alliance.“In the business of human spaceflight, we go to great lengths to design away or to control all the known hazards,” said Steve Payne, NASA Simulation Test Director and CCP Launch Integrator. “However, when the unexpected happens, we must be ready to respond. We develop and practice our procedures to handle the worst possible scenarios on launch day, but we hope we never have to use them. NASA is working closely with both our commercial partners and the Department of Defense to do everything possible to keep our flight crews and ground teams safe.”For today’s exercise, teams are practicing a worst-case scenario, pad emergency and subsequent hypergolic fuel leak. Starting at the base of the egress system at Launch Complex 39A, volunteer ground crews are evacuating the pad perimeter using three Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicles. Three helicopters, emergency services, and the triage team are meeting the evacuated crews at triage site 8, between Launch Pads 39A and B.As part of this exercise, evacuated personnel are undergoing a toxic vapor check. Kennedy Fire/Rescue teams are treating the crews as if contamination were detected and are performing decontamination measures. Following the medical evaluations, the simulated patients are being stabilized and prepared for transport. Selected patients are being evacuated to several area hospitals in order to validate all emergency procedures.This simulation is a recent example of how safety is being built into systems, processes and procedures. These simulations are designed to exercise various components of emergency procedures, as well as triage and medevac response during the unlikely event of an emergency during launch operations. It is standard practice to conduct these exercises, and was regularly done during the Space Shuttle Program. Author Stephanie Martin Posted on October 25, 2018 Categories NASA
Lars Hoffman, Senior Director of Government Sales spoke at Wernher von Braun Memorial Symposium, Huntsville, AL this week. Substitute for Joshua Brost - no explanation for last minute substitution.http://astronautical.org/vonbraun-live/Session 2, Launch panel starts about 1:15:00 with Mike Gold as moderator. Includes presentations by ULA, Boeing and Northrop Grumman.No new news from SpaceX: 5 missions scheduled before the end of 2018, BFR being built, with hop test in Texas to start in 2019.edit/gongora: alternate URL for that session: https://livestream.com/accounts/563450/events/8423330/videos/182438803
I haven't had time to listen to the whole thing yet, but Lars, in a hurry to sum up all the things SpaceX is working on makes the statement "we're right on schedule to do the first demo launch in the next 2 months, ... into its intended orbit, bring it back down safely.."I suppose that statement could be incomplete since he is talking fast and in a hurry. But it leaves open the potential to suggest that DM-1 could launch without docking? I would think not, but the statement is the statement.
Interesting talk coming from a Boeing employee at IAC. Here's a snippet from a report by a reddit user who went to the conference:QuoteI also talked with a guy from Boeing for a bit, including talking about SpaceX. He said that he thinks that SpaceX will reach the ISS first, with their uncrewed demo mission, but that they will not dock, due to not all paperwork being done, and NASA not allowing them to dock, and that while they do paperwork, Boeing will reach the station first with humans on board.That's, um, pretty specific.
I also talked with a guy from Boeing for a bit, including talking about SpaceX. He said that he thinks that SpaceX will reach the ISS first, with their uncrewed demo mission, but that they will not dock, due to not all paperwork being done, and NASA not allowing them to dock, and that while they do paperwork, Boeing will reach the station first with humans on board.
