JF Mezei wrote:

On 2017-11-06 23:05, Fred J. McCall wrote:

Uh, something wrong with your math there. May 2015 to December 2017
is a little bit more than "6-7 months".

oops my bad.


Given that the intent is for it to be reusable, I would doubt they'll
be opening hatches while it's in the water unless it's sinking and
there's an emergency.


For crewed flights, will SpaceX still do the recovery or will NASA
insist on being involved with its (NAVY) ships ?


The contract says SpaceX is responsible for recovery. I thought I
said that down there somewhere.


With men in capsule running on batteries and air reserves after splash
down, will NASA tolerate they stay in capsule while recovery ship
manoevers so its crane is within rech and attached ?


Again, the capsule comes down practically on top of the recovery ship.
They're safer in the capsule than out of it.


Will NASA tolerate that men ramin in capsule as it is hoisted up on the
ship?


Again, they're safer staying in the capsule than leaving it.



keep the pipeline full. As you shorten the refurbishment time the
number of required 'additional' capsules goes down by around one a
month for every month less than two years you can recycle them in.


But planning production capacity/rate depends on knowning how quickly
you turn around the flown Dragons. Otherwise, you end up producing too
many dragons.


Yes, but YOU don't need to know that number.



supporting NASA. Dragon V2 also isn't fully reusable. There are
parts (like the service module) that you don't get back.


Non refurshibale items are simpler because you know excatly how many you
need to produce according to contract before you start.


You appear to be stuck in the paradigm that all flights are
'contracted' and then you worry about hardware. SpaceX mostly works
the other way around; you produce hardware and then you manifest
flights to use it.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw