SpaceX and NASA Host Teleconference Today on SpaceX 2 Mission to Space Station

In article ,
says...

March 1, 2013

Joshua Buck
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-1100


MEDIA ADVISORY: M13-041

SPACEX AND NASA HOST TELECONFERENCE TODAY ON SPACEX 2 MISSION TO SPACE STATION

WASHINGTON -- SpaceX and NASA will hold a media teleconference at 3
p.m. EST today to discuss the latest information about the company's
second cargo mission to the International Space Station under NASA's
Commercial Resupply Services contract.

The teleconference participants a

- Elon Musk, chief designer and CEO, SpaceX
- Gwynne Shotwell, president, SpaceX
- William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for Human
Exploration and Operations at NASA Headquarters, Washington
- Michael Suffredini, International Space Station program manager

For dial-in information, journalists must contact Josh Buck at
or 202-358-1100, or the Kennedy Space Center newsroom
321-867-2468.

Audio of the teleconference will be streamed live on NASA's website
at:

http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio

For more information about NASA's International Space Station, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/station

-end-

I didn't get to watch this, but Spaceflight.com had this to say:

SpaceX and NASA issued a statement at 8pm UTC, confirming
ISS rendezvous on Saturday was missed. Dragon will have
other opportunities to hook up with the ISS, most likely
on Monday. However, SpaceX did confirm they were back to
two of the three thrusters, with the remaining two
expected to return to life shortly.

The root cause is still preliminary, but the initial data
points to a stuck valve that was resolved by ?jackhammering?
it open and close to free it.

Good that they got this working. Although it's a bit concerning that
one stuck valve could cause several of the four thruster pods trouble.
Of course, adding additional valves and plumbing could make this
redundant, but could introduce other possible failure modes.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

SpaceX Dragon successfully docks with International Space Station:

"After some issues with its thrusters hours after launch, the
SpaceX Dragon capsule successfully docked with the
International Space Station. NASA reported that the
capsule attached to the Harmony module of the ISS at
8:56am EST Sunday morning, with the door set to be
opened on Monday morning.

Dragon took off from Cape Canaveral on Friday morning and
reached orbit without a hitch, but a pressure problem prevented
the thruster pods from initializing once orbit was attained. The
four pods then gradually came online over the course of the
day. Two pods are needed to get Dragon to the ISS with a
third pod necessary for successfully maneuvering once the
station is reached."

See:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/...space-station/

In article a25d9e8b-9642-4af1-9172-f69cd99ee629
@ru10g2000pbc.googlegroups.com, says...

SpaceX Dragon successfully docks with International Space Station:

"After some issues with its thrusters hours after launch, the
SpaceX Dragon capsule successfully docked with the
International Space Station. NASA reported that the
capsule attached to the Harmony module of the ISS at
8:56am EST Sunday morning, with the door set to be
opened on Monday morning.

Dragon took off from Cape Canaveral on Friday morning and
reached orbit without a hitch, but a pressure problem prevented
the thruster pods from initializing once orbit was attained. The
four pods then gradually came online over the course of the
day. Two pods are needed to get Dragon to the ISS with a
third pod necessary for successfully maneuvering once the
station is reached."

See:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/...space-station/

Congrats to SpaceX for working through the problems with the "cranky"
Dragon and docking well before I could read about it on Monday morning.

:-)

I watched the launch live, over the web, last week and noted how rock
solid guidance seemed to be on the last flight of Falcon 9 version 1.0.
Next up, version 1.1 with uprated engines and stretched fuel/oxidizer
tanks for improved performance.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

Jeff Findley writes:

I watched the launch live, over the web, last week and noted how rock
solid guidance seemed to be on the last flight of Falcon 9 version 1.0.
Next up, version 1.1 with uprated engines and stretched fuel/oxidizer
tanks for improved performance.

This will be a very interesting launch, since the Falcon 9 1.1 will be
the first flight of what is very nearly a new rocket. New engines, new
engine layout, longer tanks in both stages... much more than just small
modifications.

Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

On 3/4/2013 1:20 PM, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
Jeff Findley writes:

Next up, version 1.1 with uprated engines and stretched fuel/oxidizer
tanks for improved performance.

This will be a very interesting launch, since the Falcon 9 1.1 will be
the first flight of what is very nearly a new rocket. New engines, new
engine layout, longer tanks in both stages... much more than just small
modifications.


Do we know which of the upcoming Falcon 9 flights this will be?
Will it be the next ISS resupply mission (Flight 4) or one of the
upcoming satellite launches?

Dave

David Spain writes:

Do we know which of the upcoming Falcon 9 flights this will be?
Will it be the next ISS resupply mission (Flight 4) or one of the
upcoming satellite launches?

Hmm, Flight 4 to the ISS will go up on a V1.1, but I have no idea if
there will be a satellite launch using that earlier.

To be honest, I could imagine that SpaceX would rather risk an ISS
launch to go wrong than a satellite customer's payload (the latter are
paying the bread for SpaceX and they are probably more risk-adverse than
NASA with ISS-supplies which are probably cheaper to replace and less
time-critical anyway), but this is pure speculation.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery