Launch News Orion EFT-1 Update thread

[Fabri91]

Source?

 

[Urwumpe]

ESA reported setbacks with the SM design.

Not just ESA. Actually both agencies have caused setbacks (mostly because of new requirements, as it reads) to push the PDR 10 months back.

http://aviationweek.com/blog/nasa-slips-orion-em1-flight-2018-0

---------- Post added at 12:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 PM ----------

Shoulda kept it with Lockheed. :shifty:

Lockheed contributed to the 10 month delay. :tiphat:

 

[N_Molson]

Its ok for me. I can wait 50 years if needed, though probably not a lot more. As long as the flights and the hardware are as well-prepared as this one, I'm confident we'll make it to Mars. Better a 10 months delay and more lab-testing rather than a SM with 2 solar panels that don't unfold correctly once in space or another annoying glitch of that sort.

 

[Urwumpe]

Its ok for me. I can wait 50 years if needed, though probably not a lot more. As long as the flights and the hardware are as well-prepared as this one, I'm confident we'll make it to Mars. Better a 10 months delay and more lab-testing rather than a SM with 2 solar panels that don't unfold correctly once in space or another annoying glitch of that sort.

PDR or preliminary design review takes places before the first piece of hardware is even produced, long before the CDR or critical design review, which is the milestone before production.

in the PDR, you mostly check that all the tens of thousands of individual specific requirements are not contradicting each other and the performance requirements can be achieved by the design.

In the CDR, you check if the design can actually be build, for example that it is not involving MC Escher assembly layouts. You also check that the spacecraft can be build by available tools, workers and processes (And not require magic or elves) In the CDR, you also check if the test plans are complete and capable of making sure that every requirement can be checked accurately during testing.

 

[N_Molson]

And not require magic or elves

Hehe I can imagine parts with a "Made in Lorien" label :rofl:

(forged from Mithril bars produced in dwarven foundries, of course).

 

[STS]

I had been able to watch the full event both Thursday and Friday, because I work with computers, so I am on internet almost all day...

But on Friday I couldn´t follow it from 13:30 GMT to 14:15 GMT, because was coming from job to home. But when I arrived home, I plugged the laptop to the TV and enjoyed the reentry/splashdown with my father, who didn´t believe the ApA was 5800 km.

A big achievement for science and R&D. In Spain, in the news it only took 50 seconds to tell, and only on Friday night.

Edit: Woops, I think I posted in the wrong thread... Sorry....

 

[N_Molson]

A big achievement for science and R&D. In Spain, in the news it only took 50 seconds to tell, and only on Friday night.

50 seconds about a space mission ? Wow, that's great ! Its very rare when its more than 20 over there... One good point for the local media, they used the word "capsule" (capsule) to describe Orion, while they used the word "shuttle" (navette) for everything including Soyuz those last ten years (and probably since the first Shuttle launches) :facepalm:

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Try December 2018, actually.

Ouch.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

PDR or preliminary design review takes places before the first piece of hardware is even produced, long before the CDR or critical design review, which is the milestone before production.

in the PDR, you mostly check that all the tens of thousands of individual specific requirements are not contradicting each other and the performance requirements can be achieved by the design.

In the CDR, you check if the design can actually be build, for example that it is not involving MC Escher assembly layouts. You also check that the spacecraft can be build by available tools, workers and processes (And not require magic or elves) In the CDR, you also check if the test plans are complete and capable of making sure that every requirement can be checked accurately during testing.

How long does each process usually take relative to the whole project time, and the time spent actually building the hardware?

 

[Urwumpe]

How long does each process usually take relative to the whole project time, and the time spent actually building the hardware?

Well, thats a matter of statistics, it is hard to find some good data there on engineering projects, most stuff I can find is about software.

There are the following phases:

Phase | Name
0|Concept Studies (AKA "Pre-Phase A")
A|Concept and Technology development
B|Preliminary Design and Technology Completion
«PDR»|Preliminary Design Review
C|Final Design and Fabrication
«CDR»|Critical Design Review
D|System Assembly, Integration, Test, and Launch
«FRR»| Flight Readiness Review
E|Operations and Sustainment
F|Closeout

You can say coarsely, that Phase "B&C", which represent the classic R&D takes most of the time for aerospace projects, sometimes much more than needed because of political issues, because many projects are constantly kept in Phase 0, A or B forever until getting green-lit. That makes it hard to provide any meaningful statistic there.

Source: NASA Systems Engineering Handbook

 

[C3PO]

How long does each process usually take relative to the whole project time, and the time spent actually building the hardware?

I remember Musk talking about the cost of man-rating the Dragon, he said something like: To make the necessary changes will cost x million $ (can't remember the amount) and the certification a little more than that.

 

[agentgonzo]

Are there any images of the capsule after it's been recovered? It'd be interesting to see close-up photos and see how it looks compared with Apollo capsules.

 

[DaveS]

Are there any images of the capsule after it's been recovered? It'd be interesting to see close-up photos and see how it looks compared with Apollo capsules.

Here you go: http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=272

 

[Izack]

Are there any images of the capsule after it's been recovered? It'd be interesting to see close-up photos and see how it looks compared with Apollo capsules.

Not the best view, but there is this:

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Not the best view, but there is this:

Looks pretty good for the reentry it just went through, at least compared to Apollo 13 after recovery (and I would assume the other Apollo missions?)

 

[statickid]

To be fair- I think Apollo was ESPECIALLY prone to looking bad when the shiny PET layer was ruined during reentry.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Rather crazy to think that Apollo started the trip on a big shiny Saturn V stack, and at the end three astronauts stepped out of a charred and battered CM not much bigger than my car.

Reminds me of an unattributed quote:

Life is not a journey to the grave with intentions of arriving safely in a pretty well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out and loudly proclaiming ... WOW! What a ride!

 

[kamaz]

Jacket patch:

 

[Astro SG Wise]

Shoulda kept it with Lockheed. :shifty:

I was sorta thinking the same thing. I know that the international partnership is great and all, but couldn't we just make our own SM? It's not like the ESA patented 4 solar panels sticking out the sides, right?

---------- Post added at 12:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 AM ----------

Not the best view, but there is this:

You know, I am just thinking about how famous these pictures might be in a century. Oh, the joy of seeing the open parachutes over the Pacific Ocean! Can't wait till it's in business!

 

[DaveS]

I was sorta thinking the same thing. I know that the international partnership is great and all, but couldn't we just make our own SM? It's not like the ESA patented 4 solar panels sticking out the sides, right?

---------- Post added at 12:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 AM ----------



You know, I am just thinking about how famous these pictures might be in a century. Oh, the joy of seeing the open parachutes over the Pacific Ocean! Can't wait till it's in business!

The Orion SM is ESA's way of paying their share of ISS operations costs. Previously it was through the ATVs but now that has come to end, ESA had to find some other way to pay the costs. The only thing that came close to the actual costs was two Orion Service Modules.

NASA accepted this and here things stand today.