tater Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 Launches 2 days apart on the schedule. Oct 2 and 4 (one on each coast). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Ship Builder Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 Is Gr(e/a)y Dragon going to use propulsive landings, since it isn't from NASA, and the whole propulsive landing cancellation thing was mostly from NASA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IncongruousGoat Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, Grand Ship Builder said: Is Gr(e/a)y Dragon going to use propulsive landings, since it isn't from NASA, and the whole propulsive landing cancellation thing was mostly from NASA? No. SpaceX cancelled development of propulsive landing for Dragon V2, which means that not only are they not going to do it, they can't do it because they haven't developed the technology necessary. Sure, they've been doing propulsive landings with Falcon 9 first stages, but a first stage is not a capsule. Plus, all the things that make propulsive landing dangerous for Crew Dragon make it orders of magnitude more dangerous for Gray Dragon, simply due to the differences between LEO re-entry and trans-lunar re-entry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 8 minutes ago, Grand Ship Builder said: Is Gr(e/a)y Dragon going to use propulsive landings, since it isn't from NASA, and the whole propulsive landing cancellation thing was mostly from NASA? The primary reason for cancelling propulsive landings, as I understand it, was dealing with the planetary masses of paperwork to certify that having landing legs extend out the heat shield is safe and will only fail safe. They would rather focus that effort on other things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, StrandedonEarth said: The primary reason for cancelling propulsive landings, as I understand it, was dealing with the planetary masses of paperwork to certify that having landing legs extend out the heat shield is safe and will only fail safe. They would rather focus that effort on other things. This. It's not a technical issue, it's a bureaucracy issue. That makes it not worth pursuing at the moment. Once Dragon 2 (and FH) are fully operational and mini-ITS exists on more than just paper, I think we'll see a return to propulsive Dragon landings, specifically if customers appear wanting to land stuff on the moon. As I hear it, the guy likely to take over the helm at NASA is a big proponent of both commercial spaceflight and returning to the moon, which just might be where some of those payloads come from. Maybe once there's a few Dragons on the moon, NASA will start to reconsider the practicality of such landings on earth. And non-NASA manned flights might have a different set of standards entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibb31 Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Nobody is going to land Dragons on the moon. That's not even a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streetwind Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Yeah, I was about to say. A few people skipped straight past the point there "Grey Dragon" was something other people came up with after SpaceX talked about "Red Dragon" to Mars. Mostly as a thought experiment along the lines of "what if SpaceX wanted to land on the moon, could a Dragon do it". (The answer is no, by the way. Landing could be done by devoting part of the payload capacity to extra fuel, but it could never take off again.) Even the circumlunar tourist flight SpaceX has in its plans is not called "Grey Dragon". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibb31 Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 9 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said: The primary reason for cancelling propulsive landings, as I understand it, was dealing with the planetary masses of paperwork to certify that having landing legs extend out the heat shield is safe and will only fail safe. They would rather focus that effort on other things. for the 35000th time: <blink> CANCELLING PROPULSIVE LANDINGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LANDING LEGS. </blink> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/09/13/launch-operators-expect-minimal-delays-from-hurricane-irma/ Quote SpaceX president and chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell said her company’s launch campaigns at launch pad 39A — a former space shuttle facility located at KSC — should not see much interruption from Irma. “We don’t anticipate, at this point, a delay in our next launch from 39A,” Shotwell said Tuesday at Euroconsult’s annual World Satellite Business Week meeting in Paris. “I was frankly more worried about Launch Complex 40, where we’re finishing up.” SpaceX is repairing and upgrading pad 40, which sits a few miles to the south of pad 39A on Air Force property, after a Falcon 9 rocket exploded there last September, knocking the launch complex offline until it could be repaired. SpaceX switched its launches to pad 39A once the Falcon 9 resumed flights earlier this year, but the company wants both pads operational. “We had a lot of equipment (at pad 40), lots of piping to be welded, and I’m a little bit more worried about that. That won’t hold up a launch in the near-term, but we’re waiting to get that information back,” Shotwell said. “I don’t anticipate it being an issue though, thank goodness for us, but obviously a bunch of people suffered, both in this one and our friends in Houston from Harvey.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racescort666 Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, tater said: "We don’t anticipate, at this point, a delay in our next launch from 39A" I assume that this is SES-11? Edit: never mind, the article says it's SES-11 and that Koreasat 5A still doesn't have an official pad assignment. Also, it sounds like they haven't completed their damage assessment from the hurricane. Edited September 13, 2017 by Racescort666 RTFM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 6 hours ago, Nibb31 said: CANCELLING PROPULSIVE LANDINGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LANDING LEGS. Even on a parachute landing with 5 m/s side speed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibb31 Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 4 hours ago, kerbiloid said: Even on a parachute landing with 5 m/s side speed? They are not landing with parachutes because they had to cancel the legs. They are removing the legs because they are landing on water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 4 minutes ago, Nibb31 said: They are not landing with parachutes because they had to cancel the legs. That's clear. I just mean the legs were added in Dragon, PTK NP and Zarya spaceships because all three would be performing rocket landing, with zero side speed. So, they wouldn't overturn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Nibb31 said: They are not landing with parachutes because they had to cancel the legs. They are removing the legs because they are landing on water. This and legs are pretty pointless with an water landing as most KSP players know, they will also be an leak point for water into the service module bottom of the dragon. Why water landing, because NASA want it, you could land on land with parachutes and use the super drako to slow you down for an soft landing. You might tumble afterward unless you cut parachutes once landing legs hit ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streetwind Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) Us KSP fans ought to enjoy this one quite a lot! Unfortunately I'm gonna have to wait another eight hours until I can get my hands on a playback device not fed through a Citrix connection, and with sound... =/ Edited September 14, 2017 by Streetwind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brotoro Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Drat. I thought it might finally be the BulgariaSat video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEpicSquared Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Very kerbal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVDRW Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 WOW, never seen footage's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elthy Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Its so awesome! Thats the collest thing about rocket science, if it fails you get at least nice fireworks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 And yet they won't show the BulgariaSat footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1101 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 5 hours ago, Elthy said: Its so awesome! Thats the collest thing about rocket science, if it fails you get at least nice fireworks The fact these all happened after succeeding at their actual missions really helps that enjoyment, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEpicSquared Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 2 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: And yet they won't show the BulgariaSat footage. Oh well, I guess the Thaicom-8 booster dancing around the deck serves as a sort of consolation prize... (although I want to see the BulgariaSat footage as well) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 28 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said: Oh well, I guess the Thaicom-8 booster dancing around the deck serves as a sort of consolation prize... (although I want to see the BulgariaSat footage as well) That's the thing, they'll show this great, epic (and oh so amusing) pile of fail, but they won't show the dramatic victory-from-the-jaws-of-defeat moment BulgariaSat supposedly was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CastleKSide Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) Maybe they have just forgot... Edited September 14, 2017 by CastleKSide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 41 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: That's the thing, they'll show this great, epic (and oh so amusing) pile of fail, but they won't show the dramatic victory-from-the-jaws-of-defeat moment BulgariaSat supposedly was. Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.