On May 29th,
2014 Elon Musk, the founder of Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or
SpaceX called the attention of the spaceflight community to the stage where he
was to unveil the Dragon Version 2 spacecraft. It was a show that could hardly
be matched by the best James Bond movie-maker; dramatically lit, smoke effects
and a dazzling spacecraft, revealed as
the curtain seemed to vanish magically! There was also a computer-animated
video depicting a typical mission of Dv2 with special emphasis placed on its
propulsive landing system.
“Now that’s
the way a 21st Century spaceship should land,” Musk stated firmly.
Later Musk
climbed aboard the Dv2 and demonstrated the huge flat-screen control panel,
roomy cabin and sports car seating.
This was the
unveiling of an innovative, game-changing spacecraft of the future that every
space geek in the world dreams about… and it does not get us one step closer, one
day sooner to again launching US astronauts from US soil.
Do not get
me wrong, I am all for SpaceX, I think that the Falcon 9 booster and the Dragon
spacecraft are amazing. I even have a Falcon 9 golf shirt, SpaceX pens,
first-flight patch and a Dragon C1 patch as well as Dragon wallet made of
recycled material. I truly want to see a Dragon spacecraft flying astronauts to
and from space as soon as possible. I even think that Musk is a really cool
guy, especially because he flies around in a Falcon Jet aircraft. Still, however,
the glitz of the Dv2 unveil gave me some thoughts and concerns outside of waving
the “Go SpaceX” pennant.
One of the
promises of NASA’s “commercial” crew program, in which SpaceX is a major
contender, is that the program will, as soon as possible, relieve United States
astronauts from their dependence on the Russian Soyuz in order to get to and
from the International Space Station (ISS). Recent political tensions with the
Russian government have brought to light a simple aspect of that relationship
that some of us considered a half dozen years ago, yet most in the spaceflight
community simply did not want to think about; the Russians can now cut off all
US access to the ISS at will. This has added an undercurrent of urgency to the
“commercial” human spaceflight effort and it is now apparent that we, as a
nation, need the three “commercial” spaceflight companies to move ahead at
their best speed. Let us all keep in mind that America’s investment in the ISS
is in the neighborhood of $80 Billion.
Leading the pack
among the “commercial” spaceflight providers has always been SpaceX. Their
Falcon 9 booster is rapidly building a reliability record and their Dragon
spacecraft is making flights to and from the ISS with ocean splashdowns handled
simply and inexpensively. Yet, on March 18th of 2010, SpaceX President Gwynne
Shotwell testified before Senate committee for Assessing Commercial Space Capabilities and stated that SpaceX would reduce the time
needed for Dragon to become a man-rated orbital vehicle because the Dragon, (version
1,) had been designed “from the beginning” to be a manned vehicle. Also, knowing full well that the Dragon would initiate its orbital flying in December of 2010, she told the committee, flatly, that SpaceX could fly astronauts to the ISS in “three years after we initiate." This took the other witnesses giving
testimony in that same Congressional hearing quite by surprise- because they
had just stated it would take them four to seven years to accomplish the same
feat. As of this writing it has been four and one half years after SpaceX "initiated" Dragon's orbital flights and they are no where near flying astronauts. The schedule that SpaceX gave to the Congress at that same time showed
that their Dragon spacecraft would be making its 14th cargo resupply
flight to the ISS in the beginning of 2014. Thus, many in the spaceflight
community saw SpaceX as the basket into which NASA should place all of its
eggs.
SpaceX has
lagged far behind in their projected abilities as testified to the Congress. It
has been four years since Shotwell gave that ambitious statement about flying
crews and they are nowhere close to actually lofting astronauts. Additionally,
the Dragon spacecraft had made just three cargo re-supply flights to the ISS by
the beginning of 2014, instead of the projected 14. The only claim that SpaceX
made to that session of Congress that seems to have held up is the fact that
the version 1 of Dragon was designed from the start to be man-rated, yet we now
have a version 2 of Dragon proposed as SpaceX’s manned vehicle.
My main
question here would be that since the United States is looking to fly US crews
aboard US vehicles as soon as possible and “commercial” providers are supposed
to have that as a part of their mission, would it not be better for our nation if
SpaceX had unveiled a fully flight capable version 1 Dragon rather than a
glitzy prototype of something that has not flown and probably will not fly
anytime soon?
The
propulsive landing system alone on the Dv2 is going to require extensive flight
testing in all sorts of failure modes. Yes, I know that if two go out it can
still land safely. What about other modes? If the vehicle is tumbling through
the upper atmosphere can the system recover- completely, to the ground. Yes, I
know they are retaining the parachute back-up. What about the dead zone, when
the vehicle is too low for the chutes to deploy but still high enough to kill
the crew on impact? How reliable will the new system of super draco motors be
after having been in space for the longest period time that the Dv2 is expected
to be on-orbit? How about longer than that? And these are just a very few of
the off-the-cuff areas that will need to be flight tested on just the
innovative recovery system alone. When you throw in all of the other areas that
will need to be flight tested on this new vehicle, and make no mistake- this IS
a totally new vehicle even though it carries the moniker of “Dragon” on its
side, how many years before it can fly with NASA astronauts and civilian
scientists aboard?
My guess
would be that if SpaceX is determined to use the Dv2 as its human spaceflight
vehicle, it will likely be hung up in testing until 2018 or 2019. Of course I
disregard SpaceX’s predictions as to the flight date. As proof I will point to
the claims made in front of the Congress. Their “two years” were up more than a
year ago, they made their third resupply to the ISS in 2014 rather than their
14th and even their big unveiling show for Dv2 started 22 minutes
late. “On-time, on-date” is a question when it comes to SpaceX.
As a fan of
SpaceX and as a manned spaceflight historian what I would like to see happen is
for them to fly crews to the ISS aboard flight-proven vehicles as soon as
possible. Instead what I am seeing is someone’s fanciful mock-up of Fireball
XL5. Again I know that Musk has stated that what he unveiled that night is a
flight article. But, I ask myself, “flight?” “When?”