What is the chance SpaceX will be flying crew to station on Dragon before CEV IOC?

[gladiator1332]

The Moon is a long way off. It is great that Musk seems to have an infinite horizon, however, for now he really should stay focused on LEO and the ISS.

[Danny Dot]

Can someone point me to a link that gives a technical discription of Dragon?  Does it have an ascent abort system?

[savuporo]

simonbp - 26/6/2007  6:48 PM
That's because Dragon isn't suspiciously going to the moon, and thus doesn't have a suspiciously large service module, in order to do a suspicious Trans-Earth Injection burn. Suspiciously.

They can launch and dock a  separate module to Dragon, that will do the suspicious TEI burn for it, cant they ?
Supiciously enough, they could even launch it in couple of pieces and do a fuel transfer if needed. That could work out to suspiciously close to manned lunar capability.

[Jorge]

savuporo - 27/6/2007  12:17 PM

simonbp - 26/6/2007  6:48 PM
That's because Dragon isn't suspiciously going to the moon, and thus doesn't have a suspiciously large service module, in order to do a suspicious Trans-Earth Injection burn. Suspiciously.

They can launch and dock a  separate module to Dragon, that will do the suspicious TEI burn for it, cant they ?

Maybe a suspicious Dragon Block II could do that. Dragon Block I no-can-dockee, only berthee.

[kraisee]

I would like to know much work has already gone in to the Falcon design to make it suitable for manned flight?

For example, is/has the Merlin 2 been designed with the appropriate in-flight shutdown systems and redundant backups to make it suitable for man-rating?   Or are those assumed to be included for a later phase once they have an unmanned system already flying?

Also, are SpaceX aiming to meet NASA's man rating requirements, or do they plan to develop their own?

All of this will be critical factors affecting the timings and costs for getting a Dragon to fly on a Falcon.

Ross.

[reubenb]

gladiator1332 - 26/6/2007  2:21 PM
If Hillary, Obama, or Edwards wins, say goodbye to the Moon for another 30 years or so.
What Musk has to hope for is Richardson to be nominated by the Dems and win. The guy supports private space industry...he's building a spaceport in New Mexico. By the way he supports private spaceflight in his home state, I think COTS will become more of a priority, and not some small program in the background. The VSE will change completely and with Richardson in the White House, say goodbye to Ares and hello to Atlas.

Well, there's no way Richardson is getting the nomination, though you might expect to see him in a cabinet position if the dems win.
Why do you think that Clinton, Obama, or Edwards would kill VSE? I haven't really heard any candidate say anything about the program one way or the other.

[SpacemanSpiff]

I would like to know much work has already gone in to the Falcon design to make it suitable for manned flight?

The plan for Falcon (not necessarily for F1) is to get humans to another planet affordably, so I assume there is a plan for human rating the Falcon program, though they have not shared it.


For example, is/has the Merlin 2 been designed with the appropriate in-flight shutdown systems and redundant backups to make it suitable for man-rating? Or are those assumed to be included for a later phase once they have an unmanned system already flying?

I think that would come in the Falcon 9 design or in a human rated variant?


Also, are SpaceX aiming to meet NASA's man rating requirements, or do they plan to develop their own?

From what I have heard, they would have their own human rating program, as NASA's is overkill$$$; this would be worked out with the FAA/AST. They would make sure that all requirements needed to dock to the ISS are met though, or develop an agreement on that with NASA.

[Avron]

SpacemanSpiff - 27/6/2007  4:30 PM



Also, are SpaceX aiming to meet NASA's man rating requirements, or do they plan to develop their own?

From what I have heard, they would have their own human rating program, as NASA's is overkill$$$; this would be worked out with the FAA/AST. They would make sure that all requirements needed to dock to the ISS are met though, or develop an agreement on that with NASA.

or  have an agreement with the other partners.. ISS is not NASA...
I agree they do need to get orbital and I am sure that they will do it.. One step at a time, but what I like is the vision put out and backed up with real hardware and test with very real launches.. I don't expect 100% all the time, even LMT/BA cannot get that right with all the years of experience.. if you said that CEV will be ready in 2012 then I would say that Spacex would have a tough chance at catching up.. but with CEV having a program slip rate of 100% now before any real tests, SpaceX will be given the time needed to get to the ISS first...

If anyone has any news on stock options in Spacex.. I would love to hear more.. just based on the Poll figures .. a sure bet on public positive reaction to the company (and its shares.. if there where any)

[Antares]

NASA is their customer, currently.  IIRC, COTS requires meeting the NASA Human Rating Requirements, i.e. NASA Standard 3000.  Ergo, that's what they're designing to, F9 and Dragon both.

[Jim]

Avron - 27/6/2007  11:23 PM
or  have an agreement with the other partners.. ISS is not NASA...
)

They are docking to the USOS, therefore NASA rules

[Avron]

Jim - 28/6/2007  6:45 AM

Avron - 27/6/2007  11:23 PM
or  have an agreement with the other partners.. ISS is not NASA...
)

They are docking to the USOS, therefore NASA rules

At this time.. yes but there is allways the option of docking to the other end of the stack.. nothing that a docking adapter cannot solve... I really do hope it does not come to this.. USOS docking would be best.. and that would also mean that they have met all COTS requirement, thus get some well earned cash.  I was looking at the Columbus module and the Module from Japan.. also no other docking options on these two .. or did I miss some other docking port option?

[Jim]

Only the nodes can support berthing, which COTS can only do.  The RSOS docking ports are full of ATV, Soyuz and progress.   Anyways the only way they would come to the station, is via COTS.  And the US would still have some say in use of the RSOS docking ports

[markbike528cbx]

Topic Answer/TL;Dr    --  SpaceX 100% probability.

I've been browsing old topics to see how good prognostications were/are.

This question was posed (and the thread died) PRIOR to a Falcon 1 success.

The suggested timelines for both SpaceX and CEV (Orion early version) were both ballsy (or in 2021-speak, "Aspirational" ).

Even SpaceX proponents noted that " you have to walk before you run or fly".
CEV proponents noted that as a government program, it was dependent on continuing funds over several administrations, which in fact dried up later. 

Sorry for the necro-post, but the discussions sound a lot like current prognostications. Good logic, mostly timing issues defeating the guesses from coming true.  Some of the same posters are still on the boards here.

Orion has not flown manned yet (unmanned test of development version 2014).  GAO estimated cost of 11-12 Billion USD
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-306.pdf or 18 Billion USD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft).

Edit:  Just for "fun" https://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0808/11constellation/

NASA's internal planning date for the first manned launch of the new Orion spacecraft that will replace the space shuttle after the winged orbiters are retired in 2010 has slipped one year, from September 2013 to September 2014.
......"We are adhering to our commitment date of March 2015 for initial operating capability,"

Per the GAO report 2021 SpaceX was 3 years behind "baseline" schedule and cost 2.5-2.7 Billion USD. But at least it has flown manned (ok, personned) 4 times.

[EE Scott]

Sometimes necro-posts are just plain fun!  Thanks for resurrecting - I get a kick out of remembering where we were and what our expectations were at certain points in time. It's been a long, slow road, but recent progress is gradually providing some optimism, at least for me.

[xyv]

Have to agree.  I would never have ever found this thread as it ended in 2007.  Really amazing to see the same arguments about schedule, government funding, politics and old vs new space.  A good reminder that sometimes the new guy does succeed and survive despite (or because of) crazy audacious ideas and irrational exuberance.   

[Comga]

Ditto
It's pretty funny in hindsight how many people had suggestions for how Musk could improve himself.
Perhaps our advice helped him to become the face of New Space and electric cars and the richest person on the planet.