Author Topic: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 3 (Read 815136 times)

woods170 · « **Reply #640 on:** 03/11/2019 08:55 am »

Quote from: Joffan on 03/10/2019 09:58 pm

Quote from: woods170 on 03/09/2019 01:36 pm
Quote from: Joffan on 03/09/2019 12:36 am
I wonder why there isn't a short lifting sling or two, stowed behind the parachute lines, ready to grab the free end out of the parachute bay and use for lifting the Dragon. Extra weight of course but quicker and more convenient than climbing a pitching capsule.

Not necessary. Climbing a pitching capsule has been well practised by SpaceX recovery crews on 17 open sea splash-downs of cargo Dragon so far (15 operational missions, as well as C1 and C2+ missions) as well as on dozens of recovery practice runs off the coast of Florida.

It is not a concern.
Yes, I don't doubt the existing process works, but if there is a desire to get the astros onto the boat more quickly it would be an option to help that along.

And that goes double for direct orbital tourism customers of SpaceX I'd think.

The current NASA requirement for getting the Crew Dragon aboard the ship is one (1) hour, under nominal conditions. On Demo-1 SpaceX took a few minutes longer than that because they had a off-nominal situation: a parachute was partially draped over the crew module. That had to be removed first.

One hour from splash-down to being on the ship is good enough for NASA and will be good enough for any orbital tourists.

darkenfast · « **Reply #641 on:** 03/11/2019 09:37 am »

I'll speculate that future recoveries will go faster. This was their first time with this model. The diver who climbed the capsule seemed to work fairly quickly.

ChrisGebhardt · « **Reply #642 on:** 03/21/2019 01:11 pm »

Tomorrow, Friday (23 March), at 13:30 EDT (1730 UTC) I will be interviewing Kathy Malnick - who leads the Independent Validation & Verification team over Starliner and Dragon's flight software.

If you have any questions in this realm you'd like me to ask her during our interview, please PM me the question.

NOTE: If your question is specific to Dragon, please indicate that in your PM to me; they are open to talking about both vehicles, but it would be a good idea to be able to specify which ship if necessary.

Some background is attached...

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #643 on:** 03/29/2019 10:29 pm »

Quote from: @nextspaceflight

Are you confident that Crew Dragon will be relatively easy to refurbish now that you have the data from the first orbital flight?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1111761332460634112

Quote

Yes. Sensitive propulsion & avionics remained dry. Great work by SpaceX Dragon engineering team. Major improvement over Dragon 1.

WormPicker959 · « **Reply #644 on:** 03/29/2019 11:05 pm »

Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 03/29/2019 10:29 pm

Quote from: @nextspaceflight
Are you confident that Crew Dragon will be relatively easy to refurbish now that you have the data from the first orbital flight?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1111761332460634112

Quote
Yes. Sensitive propulsion & avionics remained dry. Great work by SpaceX Dragon engineering team. Major improvement over Dragon 1.

I wonder what they do to keep the Dracos dry (I'm assuming that's included in "sensitive propulsion"). Perhaps there's some sort of cover inside? Or perhaps I'm assuming wrong, and they are actually not very sensitive?

Rondaz · « **Reply #645 on:** 04/08/2019 10:35 pm »

SpaceX likely to win NASA’s crew competition by months, for billions less.

What lessons can the space agency learn as it considers a lunar return?

ERIC BERGER - 4/8/2019, 10:24 AM

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/spacex-likely-to-win-nasas-crew-competition-by-months-for-billions-less/

DatUser14 · « **Reply #646 on:** 04/20/2019 10:00 pm »

Oh no. https://twitter.com/EmreKelly/status/1119721013166657536

Flying Beaver · « **Reply #647 on:** 04/20/2019 10:01 pm »

That puts a spanner on the works with regards to the Inflight Abort Test...

Also RIP DM-1 Dragon.

RocketLover0119 · « **Reply #648 on:** 04/20/2019 10:07 pm »

Do we know if the entire dragon blew up? Or even what happened at all?!?!

This is prob going to be a MAJOR setback, doubt we see DM-2 or even IFA until next year..... $:-\$

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #649 on:** 04/20/2019 10:10 pm »

Heard rumors earlier, but couldn't verify and was hoping it was some minor failure being overblown. Clearly not

Asked SpaceX for a comment.

Herb Schaltegger · « **Reply #650 on:** 04/20/2019 10:11 pm »

That color is too distinctive ...

mrhuggy · « **Reply #651 on:** 04/20/2019 10:13 pm »

Hazard a guess the fuel didn't ignite.

DaveS · « **Reply #652 on:** 04/20/2019 10:17 pm »

Quote from: Herb Schaltegger on 04/20/2019 10:11 pm

That color is too distinctive ...

Yes, the unmistaken sight of a BFRC, which is the sign of a significant N2O4 leak.

Zpoxy · « **Reply #653 on:** 04/20/2019 10:19 pm »

Quote from: mrhuggy on 04/20/2019 10:13 pm

Hazard a guess the fuel didn't ignite.

Well no, the propellants used are hypergolic. If the two commodities came in contact there was ignition. The reddish brown color of the cloud is indicative of a massive release of the oxidizer, Nitrogen Tetroxide.

Bubbinski · « **Reply #654 on:** 04/20/2019 10:25 pm »

Uh oh, if DM-1 Crew Dragon is destroyed, can they pull out the Crew Dragon used for Pad Abort a few years back to do the in flight abort instead? Or is there a Crew Dragon in production (other than DM-2) that can be finished as a “bare bones” craft with Draco thrusters and ballast to do the abort test this summer?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #655 on:** 04/20/2019 10:31 pm »

SpaceX Statement to us (and they'll be sending this to all media asking).

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1119729877232517122

Zpoxy · « **Reply #656 on:** 04/20/2019 10:31 pm »

Quote from: Bubbinski on 04/20/2019 10:25 pm

Uh oh, if DM-1 Crew Dragon is destroyed, can they pull out the Crew Dragon used for Pad Abort a few years back to do the in flight abort instead? Or is there a Crew Dragon in production (other than DM-2) that can be finished as a “bare bones” craft with Draco thrusters and ballast to do the abort test this summer?

First priority is to figure out what happened and why. Was it flight hardware related or a GSE failure?

Lar · « **Reply #657 on:** 04/20/2019 10:39 pm »

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1119730184544976897 Eric Berger also has some info maybe.

Alexphysics · « **Reply #658 on:** 04/20/2019 10:41 pm »

Quote from: Bubbinski on 04/20/2019 10:25 pm

Uh oh, if DM-1 Crew Dragon is destroyed, can they pull out the Crew Dragon used for Pad Abort a few years back to do the in flight abort instead? Or is there a Crew Dragon in production (other than DM-2) that can be finished as a “bare bones” craft with Draco thrusters and ballast to do the abort test this summer?

That old capsule can't be used for IFA as its shape is certainly different from the current version of Crew Dragon so aerodynamics at Max-Q would be different and in the end the data would only be valid for that kind of capsule and not for the new exterior design of Crew Dragon. I bet that if DM-1 Crew Dragon has been destroyed they'll use the DM-2 capsule for IFA and use the capsule initially planned for PCM-1 on the DM-2 mission.

mrhuggy · « **Reply #659 on:** 04/20/2019 10:45 pm »

Quote from: Zpoxy on 04/20/2019 10:19 pm

Quote from: mrhuggy on 04/20/2019 10:13 pm
Hazard a guess the fuel didn't ignite.

Well no, the propellants used are hypergolic. If the two commodities came in contact there was ignition. The reddish brown color of the cloud is indicative of a massive release of the oxidizer, Nitrogen Tetroxide.

I stand corrected, I knew it was a chemical propellent didn't know if it was a mono or bi. So oxidiser and no fuel possibly, could be a stuck valve or blockage in the fuel line. Isn't the fuel system pressure fed for the Super Draco's

Sent from my TA-1012 using Tapatalk