SpaceX F9 / Crew Dragon : Crew-2 : 22 April 2021 - DISCUSSION

[gongora]

Discussion Thread for SpaceX's second operational crew mission.

NSF Threads for Crew-2 : Discussion / Launch/Rndz/Docking Updates / End of Mission Updates

Successful launch April 23, 2021 at 5:49am EDT (9:49 UTC) on Falcon 9 (booster 1061.2) from LC-39A.  This flight used Crew Dragon "Endeavour" from the DM-2 mission.  Booster landing was successful.  Return around October 31.

[mark_m]

I wonder if Endeavor's solar panels held up so well that they're acceptable for a regular crew mission, or if (more likely I suppose) they'll upgrade them during refurbishment.

[SteveU]

I wonder if Endeavor's solar panels held up so well that they're acceptable for a regular crew mission, or if (more likely I suppose) they'll upgrade them during refurbishment.

The solar cells are on the trunk.  unfortunately - they'll be burned up on re-entry.

[Kansan52]

Isn't the reuse the story?

[mark_m]

I wonder if Endeavor's solar panels held up so well that they're acceptable for a regular crew mission, or if (more likely I suppose) they'll upgrade them during refurbishment.

The solar cells are on the trunk.  unfortunately - they'll be burned up on re-entry.

Didn't think that one through, did I? 

Okay, any other aspects of Endeavor that was demo-worthy but will need to be upgraded for a full capacity and duration mission?

[gongora]

Isn't the reuse the story?

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46136.msg2091920#msg2091920

[cppetrie]

I wonder if Endeavor's solar panels held up so well that they're acceptable for a regular crew mission, or if (more likely I suppose) they'll upgrade them during refurbishment.

The solar cells are on the trunk.  unfortunately - they'll be burned up on re-entry.

Didn't think that one through, did I? 

Okay, any other aspects of Endeavor that was demo-worthy but will need to be upgraded for a full capacity and duration mission?

This capsule was originally intended for Crew-1 so it should be fully good to go for a regular duration mission.

[AndrewRG10]

So February 2021 is the launch date. That means we'll see two Crew Dragons docked at the same time for the direct handover, right?

And I'm curious what's happening with Boeing CFT, they were expecting short turnaround between OFT-1 and CFT so if OFT-2 is going up Octoberish, why not send CFT in February?

[Zed_Noir]

So February 2021 is the launch date. That means we'll see two Crew Dragons docked at the same time for the direct handover, right?

Most likely.

And I'm curious what's happening with Boeing CFT, they were expecting short turnaround between OFT-1 and CFT so if OFT-2 is going up Octoberish, why not send CFT in February?

OT for this thread. Re-post the question in one of the CST-100 threads for an answer. 

[spacebleachers]

My question is, why would they choose Demo-2 as the first vehicle for reuse. It has been stated that the vehicle is more susceptible to wind buffeting and such. I would think they would want at least two vehicles like the Crew-1 vehicle that can tolerate additional wind buffeting and such.

Any insights as to planned updates to the vehicle before its next launch, or if it will stay the way it is?

[Alexphysics]

It has been stated that the vehicle is more susceptible to wind buffeting and such.

Where?

[Elthiryel]

Where?

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1286311950624993281

[Alexphysics]

Where?

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1286311950624993281

Ah, boh, this is basically them making the landing winds requirement stricter for this mission. They explained it before the launch. It's not capsule-related, it's mission-related. Later missions will have less strict requirements.

[gongora]

Where?

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1286311950624993281

Ah, boh, this is basically them making the landing winds requirement stricter for this mission. They explained it before the launch. It's not capsule-related, it's mission-related. Later missions will have less strict requirements.

He didn't make it sound like it was just mission requirements.  I doubt any changes would be so large that they couldn't be retrofit on Endeavour.

[Robotbeat]

I don’t think that’s the idea at all. This is the first mission with crew so they are extra careful. Once they get experience, they can open up the allowables a bit more. Most likely WITHOUT any substantial changes. Simply by accumulating more data and thus model validation.

[gongora]

This is what he said in the ASAP meeting:

The current configuration of the Crew Dragon, which has a very limited wind margin and which will be improved in subsequent capsules, in the recovery zone is expected to create a challenge in selecting the landing site, only because of wind and weather conditions.  In allowance for this limitation SpaceX and NASA teams have preapproved seven landing sites, which is an increase from the original three.

The seven landing sites were known before DM-2 took off, maybe they just weren't all approved for use yet.

[Alexphysics]

Well that's weird because on the other briefing before the mission what they meant was actually the mission margins and not the capsule margins so they're having another case of bad communication

[the_other_Doug]

I don’t think that’s the idea at all. This is the first mission with crew so they are extra careful. Once they get experience, they can open up the allowables a bit more. Most likely WITHOUT any substantial changes. Simply by accumulating more data and thus model validation.

Indeed, the only thing I've heard about Crew Dragon entry dynamics came from Musk directly, on launch day.  I read that he was asked if he was worried for the crew during the launch.  He said not really, the Falcon was very well understood, and very reliable.  He was much more concerned about entry, because, under certain conditions, the capsule could suffer from potentially fatal attitude excursions due to cross-coupling issues.  I seem to recall that this was in relation to the super draco nozzle covers flying on this particular mission, though I could be wrong about that.

Anyone else recall hearing this tidbit?  Did y'all get further details, or perhaps understand it better than I did? 

[Robotbeat]

I don’t think that’s the idea at all. This is the first mission with crew so they are extra careful. Once they get experience, they can open up the allowables a bit more. Most likely WITHOUT any substantial changes. Simply by accumulating more data and thus model validation.

Indeed, the only thing I've heard about Crew Dragon entry dynamics came from Musk directly, on launch day.  I read that he was asked if he was worried for the crew during the launch.  He said not really, the Falcon was very well understood, and very reliable.  He was much more concerned about entry, because, under certain conditions, the capsule could suffer from potentially fatal attitude excursions due to cross-coupling issues.  I seem to recall that this was in relation to the super draco nozzle covers flying on this particular mission, though I could be wrong about that.

Anyone else recall hearing this tidbit?  Did y'all get further details, or perhaps understand it better than I did? 

I recall it, but as I understood it, that isn't really related to weather as the capsule will be under drogue by the time it's low enough for weather to impact it.

[snotis]

The Crew-1 vehicle can withstand higher winds because it's outer composite panels are a little stronger.  I'm working on getting the reference to where I heard that - I will make another post when I find it.

Update: https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/07/17/nasa-confirms-plans-for-crew-dragon-return-to-earth-on-aug-2/

“The Crew-1 vehicle can land in a little bit higher wind state,” Stich said in a press briefing May 31. “SpaceX has changed some of the outer composite panels to make that a little stronger.”

Update 2: Found the press conference (14:04 in the timeline)