NASA Selects SpaceX To Return Americans To Space

http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120803

On Aug 3, 10:09*pm, Alan Erskine wrote:
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120803

good we shouldnt be dependent on russians to get to orbit

On 4/08/2012 3:56 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
Alan Erskine wrote:
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120803


All good questions, JF. Ask them.

Its not so much that, that has worried me, in this day and age there should
not be just one way. When the Shuttle had issues and was grounded, so were
the crews, if it had not been for the Russian system, all could have been
lost. Now there is no shuttle its eggs in one basket again. Very dodgy.
Brian

--
--
From the sofa of Brian Gaff -

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"bob haller" wrote in message
...
On Aug 3, 10:09 pm, Alan Erskine wrote:
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120803

good we shouldnt be dependent on russians to get to orbit

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 01:56:44 -0400, JF Mezei
wrote:


I had been under the impression that they had already gotten funding to
build a dual cargo/human vehicle (Dragon/Falcon9 combo). Seems they are
now getting an extra $440 million to finish the job. Is that a correct
interpretation ?

No. The $440 million doesn't finish the job. This new award takes them
to Critical Design Review. The first award was to Preliminary Design
Review. A final award will be needed for production go-ahead.

At the stage of development for Dragon, wouldn't launch escape engines
already be designed into the capsule ? (I assume those are used for
in-orbit manoeuvering ?) Or are those to be added with the capsule's
design adjusted accordingly ?

The existing maneuvering thrusters don't have enough thrust for launch
escape. SuperDraco (still in testing) will do that.

More importantly, Dragon, in the current documentation/marketing
material is designed for water landing. That press release talks about
landing on legs on land. Is Drago already designed for land landing on
legs, but water landing are being use during early flights because the
legs and powered landing have not yet been sufficiently tested ?

Water landing is a requirement for launch escape anyway. Not many
places downrange from Cape Canaveral for a land landing.

or will Spacex fully redesign the capsule to incorporate legs and more
powerful engines for landing on land ?

Undecided, I suspect. Such upgrades would come later. The first
priority is getting the cargo Dragon upgraded to carry crew as quickly
and cheaply as possible.

Is there a big reason why they are switching away from water landings
and to legged landings on land ?

Reusability. That's easier when your spacecraft doesn't get dunked in
sal****er.

Or is this just "vanity" reasons
because it look more cool for astronauts to land on land ?

Will cargo flighst also land on land or will they continue to land on
water ?

All will be baselined for land once this system is proven. Sea
recovery will always be available as a backup.

Brian

On 5/08/2012 7:25 AM, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 01:56:44 -0400, JF Mezei
wrote:


Will cargo flighst also land on land or will they continue to land on
water ?

All will be baselined for land once this system is proven. Sea
recovery will always be available as a backup.

There's also the point that sea recovery is more expensive than land
recovery.

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 09:03:02 +1000, Alan Erskine
wrote:


Will cargo flighst also land on land or will they continue to land on
water ?

All will be baselined for land once this system is proven. Sea
recovery will always be available as a backup.

There's also the point that sea recovery is more expensive than land
recovery.

I think that depends on how much more mass land recovery adds to the
spacecraft, how much more expensive is the more powerful launcher
needed for it, and how many more flights are needed to deliver the
same amount of revenue cargo due to the heavier spacecraft. Also,
boats and barges off San Diego aren't really all that expensive,
relative to space budgets. NASA's use of Navy carrier groups in the
past is not how it will be done this time around.

If you're only doing a couple of flights a year, I think it might be
very difficult to justify land recovery.

Brian

On 6/08/2012 3:08 AM, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 09:03:02 +1000, Alan Erskine
wrote:


Will cargo flighst also land on land or will they continue to land on
water ?

All will be baselined for land once this system is proven. Sea
recovery will always be available as a backup.

There's also the point that sea recovery is more expensive than land
recovery.

I think that depends on how much more mass land recovery adds to the
spacecraft, how much more expensive is the more powerful launcher
needed for it, and how many more flights are needed to deliver the
same amount of revenue cargo due to the heavier spacecraft. Also,
boats and barges off San Diego aren't really all that expensive,
relative to space budgets. NASA's use of Navy carrier groups in the
past is not how it will be done this time around.

If you're only doing a couple of flights a year, I think it might be
very difficult to justify land recovery.

Brian


I think it will be lighter with crew than cargo - a person's 'average'
weight is about 70kg - 7 x 70 = 490kg which is considerably less than
the 6 tonnes of cargo Dragon can carry.

On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 10:32:52 +1000, Alan Erskine
wrote:


I think that depends on how much more mass land recovery adds to the
spacecraft,

I think it will be lighter with crew than cargo - a person's 'average'
weight is about 70kg - 7 x 70 = 490kg which is considerably less than
the 6 tonnes of cargo Dragon can carry.

Offset by the much greater life support system hardware needed for
crew.

Brian