My piece on today’s historic flight is up now, over at AOL News.
22 thoughts on “A Huge Milestone”
Big deal, when NASA launch theirs in a few years, it’ll have Key Performance Indicators, SAP, Mission Success, a Gantt chart, Operational Excellence, Process improvement, Six sigma, Total Quality Management, ISO 9000, Quality function deployment, Command Media, a Continuous Improvement Plan, and a Decision matrix. See, you get all that stuff for free when you hire Lockheed Martin to build your capsule. Top that SpaceX.
Good stuff. And Musk didn’t pull any punches in the news conference today. He noted that $4.5B for Orion to date seems like a lot of money and that anything Orion can do, Dragon can do too – and then some.
Hell’s Bells; Brian D forgot the PIP, otherwise known as the Pork Improvement Plan!
The really great thing about SpaceX’s success today is that now they have succeeded, people will have to listen to what they say about the business of space and its cost structure. SpaceX is now on the same playing field as others – all of them nation states.
It was also the first time I have heard the argument for Legacy components bringing Legacy costs to new programs expressed publicly.
One can only hope that true vertical integration will extend upwards for a couple of hundred miles and really change the way we do things in space.
SpaceX is now on the same playing field as others – all of them nation states.
Yes, this is huge. SpaceX now has a launch vehicle and a capsule. Constellation/SLS+Orion have nothing. SpaceX are the experts now when it comes to manned spaceflight, or they will be after the Shuttle retires.
Rand,
According to Elon at the presser there was no Draco failure. What is your sourcing for the statement? Are you just relying on Chris Bergin’s twitter?
He did say they can be fully operational losing six thrusters so something happened.
I’ve posted the four part press conference on my blog… Nominal now means “Yeehah!!”
I wasn’t able to leave a comment at AOL, but here is what I was going to say in response to “dcsca”:
Well, of course Dragon was unmanned. It was its first flight, and only the second flight of the Falcon 9 booster. The idea is to first develop it as an unmanned cargo vehicle, and by the time it begins to carry crew, the hardware will be proven and reliable. It sounds like a logical progression to me.
I’ve seen lots of comments like, “So what? NASA did this back in the 60s.” The Dragon-Falcon is so much larger and more capable than Mercury-Atlas or Gemini-Titan that there is no comparison. All they have in common is that a rocket left the pad trailing flame and a capsule landed in the ocean by parachute.
You could see how stressed Elon was at the press conference. He said a lot of important things. One is the capsule could have carried astronauts on this flight and had a very comfortable ride. I have no doubt of it.
Imagine seven tourists at $20m each. His cost is south of $50m. He could start making $90m+ profit today.
Of course, it’s really only a transfer vehicle. Basically a taxi. Bigelow needs to gear up selling his orbital habitats now that he can point to this SpaceX accomplishment. This makes the case much easier for him now and after demo 2+3 it gets even better.
The case for a spaceship (can I drop the general use, zero-g, high delta-V, resupply, fuel and go now?) just got better as well. All the potential missions for the Dragon now make a lot more sense and extend much farther when you add a spaceship into the equation.
All they need to do now is make an IPO and they’ve got the funds to colonize mars while Elon retains controlling interest so the vision doesn’t get lost… Oh also, if anyone thinks he’s lost his way with regard to vision, the press conference should have buried that idea… he said some really important things.
Ken wrote: he said some really important things.
Yeah, it’s damn rare that a CEO comes along who will actually speak clearly and simply (the words, not the delivery) about his company’s vision. I really liked the bit about warning his investors that “maximizing profits is not my top priority”.
I get a feeling that he’ll develop a SpaceX Astronaut Corps, and that he has plans far beyond “providing a service”.
Nice work on the article, Rand. (I figure I owe you that for all the chops-busting I do on your political posts.)
Ken, the Dragon is not just a “taxi,” though that is perhaps a fair description of the freight-only versions built to meet the ISS freight contract. But SpaceX designed Dragon from the start to support long duration flights in Earth orbit or beyond. In this DragonLab configuration it would have expanded life support capability and deployable solar panels for power. Among the many things Elon is reported to have said at the press conference was also that Dragon can equal or exceed Orion in any given particular.
Among the many things Elon is reported to have said at the press conference was also that Dragon can equal or exceed Orion in any given particular.
Not in cost!
By that, I mean SpaceX could build the Dragon with the most expensive labor and materials imagineable and it still wouldn’t cost as much as an Orion.
SpaceX designed Dragon from the start to support long duration flights in Earth orbit or beyond.
Yes it can be on station for long durations, but it is not a habitat. It is habitable for short durations. That makes it a taxi and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it being a taxi. Add legs and it will be a taxi that can land on land.
You do not want to live in the thing for long durations. It is designed to enter environments that a long duration vehicle can not.
Just because something can be used for something doesn’t mean it should be used for it. It makes more sense to use it for what it is best suited for and have additional vehicles better suited for their areas of usage.
For example, Dragon doesn’t carry a lot of fuel, but a larger ship that does have a reserve capacity of fuel could provide support for various missions that involve Dragon.
Dragon carries enough fuel for the primary mission of rendezvous with the ISS and deorbiting. For the manned version, they’re planning on having a pusher escape system. If I had to guess, they’re going to put additional propellant and an abort rocket motor in what is now the unpressurized cargo area. In the event of an emergency, open the latch valves and the abort motor pushes you clear of the booster stack. If there is no emergency, they’ll have a lot of extra propellant that could be transferred to the ISS or used for different missions.
Not in cost!
Touche, sir.
You do not want to live in the thing for long durations.
True. But that applies equally to Orion. Spam-in-a-can is a non-starter for any serious deep space operation IMHO, regardless of whose “can” we’re talking about. To really explore, a true spaceship is needed with many features – especially vastly more habitable volume per crewperson – than either Dragon or Orion have on offer.
For a long duration mission, I think the capsule would only be used for launch and reentry. The habitable volume could consist of one or more Bigelow type inflatable modules. For a mission that’s months or even years long (e.g. Mars), you’re going to need a lot of room to store consumables and supplies, exercise, and to avoid going stir-crazy. None of the capsule designs is big enough for that.
I envision Dragon as a crew launch/reentry module, that could link up with a much larger spaceship once in orbit, either a space station or even a lunar or interplanetary spacecraft.
Sure, a spaceplane would be ideal for leaving and returning to Earth, but it appears to be pretty difficult to build one. In the meantime, it would be nice to have a standardized launch/reentry module. Maybe Dragon can replace Soyuz as a lifeboat for the ISS.
I think Dragon and its descendants might be around for a long time.
Addendum to my last comment:
It could also be used as a crew transfer vehicle between multiple space stations or other craft.
If I had to guess, they’re going to put additional propellant and an abort rocket motor in what is now the unpressurized cargo area.
Four Dracos gives you 360 pounds of thrust which isn’t probably enough to get you safely away if the rest of the vehicle explodes. So I would assume you are right about the need to develop and add abort motors. However, I think you may not be right about additional propellant in the trunk. An abort is going to be a short duration burn and it probably has enough fuel now for that. Adding propellant just for the rare abort potential takes away from other objectives.
They intend to add legs and touchdown on land. Four Dracos would not provide enough thrust to do that so I expect those abort motors will actually be landing motors for when there is no abort.
Big deal, when NASA launch theirs in a few years, it’ll have Key Performance Indicators, SAP, Mission Success, a Gantt chart, Operational Excellence, Process improvement, Six sigma, Total Quality Management, ISO 9000, Quality function deployment, Command Media, a Continuous Improvement Plan, and a Decision matrix. See, you get all that stuff for free when you hire Lockheed Martin to build your capsule. Top that SpaceX.
Good stuff. And Musk didn’t pull any punches in the news conference today. He noted that $4.5B for Orion to date seems like a lot of money and that anything Orion can do, Dragon can do too – and then some.
Hell’s Bells; Brian D forgot the PIP, otherwise known as the Pork Improvement Plan!
The really great thing about SpaceX’s success today is that now they have succeeded, people will have to listen to what they say about the business of space and its cost structure. SpaceX is now on the same playing field as others – all of them nation states.
It was also the first time I have heard the argument for Legacy components bringing Legacy costs to new programs expressed publicly.
One can only hope that true vertical integration will extend upwards for a couple of hundred miles and really change the way we do things in space.
SpaceX is now on the same playing field as others – all of them nation states.
Yes, this is huge. SpaceX now has a launch vehicle and a capsule. Constellation/SLS+Orion have nothing. SpaceX are the experts now when it comes to manned spaceflight, or they will be after the Shuttle retires.
Rand,
According to Elon at the presser there was no Draco failure. What is your sourcing for the statement? Are you just relying on Chris Bergin’s twitter?
He did say they can be fully operational losing six thrusters so something happened.
I’ve posted the four part press conference on my blog… Nominal now means “Yeehah!!”
I wasn’t able to leave a comment at AOL, but here is what I was going to say in response to “dcsca”:
Well, of course Dragon was unmanned. It was its first flight, and only the second flight of the Falcon 9 booster. The idea is to first develop it as an unmanned cargo vehicle, and by the time it begins to carry crew, the hardware will be proven and reliable. It sounds like a logical progression to me.
I’ve seen lots of comments like, “So what? NASA did this back in the 60s.” The Dragon-Falcon is so much larger and more capable than Mercury-Atlas or Gemini-Titan that there is no comparison. All they have in common is that a rocket left the pad trailing flame and a capsule landed in the ocean by parachute.
You could see how stressed Elon was at the press conference. He said a lot of important things. One is the capsule could have carried astronauts on this flight and had a very comfortable ride. I have no doubt of it.
Imagine seven tourists at $20m each. His cost is south of $50m. He could start making $90m+ profit today.
Of course, it’s really only a transfer vehicle. Basically a taxi. Bigelow needs to gear up selling his orbital habitats now that he can point to this SpaceX accomplishment. This makes the case much easier for him now and after demo 2+3 it gets even better.
The case for a spaceship (can I drop the general use, zero-g, high delta-V, resupply, fuel and go now?) just got better as well. All the potential missions for the Dragon now make a lot more sense and extend much farther when you add a spaceship into the equation.
All they need to do now is make an IPO and they’ve got the funds to colonize mars while Elon retains controlling interest so the vision doesn’t get lost… Oh also, if anyone thinks he’s lost his way with regard to vision, the press conference should have buried that idea… he said some really important things.
Ken wrote: he said some really important things.
Yeah, it’s damn rare that a CEO comes along who will actually speak clearly and simply (the words, not the delivery) about his company’s vision. I really liked the bit about warning his investors that “maximizing profits is not my top priority”.
I get a feeling that he’ll develop a SpaceX Astronaut Corps, and that he has plans far beyond “providing a service”.
Nice work on the article, Rand. (I figure I owe you that for all the chops-busting I do on your political posts.)
Ken, the Dragon is not just a “taxi,” though that is perhaps a fair description of the freight-only versions built to meet the ISS freight contract. But SpaceX designed Dragon from the start to support long duration flights in Earth orbit or beyond. In this DragonLab configuration it would have expanded life support capability and deployable solar panels for power. Among the many things Elon is reported to have said at the press conference was also that Dragon can equal or exceed Orion in any given particular.
Among the many things Elon is reported to have said at the press conference was also that Dragon can equal or exceed Orion in any given particular.
Not in cost!
By that, I mean SpaceX could build the Dragon with the most expensive labor and materials imagineable and it still wouldn’t cost as much as an Orion.
SpaceX designed Dragon from the start to support long duration flights in Earth orbit or beyond.
Yes it can be on station for long durations, but it is not a habitat. It is habitable for short durations. That makes it a taxi and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it being a taxi. Add legs and it will be a taxi that can land on land.
You do not want to live in the thing for long durations. It is designed to enter environments that a long duration vehicle can not.
Just because something can be used for something doesn’t mean it should be used for it. It makes more sense to use it for what it is best suited for and have additional vehicles better suited for their areas of usage.
For example, Dragon doesn’t carry a lot of fuel, but a larger ship that does have a reserve capacity of fuel could provide support for various missions that involve Dragon.
Dragon carries enough fuel for the primary mission of rendezvous with the ISS and deorbiting. For the manned version, they’re planning on having a pusher escape system. If I had to guess, they’re going to put additional propellant and an abort rocket motor in what is now the unpressurized cargo area. In the event of an emergency, open the latch valves and the abort motor pushes you clear of the booster stack. If there is no emergency, they’ll have a lot of extra propellant that could be transferred to the ISS or used for different missions.
Not in cost!
Touche, sir.
You do not want to live in the thing for long durations.
True. But that applies equally to Orion. Spam-in-a-can is a non-starter for any serious deep space operation IMHO, regardless of whose “can” we’re talking about. To really explore, a true spaceship is needed with many features – especially vastly more habitable volume per crewperson – than either Dragon or Orion have on offer.
For a long duration mission, I think the capsule would only be used for launch and reentry. The habitable volume could consist of one or more Bigelow type inflatable modules. For a mission that’s months or even years long (e.g. Mars), you’re going to need a lot of room to store consumables and supplies, exercise, and to avoid going stir-crazy. None of the capsule designs is big enough for that.
I envision Dragon as a crew launch/reentry module, that could link up with a much larger spaceship once in orbit, either a space station or even a lunar or interplanetary spacecraft.
Sure, a spaceplane would be ideal for leaving and returning to Earth, but it appears to be pretty difficult to build one. In the meantime, it would be nice to have a standardized launch/reentry module. Maybe Dragon can replace Soyuz as a lifeboat for the ISS.
I think Dragon and its descendants might be around for a long time.
Addendum to my last comment:
It could also be used as a crew transfer vehicle between multiple space stations or other craft.
If I had to guess, they’re going to put additional propellant and an abort rocket motor in what is now the unpressurized cargo area.
Four Dracos gives you 360 pounds of thrust which isn’t probably enough to get you safely away if the rest of the vehicle explodes. So I would assume you are right about the need to develop and add abort motors. However, I think you may not be right about additional propellant in the trunk. An abort is going to be a short duration burn and it probably has enough fuel now for that. Adding propellant just for the rare abort potential takes away from other objectives.
They intend to add legs and touchdown on land. Four Dracos would not provide enough thrust to do that so I expect those abort motors will actually be landing motors for when there is no abort.