SpaceX F9 - CRS-20 - SLC-40

[e-FTW]

NASA's B roll for the CRS-20 launch. Lots of new and interesting video moments.

Watching that landing with no sound and a static camera made it feel like this was normal, and not as sci-fi anymore. But then the smoke cleared and that autonomous orbital rocket that had just landed itself started venting by itself and sci-fi came back.

Also, at 17:30 things get REAL loud, so careful. But it is fascinating to me to hear that tracking camera's motors adjust to the changing path of the rocket. They sound like the 2001 Space Odyssey soundtrack at one point!

 

[Grendal]

Dragon 1 - End of an epic journey.

Good splashdown of Dragon confirmed, completing the 20th and final Space Station resupply mission for SpaceX’s first iteration of the Dragon spacecraft!

SpaceX on Twitter

 

[ecarfan]

The successful track record of Cargo Dragon is a very impressive accomplishment by a private space company. I believe it has had a perfect record in space, correct? The only Cargo Dragon mission that did not succeed was when the F9 exploded before launch due to the COPV failure. Not Dragon’s fault.

 

[mongo]

The successful track record of Cargo Dragon is a very impressive accomplishment by a private space company. I believe it has had a perfect record in space, correct? The only Cargo Dragon mission that did not succeed was when the F9 exploded before launch due to the COPV failure. Not Dragon’s fault.

Yeah, the capsule did great, but you're mixing two events.
The CRS-7 cargo Dragon was lost was due to a failed strut in the second stage that held the COPV during ascent (and lack of software to arm the parachutes in such an event)..
The COPV failure during the fueling stage for a static fire test destroyed the Amos-6 satellite.

Side note: CRS-7 was carrying the first docking adapter to allow future Crew Dragons to dock.

 

[ecarfan]

You are correct, my error. It was a flawed strut holding a COPV tank, the tank did not initiate the failure, though the tank exploding did cause the loss of the rocket.

 

[mongo]

You are correct, my error. It was a flawed strut holding a COPV tank, the tank did not initiate the failure, though the tank exploding did cause the loss of the rocket.

Well...
Based on the report I read off the Wiki entry I Googled to form my reply:The COPV itself did not fail initially. The strut broke which released the COPV which was positively buoyant and shot up through LOX and hit the top of the LOX tank really hard rupturing it (unsure if they meant the LOX tank, or the COPV). It also ruptured its plumbing venting the Helium into the LOX tank. One or the other lead to a rupture of the LOX tank.
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/public_summary_nasa_irt_spacex_crs-7_final.pdf

 

[ecarfan]

Okay man, let it go...

Eric Berger published a look back at Cargo Dragon history. The spacecraft that utterly transformed SpaceX has flown its last mission

I love this story. Quote:
——————————————————————————————————————-
Over the next half-decade, SpaceX would design, develop, and test its Cargo Dragon spacecraft. As usual, the company looked to cut costs and upend the traditional aerospace model. For example, to store supplies for the ride into space, Dragon would need to have a mix of powered lockers (both to keep science experiments cold in refrigerators, as well as provide astronauts with a treat such as real ice cream) as well open bays that larger bags could be strapped into.

For the lockers, SpaceX sought out the vendor used by the space station program. The existing locker design required two latches to open and close each compartment, and the vendor wanted $1,500 per latch. This seemed way too expensive. Around that time, during a restroom break, a SpaceX engineer found inspiration as he contemplated the latch on a stall. Perhaps, he wondered, the company's in-house machinists might be able to make a similar latch. With $30 in parts, the company fabricated its own locking mechanisms that proved more reliable than the expensive, aerospace-rated latches.
———————————————————————————————————————

So a SpaceX engineer is sitting on the john looking at that simple latch holding the stall door closed and thinks “Hmm...with some mods that could do what we want it to do for way less than $1,500...”.

 

[SMAlset]

Crap totally spaced out on it this morning and obviously was home to watch it. I love watching these live, more exciting knowing it’s happening right then.

Happy to see they had a successful mission though.

 

[bxr140]

To be fair, the $1500 vendor latch is probably made out of $30 "of parts" too...

 

[e-FTW]

To be fair, the $1500 vendor latch is probably made out of $30 "of parts" too...

Good point: much like many products, the cost is not in the materials, but in the design, engineering, testing, certification, rinse-wash-repeat. Space-rating things is clearly expensive. Always required? Nope, as SpaceX has shown for many things.

 

[bxr140]

Good point: much like many products, the cost is not in the materials, but in the design, engineering, testing, certification, rinse-wash-repeat.

In fact that's where I was going with my comment--there's a financial accounting/reporting layer that muddies an apples-to-apples cost comparison. While nobody would argue a latch that came out of a cost-plus project is going to come anywhere close the bottom line of one from a commercial project, the delta isn't necessarily as sensational as implied. Using the financial elements represented in the $1500 latch, one would expect the SpaceX latch to cost at least many hundreds of dollars, if not $1000.

Space-rating things is clearly expensive. Always required? Nope, as SpaceX has shown for many things.

True, and that's the major element to why new space is cheaper than old space--the BOM itself is so much cheaper because a first principals analysis results in components that don't all need to adhere to Apollo-era concepts. T