Dragon/Falcon 9 Update
dump...@hotmail.com
Jochem Huhmann
> See:
>
> http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Dragon_Falcon_9_Update_999.html
The original text *with* pictures is at http://www.spacex.com/updates.php
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
Pat Flannery
> dump...@hotmail.com writes:
>
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Dragon_Falcon_9_Update_999.html
>
> The original text *with* pictures is at http://www.spacex.com/updates.php
Since the Dragon won't have any engine systems aboard, are they just
going to let it decay from orbit, or is this flight suborbital?
Pat
Jochem Huhmann
I don't think it's intended to be suborbital. But if they even won't
bother to separate the thing from the second stage it will probably
decay fast.
Glen Overby
>going to let it decay from orbit, or is this flight suborbital?
ocean-sychronous :)
me
wrote:
??? It's supposed to have an RCS , no?
Derek Lyons
The actual Dragon is supposed to have an RCS - but they are launching
the qualification model, and it's not entirely clear how close to
completely operational it will be.
(from: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0909/24falcon/):
:"This is the actual article used to qualify Dragon for flight loads,
:so it is identical to the flight article as far as the core structure
:and mold line, but will not carry engines or avionics, therefore it is
:lighter," said Elon Musk, SpaceX's billionaire founder.
Which strikes me as *very* odd, because one of the reasons for doing
this was given as:
(from the same source)
:"This gives us the best flight data in advance of our first COTS mission,"
:Musk said. "It also removes the (payload) fairing from the schedule critical
:path and allows us to spend more time on making the fairing lighter and more
:reliable."
Which sounds fishy as hell... Almost like there is a problem with the
fairing, and thus they are unable to launch the (as yet unannounced)
originally intended payload.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Pat Flannery
>> Since the Dragon won't have any engine systems aboard, are they just
>> going to let it decay from orbit, or is this flight suborbital?
>
> ??? It's supposed to have an RCS , no?
>
> http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php
From what I read, this first one will be pretty much inert, and the
second one will have a operational RCS.
Pat
Pat Flannery
> (from the same source)
> :"This gives us the best flight data in advance of our first COTS mission,"
> :Musk said. "It also removes the (payload) fairing from the schedule critical
> :path and allows us to spend more time on making the fairing lighter and more
> :reliable."
>
> Which sounds fishy as hell... Almost like there is a problem with the
> fairing, and thus they are unable to launch the (as yet unannounced)
> originally intended payload.
Hmm, now that you mention it, that does sound odd...but they probably
want to get Dragon up and running ASAP, so they can get a major lead
over Orbital Sciences.
Pat
Rick Jones
If what Derek suggested is correct - that SpaceX are having trouble
with the fairing, then could this be an attempt at an Apollo-8-esque
lemonade from lemons situation?
SpaceX had an issue with vibration that delayed their last launch on
Falcon1 - might that vibration issue also have manifested itself in
Falcon9? If so, perhaps a "not quite just boilerplate" Dragon capsule
wouldn't care and so they can shuffle their ordering while issues are
worked?
rick jones
--
web2.0 n, the dot.com reunion tour...
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
Derek Lyons
>Pat Flannery <fla...@daktel.com> wrote:
>> Derek Lyons wrote:
>> > (from the same source)
>> > :"This gives us the best flight data in advance of our first COTS
>> > :mission," Musk said. "It also removes the (payload) fairing from
>> > :the schedule critical path and allows us to spend more time on
>> > :making the fairing lighter and more reliable."
>> >
>> > Which sounds fishy as hell... Almost like there is a problem with
>> > the fairing, and thus they are unable to launch the (as yet
>> > unannounced) originally intended payload.
>
>> Hmm, now that you mention it, that does sound odd...but they
>> probably want to get Dragon up and running ASAP, so they can get a
>> major lead over Orbital Sciences.
>
>If what Derek suggested is correct - that SpaceX are having trouble
>with the fairing, then could this be an attempt at an Apollo-8-esque
>lemonade from lemons situation?
There's not many other ways to read Elon's statement - unless they are
intentionally sidelining the commercial version of the Falcon 9 in
favor of going hell-for-leather for the COTS flights.
Even so, flying a unit that (AFAIK) was never intended to be flown
smells of desperation. If they loose the booster (highly likely),
they lose the capsule too.
Was the unamed original customer scared off given the problematic
history of the Falcon I?
>SpaceX had an issue with vibration that delayed their last launch on
>Falcon1 - might that vibration issue also have manifested itself in
>Falcon9? If so, perhaps a "not quite just boilerplate" Dragon capsule
>wouldn't care and so they can shuffle their ordering while issues are
>worked?
There's any number of issues, as well as customer perception, that
could lead to skittishness on the part of potential customers to
commit to the Falcon 9.
David Spain
> Which sounds fishy as hell... Almost like there is a problem with the
> fairing, and thus they are unable to launch the (as yet unannounced)
> originally intended payload.
>
> D.
To restore customer confidence they should stage a PR stunt for the
next Dragon flight, the one planned w/RCS + re-entry.
I have a suggestion. In the would-be astronaut seats, stuff bags
of cash, in small enough denominations to simulate the weight of
an astronaut, but enough so that all bags total $1 MEEELION DOLLARS!
I can't help it, the parallels between Elon Musk and Mike Meyers
playing Dr. Evil are just unavoidable!
:-D
Dave
Rick Jones
> To restore customer confidence they should stage a PR stunt for the
> next Dragon flight, the one planned w/RCS + re-entry.
> I have a suggestion. In the would-be astronaut seats, stuff bags
> of cash, in small enough denominations to simulate the weight of
> an astronaut, but enough so that all bags total $1 MEEELION DOLLARS!
Compared to how much money they are spending on the thing itself I
suspect your one meeelion dollars would be saltmarsh harvest mouse
nuts. To truly restore customer confidence, it would have to be much
more, or perhaps Elon himself doing a Victor Kiam - "I loved it so
much, I bet my life on it!"
Now, a meeesly 1 meeelion dollars *would* make for an interesting
experiment in the durability of U.S. currency when Dragon
breaks/burns-up on reentry :) There was a shot on www.spacex.com that
suggested the thermal shield is actually in many discrete peices, not
too unlike Shuttle tiles, rather than the "one big heatshield"
variety.
rick jones
--
oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates
Niels Jørgen Kruse
> Now, a meeesly 1 meeelion dollars *would* make for an interesting
> experiment in the durability of U.S. currency when Dragon
> breaks/burns-up on reentry :) There was a shot on www.spacex.com that
> suggested the thermal shield is actually in many discrete peices, not
> too unlike Shuttle tiles, rather than the "one big heatshield"
> variety.
Are you proposing a heatshield made out of dollar bills?
--
Mvh./Regards, Niels J�rgen Kruse, Vanl�se, Denmark
Rick Jones
> > Now, a meeesly 1 meeelion dollars *would* make for an interesting
> > experiment in the durability of U.S. currency when Dragon
> > breaks/burns-up on reentry :) There was a shot on www.spacex.com that
> > suggested the thermal shield is actually in many discrete peices, not
> > too unlike Shuttle tiles, rather than the "one big heatshield"
> > variety.
> Are you proposing a heatshield made out of dollar bills?
Um, ah, sure - the folks who consider the whole endeavour burning
money would probably find it apt :) I was thinking more whether or not
the individual bills would survive reentry after the capsule
containing them broke-up though :)
rick jones
--
the road to hell is paved with business decisions...
dump...@hotmail.com
conduct static fire testing of the first and second stages of
the Falcon 9 launch vehicle, following the completion of
acceptance testing of the stages themselves.
The milestone, completed at the company's McGregor,
Texas, test site, moves SpaceX a step closer to launching
the Falcon 9 demonstrator at Cape Canaveral, Fla. This has
always been ambitiously targeted for sometime before the
end of the year, though with the expected delivery of the
stages to the Cape in November the company now appears
to be hinting at a potential slip into January or February 2010."
See:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/Spacex100709.xml&headline=SpaceX
Readies For Final Static Fire Tests&channel=space