• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

NASA Commercial Crew (CCtCap) test milestones

Recommended Posts

Unobscured Vision    2,678

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim K    13,683

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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592
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.

 

250178617_LC-39AStarshipmodsHD.thumb.jpeg.2de45b0301ec540274580115fe8a74c9.jpeg

 

 

Edited by DocM
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim K    13,683
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.

 

250178617_LC-39AStarshipmodsHD.thumb.jpeg.2de45b0301ec540274580115fe8a74c9.jpeg

 

 

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

 

"Starship capable? We'll see"

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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

 

Kathy Leuders, Commercial Crew program manager...

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision    2,678

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. :yes: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beittil    582

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. 🤣

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision    2,678

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

Kirk Shireman is the ISS Program Manager

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

One more box checked

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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/

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beittil    582

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 by Beittil
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

YIKES!!

 

 

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision    2,678

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 ...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision    2,678

OH MY. :no: 

 

Yeah, that's not good at all.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592
14 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

OH MY. :no: 

 

Yeah, that's not good at all.

 

Yeah, that just plain looks bad 😕

 

Crew Dragon Static Fire

Date: NET November 8
Time: TBA

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

🙄

 

 

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,592

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.

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.