Author Topic: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)  (Read 29024 times)

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 1549
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #80 on: 02/06/2019 12:27 pm »
Why has the Falcon Heavy had so little impact on NASA?

by National Space Society | Jan 21, 2019 | Commercial Space, Space Development

OPINION by Dale Skran, NSS Executive Vice President

https://space.nss.org/why-has-the-falcon-heavy-had-so-little-impact-on-nasa/

This bit I find particularly curious:

Quote
The second reason the Falcon Heavy has not had a great impact thus far is that among key policymakers behind the scenes there is a rule of thumb that a launch vehicle needs to be flown successfully 10 consecutive times in order to be considered a reliable option for government flights. ... At this rate and with the 10 flight criteria being applied it might be 2022 or 2023 before the Falcon Heavy is considered ready for use by the government.

Atlas V flew MRO for NASA on it's 5th mission.
Delta IV flew a USAF payload on its 2nd mission.
Delta IV Heavy flew a USAF payload on its 2nd mission, and that after a partial failure.
Antares and Falcon 9 both flew NASA payloads to ISS on their 2nd flights.

Falcon Heavy is scheduled to fly a USAF payload on its 3rd flight, STP-2, and is certified for NSS payloads and has another USAF payload on the schedule.

NASA's certification standards state that a vehicle can be certified for Class B payloads (e.g. Discovery class) after only 1 flight of an evolved vehicle or 3 flights of a new vehicle.

...The only reason why FH has had little  impact on NASA is because there are currently zero NASA missions available to fly on it.

Not entirely true. NASA recently chose AV 401 to launch Lucy. That mission could have gone on FH, probably at considerably lower cost.
« Last Edit: 02/06/2019 12:32 pm by envy887 »

Offline Semmel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1496
  • Likes Given: 3874
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #81 on: 02/06/2019 12:49 pm »
...The only reason why FH has had little  impact on NASA is because there are currently zero NASA missions available to fly on it.

Not entirely true. NASA recently chose AV 401 to launch Lucy. That mission could have gone on FH, probably at considerably lower cost.

I dont know, FH vs. AtlasV 401 .. doesnt seem to be a very big difference. Rumors have it that AtlasV 401 is about $110M and FH about $90M. A difference but not all that much. Also, SpaceX charges government extra over the minimal launch cost due to the pile of paper they have to produce. Not sure how that works for ULA.

In terms of launch success probability, as well as schedule stability, Atlas is still much better than FH. So these might have been factors and it wouldn't surprise me that these were deciding factors in the decision.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 1549
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #82 on: 02/06/2019 01:05 pm »
...The only reason why FH has had little  impact on NASA is because there are currently zero NASA missions available to fly on it.

Not entirely true. NASA recently chose AV 401 to launch Lucy. That mission could have gone on FH, probably at considerably lower cost.

I dont know, FH vs. AtlasV 401 .. doesnt seem to be a very big difference. Rumors have it that AtlasV 401 is about $110M and FH about $90M. A difference but not all that much. Also, SpaceX charges government extra over the minimal launch cost due to the pile of paper they have to produce. Not sure how that works for ULA.

In terms of launch success probability, as well as schedule stability, Atlas is still much better than FH. So these might have been factors and it wouldn't surprise me that these were deciding factors in the decision.

NASA is paying $148 million for Lucy on a 401, while the USAF is paying $130 million to launch AFSPC-52 on FH. Not a huge difference, but cheaper nonetheless.

Also, the $90M for FH and $110M for 401 are not rumors. Those are the list prices for basic GTO launches on SpaceX and ULA websites. ULA has since taken the prices off the site, but SpaceX still lists theirs.
« Last Edit: 02/06/2019 03:09 pm by envy887 »

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 346
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #83 on: 02/06/2019 02:00 pm »
...The only reason why FH has had little  impact on NASA is because there are currently zero NASA missions available to fly on it.

Not entirely true. NASA recently chose AV 401 to launch Lucy. That mission could have gone on FH, probably at considerably lower cost.

I dont know, FH vs. AtlasV 401 .. doesnt seem to be a very big difference. Rumors have it that AtlasV 401 is about $110M and FH about $90M. A difference but not all that much. Also, SpaceX charges government extra over the minimal launch cost due to the pile of paper they have to produce. Not sure how that works for ULA.

In terms of launch success probability, as well as schedule stability, Atlas is still much better than FH. So these might have been factors and it wouldn't surprise me that these were deciding factors in the decision.

NASA is paying $148 million for Lucy on a 401, while the USAF is paying $130 million to launch AFSPC-52 on FH. Not a huge difference, but cheaper nonetheless.

Also, the $90M for FH and $100M for 401 are not rumors. Those are the list prices for basic GTO launches on SpaceX and ULA websites. ULA has since taken the prices off the site, but SpaceX still lists theirs.

Still, I wouldn't fault NASA for choosing ULA on this one. Atlas 401 is a good rocket and the price is acceptable and within a reasonable range. I think the general sentiment about NASA underusing FH is missions that are planned on SLS or cost increases/feature reduction to stay within the performance of other rockets.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Offline Semmel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1496
  • Likes Given: 3874
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #84 on: 02/06/2019 03:39 pm »
...The only reason why FH has had little  impact on NASA is because there are currently zero NASA missions available to fly on it.

Not entirely true. NASA recently chose AV 401 to launch Lucy. That mission could have gone on FH, probably at considerably lower cost.

I dont know, FH vs. AtlasV 401 .. doesnt seem to be a very big difference. Rumors have it that AtlasV 401 is about $110M and FH about $90M. A difference but not all that much. Also, SpaceX charges government extra over the minimal launch cost due to the pile of paper they have to produce. Not sure how that works for ULA.

In terms of launch success probability, as well as schedule stability, Atlas is still much better than FH. So these might have been factors and it wouldn't surprise me that these were deciding factors in the decision.

NASA is paying $148 million for Lucy on a 401, while the USAF is paying $130 million to launch AFSPC-52 on FH. Not a huge difference, but cheaper nonetheless.

Also, the $90M for FH and $110M for 401 are not rumors. Those are the list prices for basic GTO launches on SpaceX and ULA websites. ULA has since taken the prices off the site, but SpaceX still lists theirs.

I took the $110M for 401 from wikipedia, which is why I called it a rumor. Anyway, you provide good data points with Lucy and AFSPC-52. Thanks!

Online OhYeah

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Estonia
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #85 on: 02/07/2019 07:39 am »
https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/02/06/first-unpiloted-test-flight-of-spacex-crew-dragon-capsule-reset-for-march-2/

Quote
As expected, NASA announced Wednesday that the first unpiloted test flight of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and a Crew Dragon astronaut ferry ship has slipped from later this month to March 2. The first unpiloted flight of Boeing’s Starliner capsule is now targeted for the April timeframe.

In a statement posted on the agency’s website, NASA said the revised schedule will allow time for “completion of necessary hardware testing, data verification, remaining NASA and provider reviews, as well as training of flight controllers and mission managers.”

So about three more weeks and we'll the Crew Dragon in space. Fingers crossed.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4301
  • US
  • Liked: 3832
  • Likes Given: 2189
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #86 on: 02/07/2019 07:02 pm »
Tweet from Math Sundin
Quote
RUAG Space puts one ping pong ball in for every launch they are part of. @SpaceX designed their own and sent 500. @elonmusk

Update:
https://twitter.com/PeterGuggenbach/status/1093476774523080704

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8835
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 5895
  • Likes Given: 1991
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #87 on: 02/07/2019 07:35 pm »
Why has the Falcon Heavy had so little impact on NASA?

by National Space Society | Jan 21, 2019 | Commercial Space, Space Development

OPINION by Dale Skran, NSS Executive Vice President

https://space.nss.org/why-has-the-falcon-heavy-had-so-little-impact-on-nasa/

This bit I find particularly curious:

Quote
The second reason the Falcon Heavy has not had a great impact thus far is that among key policymakers behind the scenes there is a rule of thumb that a launch vehicle needs to be flown successfully 10 consecutive times in order to be considered a reliable option for government flights. ... At this rate and with the 10 flight criteria being applied it might be 2022 or 2023 before the Falcon Heavy is considered ready for use by the government.

Atlas V flew MRO for NASA on it's 5th mission.
Delta IV flew a USAF payload on its 2nd mission.
Delta IV Heavy flew a USAF payload on its 2nd mission, and that after a partial failure.
Antares and Falcon 9 both flew NASA payloads to ISS on their 2nd flights.

Falcon Heavy is scheduled to fly a USAF payload on its 3rd flight, STP-2, and is certified for NSS payloads and has another USAF payload on the schedule.

NASA's certification standards state that a vehicle can be certified for Class B payloads (e.g. Discovery class) after only 1 flight of an evolved vehicle or 3 flights of a new vehicle.

This is exactly why I referred to the article as a piece of cr*p. The author is making up stuff and stating it as "facts" whereas the actual facts (such as the list you gave) clearly show that the author of the article is full of cr*p.

Online OhYeah

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Estonia
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #88 on: 02/07/2019 10:08 pm »
This is exactly why I referred to the article as a piece of cr*p. The author is making up stuff and stating it as "facts" whereas the actual facts (such as the list you gave) clearly show that the author of the article is full of cr*p.

Wasn't the Air Force STP-2 payload supposed to be the *second* FH to launch but it got pushed way back into 2019? The author's claims have little basis in reality.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4301
  • US
  • Liked: 3832
  • Likes Given: 2189
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #89 on: 02/07/2019 10:20 pm »
STP-2 is basically a test launch, it's not awarded under the EELV program.

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5326
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2630
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #90 on: 02/08/2019 12:02 am »
FH also has the classified USAF AFSPC 52 launch in 2020.

Space News...
« Last Edit: 02/08/2019 12:03 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1384
  • Liked: 1315
  • Likes Given: 348
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #91 on: 02/12/2019 08:13 am »
Reported on Reddit.

SpaceX Launch Certification to Face Review by Pentagon Watchdog.

Quote
    Review to look at approval for Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy launches
    Memo to Air Force doesn’t say what prompted watchdog review

Is this good, bad or routine?
« Last Edit: 02/12/2019 08:14 am by jpo234 »
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7202
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 7484
  • Likes Given: 2500
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #92 on: 02/12/2019 12:52 pm »
I think Jeff Foust has a sensible take on this:

Quote from: @jeff_foust
Worth noting that just because an inspector general decides to audit a project doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a problem with it (a lesson I learned in a past career where I served as a quality manager at a small company with an ISO 9001 certification.) http://bit.ly/2Sqjulv

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1095318655842295808

Quote
Also, it’s not a bad idea to review the overall launch vehicle certification process given that the Air Force will be going through that process in the next few years with several other vehicles (New Glenn, OmegA, Vulcan.)

Edit to add: attached formal DoD notice of the audit
« Last Edit: 02/12/2019 12:58 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13120
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 4374
  • Likes Given: 796
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #93 on: 02/13/2019 05:47 pm »
"An official with knowledge of the company’s thinking, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that SpaceX was surprised by the announcement of the inspector general’s review and doesn’t know what prompted it."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/02/12/pentagon-watchdog-review-spacexs-certification-launch-national-security-satellites/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3a8d0069be9a

 - Ed Kyle

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4301
  • US
  • Liked: 3832
  • Likes Given: 2189
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #94 on: 02/13/2019 06:11 pm »
Speculation on what politicians you think are trying to screw SpaceX belongs in the Space Policy section, not here.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11356
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 8398
  • Likes Given: 6728
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #95 on: 02/13/2019 08:34 pm »
Speculation on what politicians you think are trying to screw SpaceX belongs in the Space Policy section, not here.
Arguably it probably actually belongs on your facebook page or blog rather than here on NSF at all... but gongora's right it surely doesn't belong in this thread.
« Last Edit: 02/13/2019 08:34 pm by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline JohnR

  • Member
  • Posts: 31
  • Florida
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #96 on: 02/14/2019 12:06 am »
I've been searching and if I missed it, I am so very sorry for asking. Is the dry and/or wet mass of the trunk for the Crew Dragon known?

Online Rondaz

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #97 on: 02/17/2019 04:56 pm »
Will SpaceX Shut Europe Out of the Space Launch Market?

How do you say "we're losing the space race" in French?

By Rich Smith (TMFDitty)
Feb 17, 2019 at 7:10AM

https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/02/17/will-spacex-shut-europe-out-of-the-space-launch-ma.aspx

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8835
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 5895
  • Likes Given: 1991
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)
« Reply #98 on: 02/17/2019 06:36 pm »
Will SpaceX Shut Europe Out of the Space Launch Market?

How do you say "we're losing the space race" in French?

By Rich Smith (TMFDitty)
Feb 17, 2019 at 7:10AM

https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/02/17/will-spacex-shut-europe-out-of-the-space-launch-ma.aspx

What Space Race?

Sheesh, looks like each trash news-site these days is using the phrase "Space Race" to spice up its "articles".

Annoying.
« Last Edit: 02/18/2019 06:59 am by woods170 »

Tags: