the AMOS-6 mishap.
Well the first falcon heavy flight article has already been built and was scheduled to fly in the spring of 2017 before the AMOS-6 mishap. First flight of FH before the end of the year doesn't seem like all that much of a stretch.
And frankly, given their history, I'd place more trust in SpaceX's judgment on matters of safety than I would NASA's.
Accidents as that happen precisely when you are in hurry.
I must remind you that NASA, and not SpaceX, has sent a space capsule intended for men beyond low earth orbit for the first time in forty years.
You guys trust too much in a single man.
6,000 km isn't much different from 400km when compared to the distance of the Moon.
The capsule would only need one supersynchronous flight - Enough for verifying everything works, fast enough for certifying the heatshield and reentry systems. During such a flight, the ECLSS could be verified, the communication system and the navigation system, even if unmanned.
Most other subsystems are already verified during the ISS flights.
The first manned flight could then go straight to the moon. So, instead of launching a commercial payload on the first FH flight, it would need to launch a lunar Dragon.
One audacious test flight before the manned show. That is possible. Slightly risky. But possible.
Yes, and loss of Challenger was also driven partially by schedule pressures.
Precisely because events as Challenger, Columbia and Apollo 1 have happened in the past, we should not push our luck with the same attitude of rushing times and accepting avoidable risks.
Challenger wasn't rushed. Columbia wasn't rushed. Apollo 1 was maybe rushed in general, but even there, taking more time wouldn't have prevented the accident.
All those accidents happened either by taking known risks (Challenger, Columbia) or by lacking the imagination for unknown risks.
The latter could happen to the Dragon. Sure. But the only way to prevent this is to test it. And you can't test for things you don't know yet.
The really high risk for a lunar fly-by is the TLI and the reentry. Unless the propulsion system is modified for the flight, it should not be an issue since it is flight-proven already and should have the necessary DV for mid-course corrections. There are no major maneuvers necessary during the flight, so even a partial failure of the propulsion system doesn't harm.
The TLI is a minor risk because SpaceX has never done such a maneuver. But it should only have small differences to a GTO insertion.
Of course, it needs to be proven that the ECLSS works. The heat shield must show its potential before a human sits there. Should SpaceX use any kind of aerobatics during reentry (Skip reentry), this needs to be certified first.
But beyond that, the flight would be just meat in a tin. Some tourists making a tour around the moon and mostly being challenged by boredom and some amount of space sickness.
It was, absolutely. They wanted to launch it without further delays, despite all risks.Challenger wasn't rushed.
Columbia was the final result of the policy of "accepting avoidable risks", as said. The launch system had a well known and documented flaw and even though, until then, that flaw had not caused fatalities, it was only a matter of time for this to happen.Columbia wasn't rushed.
I don't know how can you say this with confidence. More time, maybe, would have allowed to discover the flaws in cables insulations, or maybe to rethink the hatch in prevision of the need of a fast escape... and so on. On the other hand, the tragedy has allowed to focus the efforts on safety, and thus retrospectively it had a positive effect. But a fact remains: NASA had over-confidence on himself.Apollo 1 was maybe rushed in general, but even there, taking more time wouldn't have prevented the accident.
It's easy for people on a web forum to say that sending people to the moon on a free-return trajectory is easy.
And you can't test for things you don't know yet.
All those accidents happened either by taking known risks (Challenger, Columbia) or by lacking the imagination for unknown risks.
Elon Musk should not rush a manned BEO Dragon mission and risk crew safety. I expect this mission to be delayed for a long time. SpaceX hasn't even been able to increase its launch cadence to where it should be.
It's easy for people on a web forum to say that sending people to the moon on a free-return trajectory is easy.
It was, absolutely. They wanted to launch it without further delays, despite all risks.
Not really - it was already delayed as said.
I've said the same thing: they wanted no further delays. And they choose to launch the damn thing, although it was strong debate about the risk. This is still a rushed approach. Or ill-advised, if you prefer.
Apollo 1 involved taking known risks as well. The crew had specifically expressed concern over flammables in the cabin, but they weren't removed.