space dragon

[Dyna-Soar]

Originally Posted by dhanners

Does Dragon V.2 have parachutes in case the descent rockets malfunction? And I'm no rocket scientist, but it seems like a powered, controlled descent is going to use a heck of a lot fuel. Where is it stored?

It does carry parachutes as a back up, if I remember correctly.

[eagleclaw4935]

You are correct Dyna-Soar. Elon Musk did mention a parchute back up system in the event of a propulsion system mulfuntion.storage of the chutes would be in the nose section simular to Apollo.

[spaceagent-9]

I realize that the bottom has a couture for plasma burn maximum heat shield capacity, but couldn't it just be flattened on the very middle so you don't need the pegs ? isn't that a little more efficient and lighter?

[Paper Kosmonaut]

Originally Posted by spaceagent-9

I realize that the bottom has a couture for plasma burn maximum heat shield capacity, but couldn't it just be flattened on the very middle so you don't need the pegs ? isn't that a little more efficient and lighter?

I guess it's because you want to prevent it from falling over at any time. Otherwise one also could keep using a Soyuz, of course. The innovation for it is to land on solid ground and not topple. Prevents damage to heat shield and outer hull. Easier on the occupants. And furthermore, it looks a lot better than a capsule tipping over on hitting the ground. It has "controlled landing" all over. And although I have a big weak spot for the Soyuz, it hasn't got that "controlled landing" feel about it.

And Les, you are also completely right. That powered descent mode looks like it still needs a lot of tests (the amount of fuel!) but I am very enthusiastic about this one. It looks like spaceflight finally took another step forward.

Reusability is something that will keep flight costs low. And even though the Space Shuttle was meant to do just that, it was all built out of compromises. Which led to long overhaul periods and high maintenance costs. All because it was not fully reusable. Now this one might be really reusable. Now with all the innovations made to the new Falcon 9 we might see the same Dragon and Falcon go in space together for a second time! Now that would really be a next step.

I am not sure about that trunk though. What do they need the fins for? by the time the stack is up in space they have no need at all and as far as I know there never were any issues in rolling during ascent which the engines not could correct.
(adding two more eurocents to the discussion. )

[OhioMike]

Would love to see a 1/24 scale to match the mercury, Gemini, and Apollo versions!

[OhioMike]

Is there any other vehicle right now delivering goods to the ISS other than the spacex dragon or the Soyuz?

[PhantomCruiser]

ESA has the ATV, and Orbital has the Cygnus. ATV can carry more than anything flying right now.

Automated Transfer Vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_(spacecraft)

Oooh! Forgot about JAXA
H-II Transfer Vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comparison of space station cargo vehicles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All of which have an associated paper model.

[Retired_for_now]

The Dragon and Soyuz are the only two that can bring something back from the station - others burn up on the way down.
Fuel requirements for return would be an interesting calculation. Remember, going up you need the big stack to get to orbital velocity/altitude and overcome drag. Coming back down you dump most of that energy with the drag from atmospheric re-entry. All you need is a few minutes of fuel to finish decelerating just before touchdown.
Bringing back the first stage Falcon is easier than you'd think because it's very light after most of the fuel is burned off.
All in all, I'm rooting for all these (Orion, CST-100, Dragon, and Dream Catcher).
Yogi

[Paper Kosmonaut]

Originally Posted by Retired_for_now

Fuel requirements for return would be an interesting calculation. Remember, going up you need the big stack to get to orbital velocity/altitude and overcome drag. Coming back down you dump most of that energy with the drag from atmospheric re-entry. All you need is a few minutes of fuel to finish decelerating just before touchdown.
Bringing back the first stage Falcon is easier than you'd think because it's very light after most of the fuel is burned off.
All in all, I'm rooting for all these (Orion, CST-100, Dragon, and Dream Catcher).
Yogi

That was an interesting little read, especially the part on re-entry. Thanks. And of course the more, the merrier. Dragon, CST-100 an the Sierra Nevada spacecraft are for LEO, Orion has its own field of work amongst them, of course, being the only one designed for deep space expeditions. And wasn't Orion a fully NASA-sponsored project?

(BTW, I think you meant Dream Chaser. I now feel it needs something to catch the dream with. A little Canadarm perhaps?)

[sparky00]

It would be great to see the Dream Chaser become operational. I'm a fan of the Dyna-Soar project, and it would be great to see the manned space plane concept finally come to fruition. I'd love to see a Dream Chaser launch and ride to orbit on an Atlas V.