CCiCap - Commercial Crew Integrated Capability

Автор Salo, 17.09.2012 14:53:48

« назад - далее »

0 Пользователи и 1 гость просматривают эту тему.


tnt22

http://spacenews.com/commercial-crew-vehicles-may-fall-short-of-safety-threshold/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
ЦитироватьCommercial crew vehicles may fall short of safety threshold

by Jeff Foust — May 30, 2017
Спойлер

While both SpaceX and Boeing are making progress with their Dragon v2 (left) and CST-100 Starliner spacecraft in terms of improving their safety, both are facing challenges to meet a specific safety threshold in their contracts. Credit: SpaceX artist's concept and Boeing
[свернуть]
WASHINGTON — The two companies developing commercial crew vehicles for NASA may not be able to meet a safety threshold specified in their contracts, an agency safety panel found.

At a meeting May 25 of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, members said Boeing and SpaceX were making good progress in improving the safety of their vehicles in advance of test flights scheduled to begin within the next year, but have yet to achieve a key requirement in their Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) contracts.

That requirement is known as loss of crew (LOC), a measure of the probability of death or permanent disability of one or more people on a spacecraft during a mission. The CCtCap contracts included a requirement that the spacecraft have a LOC of 1 in 270 or better. The shuttle program, by comparison, had a LOC of 1 in 90 at the time of the program's retirement in 2011.
Спойлер
"The number one safety-related concern for the program is the current situation with respect to the estimate of loss of crew," Donald McErlean, a former engineering fellow at L-3 Communications and a member of the panel, said at the meeting. "The threshold values were considered to be challenging, and both contractors currently have a challenge to meet that precise number."

McErlean didn't identify specific issues the companies were facing in their efforts to meet that LOC threshold. One factor, though, he said, is how the companies and NASA calculate the risk to the spacecraft fr om orbital debris and micrometeoroids while in orbit.

"The numbers themselves depend very heavily on the model of orbital debris that one utilizes to develop the risk to the system," he said. "That is a driving factor in determining the potential for loss of crew." Those models, he said, "have been validated to some degree, but they are not perfect."

That assessment matches a February report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which also warned that the companies could face problems reaching that LOC requirement. It cited the orbital debris and micrometeoroid environment of low Earth orbit as one of the main safety risks for the program.

If either or both companies can't meet the LOC requirement with the spacecraft, NASA may have to issue waivers for that requirement. "That remains a risk to the program that will have to be addressed, in all likelihood, by a risk acceptance waiver," McErlean said.

"It may be necessary to do a formal risk acceptance of the variance from the stipulated goal," he said later in the meeting. "We would remind NASA that that risk acceptance, including a complete presentation of the alternatives and the consequences, should be made formally, and that risk acceptance signed off by appropriate authorities."

Despite the concern about the potential risk of not meeting the LOC requirement, McErlean praised the companies for working to improve the safety of their vehicles, in part because of the motivation to try and reach that safety threshold placed in the CCtCap contract.

"We are very pleased to report that those requirements did drive systemic behavior on the part of both contractors," he said. "They have expended considerable time and energy in making their systems considerably safer than they might have been without such an incentive, and they have achieved considerable progress from the first time the estimates were made."

He also warned against placing too much emphasis on the LOC metric alone. "One has to be judicious in how one applies these statistical estimates," he said. "One has to look at whether or not the contractors have expended the necessary effort and engineering activity to make the system as safe as they conceivably can and still perform the mission."

He added that he was "very positive" both companies were doing so. "There was no known or indicated area wh ere with, by spending even a small amount of money, the contractor could have made their systems considerably safer."

Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA associate administrator for human exploration and operations, has also warned against focusing too much on the LOC statistic alone in weighing risks of flying crewed spacecraft.

"Blindly striving to achieve a statistical loss of crew number may drive you to design a system that is less safe," he said in a February speech at a Federal Aviation Administration commercial space transportation conference here. That sounded counterintuitive, he acknowledged, but noted measures that can, on paper, reduce the LOC figure, like the addition of redundant systems, can increase a vehicle's complexity and result in unforeseen failure modes.

The use of LOC is good when comparing the relative safety of different designs in the same model. "But it's not a very good tool for determining absolute risk," Gerstenmaier. "That really misleads, sometimes, our overall design decisions."

"I really don't have a better method than to use this as a absolute measure of safety," he said of LOC. "We just need to be careful when we discuss these numbers."
[свернуть]

tnt22

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/commercial-crew-providers-significant-progress-flights/
ЦитироватьCommercial Crew providers making "significant progress" toward first flights
June 27, 2017 by Chris Gebhardt



As the mid-way point of 2017 arrives, both of NASA's Commercial Crew Program service providers are making significant progress toward the first uncrewed test flights of their Dragon and Starliner capsules.

At their second quarter 2017 meeting, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel noted this progress while also discussing outstanding concerns regarding the program and vehicles as well as the positive steps being taken to address these matters.

Commercial Crew progress:
Спойлер
During last month's NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) second quarter meeting in Huntsville, Alabama, the panel noted the "significant progress" both Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) providers are making toward their first uncrewed demo flights.



...

Notwithstanding the ultimate commencement of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP) flight operations, the ASAP noted its concern and recommendations regarding CCP provider System Engineering & Integration (SE&I) process and controls.
 
...

... the ASAP's previously put forward a recommendation at a meeting in first quarter 2017 that NASA "require the commercial crew providers to produce verifiable evidence of the practice of rigorous, disciplined, and sustained SE&I principles in support of NASA certification and operation of commercial crew transportation services to the International Space Station (ISS)."

Based on the wording of the CCtCap contracts, both providers are allowed to utilize their corporate policies rather than NASA-traditional SE&I processes; however, the contracts also stipulate that NASA will confirm – through documentation, requirements verification, and deliverables – that both company's have adhered to SE&I principals.



Nonetheless, the ASAP "remains concerned."

According to the minutes of Dr. Sanders' remarks, "the ASAP remains concerned that no amount of insight or oversight by the CCP can ensure that the appropriate level of engineering discipline and control is employed unless the providers have internalized the need for it and made it an inherent part of their corporate culture."

...

Dr. Sanders' opening statement closed with a reminder of an already-established ASAP recommendation that "Regardless of the methodology employed, both providers need to demonstrate that the proper controls are in place to ensure hardware is properly qualified, hazards are identified and appropriately mitigated, and the system is employed within the constraints of that qualification."



As the meeting progressed (which covered a wide-range of NASA-related programs), Dr. McErlean presented a dedicated Commercial Crew Program briefing.

A large portion of this section, unsurprisingly, focused on the LOC (Loss Of Crew) gap between what Dragon and Starliner are independently capable of providing v. what the CCtCap contracts require of them.

As previously reported by NASASpaceflight.com, the CCtCap contracts establish a minimum baseline requirement that Dragon and Starliner each meet a LOC criteria of 1 in 270 – meaning for every 270 flights, only one would result in an LOC event.



Currently, there is a gap in what the data analysis shows both Starliner and Dragon are capable of providing and that 1 in 270 requirement.

While NASA has rightly not made the current LOC number for each vehicle public (as both providers are still working on this requirement), Kathy Lueders, NASA's CCP manager, stated earlier this year to the NASA Advisory Council that "I will tell you that we are having a hard time getting to 1 in 270. But we're not done yet."

...

However, after NASA set this requirement and signed the CCtCap contracts with SpaceX and Boeing, more stringent MMOD (Micro Meteoroid Orbiting Debris) protection requirements were imposed on everyone (NASA included).



This new MMOD requirement has made it "challenging" to reach the 1 in 270 LOC benchmark.

At the NAC meeting in March, Ms. Lueders stated that SpaceX and Boeing were "still updating MMOD protection and a few other critical areas including looking at operational controls, and when we get through all that we'll be in a better place to talk about our final LOC projection."

At the ASAP meeting, Dr. McErlean reminded the panel that the LOC contract requirements were a recommendation of the ASAP and that the panel remains happy it was included because the requirement "appeared to drive systemic behavior by both providers ... in making their systems substantially safer than they might have been without such an incentive and [that both providers] have achieved considerable progress fr om their initial LOC estimates."



However, Dr. McErlean noted that "the threshold values [are] acknowledged to be challenging, and both providers are still striving to meet that precise number."

From here, a discussion that NASA might have to accept the risk and/or that waivers might have to be processed if the LOC requirement can't be met took center stage.

According to the ASAP meeting minutes, Dr. McErlean said that "While these LOC numbers were known to be challenging, and both providers have been working toward meeting the challenge, it is conceivable that in both cases the number may not be met."

However, Dr. McErlean cautioned the ASAP and NASA about rushing to judgement on the current and whatever the final LOC number for each vehicle is.



"The ASAP is on record agreeing with the Program that one must be judicious in how one applies these statistical estimates.  In the case of LOC, the numbers themselves depend very heavily on the orbital debris model used to develop the risk to the system [as] orbital debris is a driving factor in determining the potential for LOC.

"The orbital debris models have been used and validated to some degree, but they are not perfect.

"One must be wary of being too pernicious in the application of a specific number and must look at whether the providers have expended the necessary efforts and engineering activity to make the systems as safe as they can and still perform the mission."



To that last point, Dr. McErlean reported that both providers indeed "expended the necessary efforts and engineering activity to make the systems as safe as they can."

Importantly, too, Dr. McErlean noted that there was no evidence that spending more money on closing the LOC gap for both providers "could [make] their systems considerably safer."

The ASAP at large concurred with this finding and noted their pleasure at the progress made in closing the LOC gap for both Dragon and Starliner.

However, the panel did discuss the possible necessity "for NASA to do a formal risk acceptance of the variance from the requirement."

To this point, the ASAP discussed a recommendation of how NASA would do this – including the need for a formal and "complete presentation of the alternatives and the consequences" as well as "the rationale for the path that [is] ultimately chosen" for risk acceptance before any such rationale is signed off on by the appropriate authority.


In this case, Mr. John Frost noted that that authority is likely "at the highest levels of NASA."

Importantly, though, the ASAP meeting wasn't just focused on the panel's concerns.  Considerable time was dedicated to a discussion and review of the progress both providers continue to make and wh ere each provider is in terms of schedule milestones for their first uncrewed demo flights.

Presently, Boeing is moving through software release for Starliner, and the Starliner STA (Structural Test Article) is progressing through its test regime.

Meanwhile, the first Starliner spacecraft – the one that will fly the OFT mission next year – has undergone initial power activation, and the builds for Starliner spacecrafts two and three are progressing inside Boeing's Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at the Kennedy Space Center.



For SpaceX, Dragon has completed its first pressurized space suit test and final assembly of the craft for SpX Demo-1 has begun – all while SLC-39A at Kennedy is undergoing final acceptance testing ahead of the upcoming installation of the Crew Access Arm onto the pad's Fix Service Structure tower.

Moreover, the new, full-thrust (Block 5) Merlin 1D engines are in developmental hot fire testing at McGregor, and NASA has received the detailed CDR (Critical Design Review) of the engine for crew mission certification.

Finally, the ASAP noted that "Both providers have completed parachute testing for landings and are moving into production and qualification."

Moreover, SpaceX and Boeing have implemented solutions to several issues flagged by NASA toward the end of last year, and very few new issues have been identified to date.

(Images: NASA, L2 Shuttle and L2 artist Nathan Koga – The full gallery of Nathan's (SpaceX Dragon to MCT, SLS, Commercial Crew and more) L2 images can be *found here*)
[свернуть]

LRV_75

Как же много ASAP , ASAP, ASAP  ...
Главное не наличие проблем, главное способность их решать.
У каждой ошибки есть Имя и Фамилия

tnt22

Цитировать Chris B - NSF‏ @NASASpaceflight 21 мин. назад

Dragon, Orion and Starliner on stage. I'd love a speech from those three.

tnt22

https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2017/07/20/nasas-commercial-crew-program-target-flight-dates/
ЦитироватьNASA's Commercial Crew Program Target Flight Dates
Posted on July 20, 2017 at 7:00 am by Stephanie Martin.

The next generation of American spacecraft and rockets that will launch astronauts to the International Space Station are nearing the final stages of development and evaluation. NASA's Commercial Crew Program will return human spaceflight launches to U.S. soil, providing reliable and cost-effective access to low-Earth orbit on systems that meet our safety and mission requirements. To meet NASA's requirements, the commercial providers must demonstrate that their systems are ready to begin regular flights to the space station. Two of those demonstrations are uncrewed flight tests, known as Orbital Flight Test for Boeing, and Demonstration Mission 1 for SpaceX. After the uncrewed flight tests, both companies will execute a flight test with crew prior to being certified by NASA for crew rotation mission. The following schedule reflects the most recent publicly-releasable dates for both providers.

Targeted Test Flight Dates:
 Boeing Orbital Flight Test: June 2018
 Boeing Crew Flight Test: August 2018
 SpaceX Demonstration Mission 1: February 2018
 SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2 (crewed): June 2018

This entry was posted in Boeing, CCtCap, Commercial Spaceflight, International Space Station, Kennedy Space Center, SpaceX and tagged Boeing Commercial Crew, Commercial Crew, SpaceX on July 20, 2017 by Stephanie Martin.

tnt22

https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2017/07/20/recovery-and-rescue-teams-practice-with-full-size-crew-dragon-trainer/
ЦитироватьRecovery and Rescue Teams Practice with Full-Size Crew Dragon Trainer
Posted on July 20, 2017 at 12:00 pm by Amanda Griffin.

SpaceX, NASA and Air Force personnel who will help astronauts out of the SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft returning fr om a mission to the International Space Station have begun practicing for that using a full-size model of the spacecraft. In certain unusual recovery situations, SpaceX may need to work with the U.S. Air Force to send parajumpers to recover astronauts from the capsule in the water. Recently, the Recovery Trainer was lowered into the Indian River Lagoon near NASA's Kennedy Space Center so Air Force pararescue and others could learn techniques for getting aboard the spacecraft and rescuing the astronauts.
Спойлер
Such rescue practice is typical of all human missions because it gives astronauts and support teams many opportunities to practice and refine the critical steps in safely rescuing the crew in a contingency situation. A number of procedures will be developed and then practiced over time to deal with recoveries in many different conditions.

SpaceX is developing the Crew Dragon in partnership with NASA's Commercial Crew Program to carry astronauts to the International Space Station. The Recovery Trainer was built by SpaceX and subsequently modified by Kennedy's Prototype Lab to SpaceX specifications. The same dimensions as the outside mold line of a Crew Dragon, it has indicators wh ere thrusters will be and other markings on the exterior. Inside, the crew area matches that of the operational spacecraft and includes an instrument panel.
[свернуть]

Photo Credit: SpaceX

This entry was posted in Commercial Spaceflight, NASA, SpaceX and tagged Commercial Crew Program, Crew Dragon on July 20, 2017 by Amanda Griffin.

tnt22

http://spacenews.com/nasa-and-companies-express-growing-confidence-in-commercial-crew-schedules/
ЦитироватьNASA and companies express growing confidence in commercial crew schedules
by Jeff Foust — July 21, 2017


NASA, SpaceX and Boeing expect test flights of their Crew Dragon and CST-100 Starliner vehicles to take place next year after extensive delays. Credit: SpaceX artist's concept and Boeing

WASHINGTON — Both NASA and the two companies developing commercial crew vehicles say those efforts remain on schedule for test flights that are in some cases less than a year away.

NASA published July 20 what it called "the most recent publicly-releasable dates" of the test flights of Boeing's CST-100 Starliner and SpaceX's Crew Dragon vehicles. Each company, under terms of Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) contracts awarded in September 2014, are required to first fly an uncrewed test flight of their spacecraft, followed by one with astronauts on board.

The latest SpaceX schedule calls for an uncrewed test flight in February 2018, followed by a crewed test flight in June 2018. Boeing's schedule anticipates an uncrewed test flight in June 2018 and a crewed test flight in August 2018.
Спойлер
Those scheduled have slipped considerably fr om the original CCtCap announcement. At that time, NASA expected both vehicles to have completed their test flights and be certified for regular crew transportation missions to the International Space Station by the end of 2017. Both companies have suffered technical problems that have pushed back those flights, in some cases by more than a year.

A leading NASA official, though, sounded more confident about the companies' efforts towards those 2018 test flights. "Commercial crew is making great progress," said Kirk Shireman, ISS program manager, in a July 18 speech at the ISS Research and Development Conference here.

"By the next ISS R&D Conference, I expect to have flown the first Boeing CST-100 Starliner and SpaceX Crew Dragon flight," he said. The 2018 conference is scheduled for late July in San Francisco.

In an on-stage interview with Shireman at the conference July 19, SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk also expressed confidence his company's schedule. "Our primary focus will be on, particularly over the next year or so, our Dragon 2 spacecraft," he said, using the company's name for what NASA calls Crew Dragon.

"What's our primary focus? Making sure we stay on track for getting crew to station, as we promised NASA, around the middle of next year," he said. "That's going to be real exciting."

Musk acknowledged that developing the Crew Dragon spacecraft has been "way more difficult" than the cargo version of Dragon currently flying. "As soon as people enter the picture, it's really a giant step up in making sure things go right," he said. "The oversight from NASA is much tougher."

"We have some debates going into next year about some of the technical details," he said of SpaceX's relationship with NASA. However, he later described those debates as minor "technical bones of contention" on unspecified "esoteric" issues.

Boeing is also confident in its ability to maintain its schedule. "We are in the middle of a very aggressive test program," said Chris Ferguson, director of Starliner crew and mission systems at Boeing, during a July 20 panel session at the conference. Prior to the flight tests, he said, is a pad abort test planned for early 2018 at White Sands, New Mexico, as well as ongoing parachute and drop tests.

Ferguson, in his presentation, said the flight test program would run from June through December of 2018, followed by NASA certification, and in an interview earlier in the day said those launches would take place in the "latter part of next year." He clarified, though, that the schedule of June and August test flights remains in place.

"Our schedule hasn't changed from June," he said in the interview. "That said, we've got challenges we've got to deal with and we'll let the schedule fall out wh ere it will."

Boeing may offer more clarity about that test flight schedule in the near future. Ferguson said that United Launch Alliance, who will launch the CST-100 on Atlas 5 rockets, requires a "non-handshake type of agreement" about 12 months before launch. "If there's going to be movement, of which there's been nothing planned yet, it's going have to occur soon just to keep it consistent with what ULA wants," he said.

Another upcoming milestone is the selection of a NASA astronaut to fly on the crewed flight test along with a Boeing test pilot. "Traditionally it's been about [launch] minus 12 months," he said of prior crew selections. "I think what they would like to do is have some schedule assurance before they go ahead and assign crews. Once they feel comfortable that they're about 12 months out from a crewed flight launch, I think you can see an assignment come out."

Ferguson said the first operational, or post-certification mission (PCM) for the CST-100 could fly as soon as next December, but that schedule is dependent on both the vehicle's development as well as ISS needs. "I think the next crewed mission to be assigned would launch in May of 2019," he said. "We're keeping a close eye on that. NASA has a void they'd like to fill there. We'd like to be there to fill it for them."
[свернуть]

silentpom

интересна, а какая теперь будет САС?

Apollo13

Цитироватьsilentpom пишет:
интересна, а какая теперь будет САС?
САС пилотируемого Дракона не изменилась. Ноги отпали, а вместе с ними реактивная посадка на сушу. Соответственно у грузового Дракона отпали и двигатели.

silentpom

да, но тогда надобность в супердрако и такой схеме САС выглядит странно

makandser

Цитироватьsilentpom пишет:
да, но тогда надобность в супердрако и такой схеме САС выглядит странно
Невзирая на отказ от реактивной посадки, корабль всё ещё остаётся потенциально многоразовым, так что ничего странного в такой схеме САС нет. Максимум систем корабля расположено в капсуле и могут быть использованы повторно.

tnt22


Salo

https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2017/10/05/nasas-commercial-crew-program-target-test-flight-dates/
ЦитироватьNASA's Commercial Crew Program Target Test Flight Dates
Posted on October 5, 2017 at 4:20 pm by Anna Heiney.
          
The next generation of American spacecraft and rockets that will launch astronauts to the International Space Station are nearing the final stages of development and evaluation. NASA's Commercial Crew Program will return human spaceflight launches to U.S. soil, providing reliable and cost-effective access to low-Earth orbit on systems that meet our safety and mission requirements. To meet NASA's requirements, the commercial providers must demonstrate that their systems are ready to begin regular flights to the space station. Two of those demonstrations are uncrewed flight tests, known as Orbital Flight Test for Boeing, and Demonstration Mission 1 for SpaceX. After the uncrewed flight tests, both companies will execute a flight test with crew prior to being certified by NASA for crew rotation missions. The following schedule reflects the most recent publicly releasable dates for both providers.

Targeted Test Flight Dates:
 Boeing Orbital Flight Test: August 2018
 Boeing Crew Flight Test: November 2018
 SpaceX Demonstration Mission 1: April 2018
 SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2 (crewed): August 2018
"Были когда-то и мы рысаками!!!"

Чебурашка

Бгг... 
Товарищи пишут, что NASA специально тормозит программу, выдумывая всё новые и новые требования 

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37802.msg1732237#msg1732237

ЦитироватьIt is almost as if NASA doesn't want those vehicles to ever fly. Every few months NASA comes up with yet another new set of requirements for some previously unlisted feature Very disappointing. And I can imagine extremely frustrating for both Boeing and SpaceX.

:D:D:D

Paleopulo

ЦитироватьЧебурашка пишет:
Бгг...
Товарищи пишут, что NASA специально тормозит программу, выдумывая всё новые и 
Все может быть. Но если бы обе компании были бы реально готовы к полету, это звучало бы весомее.

Apollo13

Как интересно

ЦитироватьNASA ASAP notes:

Kathy Leuders and team doing great job

Schedule: SpaceX April 2018 uncrewed, August 2018 crewed.  Boeing August 2018 uncrewed, November 2018 crewed.

MMOD - something about purposely putting some defects on a cargo Dragon so they can inspect on return and refine the MMOD models???

Both providers still doing parachute testing.  SpaceX has several more tests to help reduce uncertainty in the models.  Boeing added six tests (not all drop tests?  something about a high mach test?) for parachutes.  Boeing found issue with shock of parachute deployment during structural testing, being worked.

NASA working on launch commit criteria, including weather/sea states for abort scenarios.  Also looking at on-orbit MMOD inspections.

Approval of the vehicles will occur at Associate Administrator or higher level.

SpaceX continues development of the COPV 2.0.  Some members of the panel visited SpaceX last month to discuss.  NASA is still doing lots of analysis on COPV physics, something about NASA working on some alternative path for the COPVs.

The Merlin turbine disc improvements have been implemented and are in the middle of testing.  One of the panel members with propulsion experience had a chance to go over it with SpaceX.  Referred to it as a bladed disc (blisc) in a single forging.  It's a complex, state of the art forging.

Boeing making progress on RD-180 certification, working through several unspecified design changes.


silentpom

на 28 страничке таблица со стоимостью достваки, видно что у шаттла инфраструктурные затраты 4.5 млдр + 450 лямов за полет. было бы 20 полетов - шаттл был бы королем :)  вот интересно, на что они 4.5 лярда тратили...

LRV_75

4.5 млдр это наверное накладные расходы на содержание производства и какое то R&D
Главное не наличие проблем, главное способность их решать.
У каждой ошибки есть Имя и Фамилия