SpaceX to dock with ISS this fall

[pokerfan]

NASA and SpaceX have “technically” agreed to allow the Dragon capsule to dock with the International Space Station this fall, according to SpaceX’s Twitter feed. The Dragon capsule is currently – and tentatively — scheduled to launch aboard a Falcon 9 rocket on November 30, and berth with the ISS 9 days later. Originally, the Dragon was scheduled to just rendezvous and station-keep with the space station on this second flight for Dragon and then dock on a subsequent flight. But after the successful test flight for the first Dragon capsule in Dec. 2010, SpaceX asked NASA to combine the two missions.

“We technically have agreed with SpaceX that we want to combine those flights,” said William Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for space operations, speaking at the post-launch press conference for the STS-135 final shuttle mission. “We are doing all the planning to go ahead and have those missions combined, but we haven’t given them formal approval yet.

http://www.universetoday.com/87772/spacex-pushes-for-mission-to-space-station-on-next-flight

[Phoonzang]

1. Wow, already? These guys mean business.

Wonder when SpaceX will be publicly traded?

[SnakeEyes]

4. Have to say I'm exicited to see this

but part of me wishes they weren't moving this fast as it just fuels the right wingers saying "see what happens when you privatize?"

[kentauros]

9. Except that many of their launch sites are government-run

Flight operations and contracts

They may have their own launch site, but it's still on military land with airspace governed by the military, too. Until these private companies can fund their own range-control, I'm sure most will continue to take advantage of non-privatized military and NASA facilities.

[SnakeEyes]

10. Yeah but that's like saying

well cars are on public roads so the government gets the credit for car innovation.

The point they love to make is that the private space company is innovating and advancing faster than the government without the money NASA needed.

[LongTomH]

12. It's a bit more complex......

US airlines are privately run; we don't have a national 'flag carrier,' like Lufthansa or British Air.

The first successful airliner, the DC3, was commissioned by American Airlines then designed built by Douglas. However, the innovations that led to the successful DC3 came from concepts pioneered by the NACA, National Advisory Commission on Aeronautics, NASA's predecessor. The high-lift wings and streamlined cowlings around the engines came from NACA's wind tunnels. The military and NACA also developed the radio navigation system used by the DC3 and other early airliners.

Remember also, the airlines depend on a federally funded air traffic control system.

Actually, the airlines would never have gotten a start without the government subsidy represented by air mail. The DC3 is called the first successful airliner because it was the first that could make a profit from passenger revenues. That airmail subsidy is still a big source of revenue for airlines.

I'm certain that the development of 'private' space travel will be very similar, with companies like Space-X using technology developed by NASA and the Air Force and largely dependent on NASA as a source of revenue.

[Posteritatis]

11. If they can see far, etc.

Hitting a good pace like this certainly comes easier when someone's at least started to prepare the road ahead of them. If it helps the private firms get up some good momentum on their own projects, more power to 'em.

[jimlup]

2. How long before they go "manned"

[RT Atlanta]

3. I'd like to know more about this too

Not sure whether SpaceX has a manned operations divsion (although I presume they do since they are building a human-rated version). From there, not sure whether the capsule will have to go through a human-rating certification process by the FAA - although here again I suspect they will - before they can attempt to fly with humans.

It would surprise me if SpaceX orbits an astronaut within the next 2 years.

[pokerfan]

5. I believe crew-rating the Dragon is at least three years out

The Dragon has some cool safety features not the least of which is an escape system that works throughout the entire launch sequence. And being a capsule, they can land anywhere, unlike the space shuttle.

[bananas]

6. SpaceX goal has been Mars settlement

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=228x81110
and http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=228&topic_id=81110&mesg_id=81193

[bananas]

7. I don't thnk they have two seperate divisions

for manned and unmanned.
They are making design decisions based on an integrated set of goals:
- very short term: cargo and station-keeping for ISS
- short term: crew to ISS
- mid to long term: crew to Mars surface and back

[pokerfan]

8. Bob Zubrin (Mars Society) has retooled Mars Direct to use SpaceX hardware

What would a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct">Mars Direct mission utilizing SpaceX hardware (Falcon Heavy) look like? Listen to this interview.

SpaceX's Falcon Heavy will have a launch capacity of 53 metric tons to low Earth orbit. This means that if a conventional hydrogen-oxygen chemical rocket upper stage were added, it could send 17.5 tons on a trajectory to Mars, placing 14 tons in Mars orbit, or landing 11 tons on the Martian surface.

Changes to Mars Direct: Two person crew instead of four. Three launches per mission instead of two: An Earth Return vehicle, a Mars Ascent vehicle, and a Mars Habitat. All Dragon derived vehicles.

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1583-BWB-2011-06-28.mp3