NASA Commercial Crew (CCtCap) test milestones

[Blue-Vision]

MUCH larger and heavier, able to deal with Starship's mass when landing at sea.  🚀

[Jim K Global Moderator]

What...LOL?  What do these ships have to do with Starship which will be landing on land.

 

[DocM]

3 hours ago, Jim K said:

What...LOL?  What do these ships have to do with Starship which will be landing on land.

 

For at least initial LC-39A flights Super Heavy will land on a droneship and Starship at LZ-1.

 

Because of A Shortfall of Gravitas being delivered many months late there's strong speculation it'll be a new, larger class of droneship to fit the larger vehicles. This would fit in with the large platform seen in the Point-2-Point concepts.

 

Once the Eastern range is convinced of their landing accuracy, Super Heavy will land on a pad next to the SH/SS launch platform and Starship on its own LZ between the SH/SS pad and 39A's hangar.

 

From the new LC-39A EA, this construction started 2 weeks ago with much of the ironwork already built off-site and in storage.  Phase 1 will have a smaller Starship platform, essentially a circular milk stool launch stand,  but Phase 2 will be a full stack elevated  launch platform & diverter akin to that used for Saturn 1B.

 

As we type, Phase 1 facilities are also being erected at Boca Chica.

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by DocM

[Jim K Global Moderator]

23 minutes ago, DocM said:

 

For at least initial LC-39A flights Super Heavy will land on a droneship and Starship at LZ-1.

 

Because of A Shortfall of Gravitas being delivered many months late there's strong speculation it'll be a new, larger class of droneship to fit the larger vehicles. This would fit in with the large platform seen in the Point-2-Point concepts.

 

Once the Eastern range is convinced of their landing accuracy, Super Heavy will land on a pad next to the SH/SS launch platform and Starship on its own LZ between the SH/SS pad and 39A's hangar.

 

From the new LC-39A EA, this construction started 2 weeks ago. Phase 1 will have a smaller Starship platform, but Phase 2 will be a full stack elevated  launch platform & diverter akin to that used for Saturn 1B.

 

 

 

Yes...but you can probably see why this led to some confusion...

 

"Starship capable? We'll see"

 

 

[DocM]

How many people would be confused by  Super Heavy but have lights go on if Starship is mentioned?

 

Besides, there's already been mention of a Starship Launch System. Cheeky perhaps, but still.

[DocM]

 

 

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/24/spacex-sets-nov-2-date-for-critical-crew-dragon-engine-test-firing.html

[DocM]

NASA, SpaceX and the industry  learned new things from the DM-1 explosion investigation

 

Kathy Leuders, Commercial Crew program manager...

 

 

[Blue-Vision]

Well then ... this could explain a ton of previously-unexplained failures in past missions with other providers/craft. My, my, my.

 

SpaceX being so "on top" of fault-tracking and vehicle status used to draw criticism ... now it's turning out to be so helpful. Safety and reliability is gonna be so improved by all of this work.  

[DocM]

 

[Beittil]

It is ffing bs that he would have to request that to begin with! 

 

I can only imagine Boeing being scared as hell that something might go south (hehe) and it gets smeared all over youtube. 🤣

[Blue-Vision]

That's precisely why Jim wants it as a matter of public record. SpaceX has had to obey the same standard.

[DocM]

Boeing got off easy when last summer's test stand failure spilled hydrazine all over White Sands and no cams were running. If it hadn't been for leakers no one would have known how bad it was.

[DocM]

Kirk Shireman is the ISS Program Manager

 

 

 

[DocM]

One more box checked

 

 

 

[DocM]

Reminder

 

Boeing's Starliner pad abort test is on for 0900 Eastern today (Monday), and it'll be webcast & broadcast on NASA TV

 

https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

 

[Beittil]

That hydrazine cloud... Lol

 

Also, did they intentionally do 1 main chute out or was that a screwup? 

 

Edit: That was deffo a whoopsie by Starliner there... 

Edited November 4, 2019 by Beittil

[DocM]

That was a failed main chute deployment, which Boeing types are trying very hard to gloss over

 

 

[DocM]

 

[DocM]

YIKES!!

 

 

[Blue-Vision]

Yeah it didn't look great. I noted that the SM was on fire on the ground afterwards, plus that toxic cloud hanging around that would cause issues in retrieving crew + vessel when performing recovery ops -- not to mention that substance would be ALL over it making it unsafe to touch.

 

I'm calling this one a partial failure of the parachute system. That system has fatal flaws that have been completely exposed now.

 

Betcha anything this was what Bridenstine was referring to when he wanted this one completely transparent and public ...

[DocM]

 

[Blue-Vision]

OH MY.  

 

Yeah, that's not good at all.

[DocM]

14 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

OH MY.  

 

Yeah, that's not good at all.

 

Yeah, that just plain looks bad 😕

 

Crew Dragon Static Fire

Date: NET November 8
Time: TBA

[DocM]

🙄

 

 

[DocM]

https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2019/11/07/nasa-and-boeing-discuss-preliminary-pad-abort-test-results/

 

NASA and Boeing discuss preliminary Pad Abort Test results

On Thursday, Nov. 7, Boeing Commercial Crew Vice President and Program Manager John Mulholland and NASA Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders addressed preliminary results of the Nov. 4 CST-100 Starliner Pad Abort Test during a media teleconference.

* Validated the launch abort systems capability to perform a safe abort

* Safely separated CST-100 from a static launch vehicle adapter on the launch pad

* Validated the launch abort systems capability to propel Starliner safely to a target point to avoid re-contact with any potential debris or other pieces of hardware

* Demonstrated stability and control characteristics of the launch abort system

* Safely separated the crew module from the service module during the abort sequence

* Deployed landing and recovery system to execute a controlled land landing

* Validated functionality of guidance, navigation & control and command & data handling system for appropriate sequencing of commands to the propulsion controllers

During the test, two of three of Starliners main parachutes deployed and eased Starliner to the ground. Although designed with three parachutes, two opening successfully is acceptable for the test parameters and crew safety. Boeing has determined that the parachute anomaly occurred because the rigging between one of the three pilot and main parachutes was improperly connected. Boeing has verified this through closeout photos, and understands how this happened on a test vehicle. The company is validating that its processes were followed correctly on its Orbital Flight Test vehicle, which is targeted to launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida on Dec. 17.

NASA is encouraged by the preliminary results of the Pad Abort Test and remains committed to working in concert with Boeing to ensure crew safety as we move to return astronauts to the International Space Station from U.S. soil.