Another One-Week Slip

The Dragon flight has been pushed off again, apparently to do some final validation on code. There’s entirely too much political pressure on the successful outcome of this flight.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s the official release from SpaceX: “After reviewing our recent progress, it was clear that we needed more time to finish hardware-in-the-loop testing and properly review and follow up on all data. While it is still possible that we could launch on May 3rd, it would be wise to add a few more days of margin in case things take longer than expected. As a result, our launch is likely to be pushed back by one week, pending coordination with NASA.”

27 thoughts on “Another One-Week Slip”

  1. If anything goes wrong the criticism will be merciless so I do not blame them for taking the time extra time to be as sure as possible.

    On the other hand I hope McClellan is not the test conductor.

  2. There was also an Atlas V launch scheduled for May 5, and it’s apparently being moved up to May 3. (per NSF.com)

  3. Speaking for myself, it’s hard to remember a launch that I’ve so eagerly anticipated. I’d have to go back to STS-1 at least, and maybe back to Apollo.

    And for an unmanned test flight, no less.

    1. I think your bet is entirely safe. They are entirely enjoying having the government as a customer right about now.

      1. I think your bet is entirely safe. They are entirely ‘enjoying’ having the government as a customer right about now.

        FIFY. Nobody _enjoys_ working for NASA.

        Nobody.

    2. Understanding that the dates on the manifest are not launch dates, they have about a half a dozen this year including two resupply which I would think they will have to keep on schedule and the FH demo which is really important for their future.

      So while this flight may slip a bit I don’t expect the resupply missions do.

      The FH is only likely to slip if they discover a reason to.

  4. When I first heard, many months ago I think, that NASA was questioning on-board software I got a sick feeling in my core. I’ve worked with a lot of programmers for over thirty years and what they don’t know is frightening. Even more frightening is what they think they do know because they’ve read it in a book. Worse still is when they implement something and it doesn’t work the way the book said it would and they still won’t believe the book is wrong. There really is no such thing as ‘software engineering.’ Experience and good instincts are much more valuable.

    This can lead to disaster. I hope I’m wrong and they haven’t introduced problems where none originally existed.

    1. Is there any evidence at all that any of what you say is actually what’s happening? Could it not just be a hard problem that’s taking time to solve? And what evidence is there that it’s NASA that’s the source of the delay?

      1. OTOH, it could be like when the upgraded Merlin had residual thrust. They haven’t really tested the dracos in close proximity to another object. It could be that precise control is not as easy to achieve as they hoped. I believe the normal dracos produce about 90lbs of thrust each. I don’t think they are throttle-able. Which means on/off has to be very precise and if they have some residual thrust that could make things tricky.

        1. I don’t think officials necessarily means NASA. I think it’s more likely that the author was being imprecise. And I wasn’t questioning whether it was a matter of looking at the software — that’s right there in the story and obvious — my question was about whether it was the sage NASA folks putting the brakes on the devil-may-care, inexperienced, SpaceX kids who are seemingly shocked that reality doesn’t conform to a textbook equation.

          1. I know this article doesn’t specify who the ‘officials’ were, but I’m pretty sure I read somewhere else that it was NASA. The review they refer to could have been an internal review of the first flight which is why my OTOH comment.

          2. My understanding is this is an action item that came out of the Launch Readiness Review with NASA that Miss Shotwell mentioned at the National Space Symposium last week as having “passed with liens”. In that context I understood “official” to mean a government employee.

  5. It is stuff like this that makes being a space cadet so frustrating, even though it happens all the time.

  6. The problem with space is that automation is really hard, and after launch, you don’t have acces when it’s unmanned. So the testing has to be extra rigorous in a less than ideal environment. In other words, not the real environment.

    1. Keep in mind they’ve tested the software in space already and it came through beautifully including a precision touchdown. It is possible they discovered a problem then and just didn’t tell us, but I do not get that impression.

      1. There’s a lot more to rendezvous and precision prox ops than there is to a 2.5 orbit solo mission.

        1. Of course, but the original software was already designed, not only to position the craft in any orientation, but to do it with up to two dracos being defective. The thing that’s harder to know is not rotation, but translation as you are near another object. I hope we get a definitive answer from SpaceX in their updates.

  7. Rand,

    [[[There’s entirely too much political pressure on the successful outcome of this flight.]]]

    I agree and you may thank CCDev (or whatever today’s name is…) for it. Once Constellation was killed it got the spotlight put on COTS and CRS as being on the critical path. I really hope its a perfect flight. If not I expect the foes of CCDev will block any future COTS attempts and work to get SpaceX CRS contract killed as well. Yes, the pressure must be huge when you consider what is riding on this flight.

    1. Nobody put them in this position. They walked into this, instead of steering clear of politics and focusing on commercial customers.

      1. True. And Elon Musk does seem to be drawn to government contacting and investment like a moth to the flame. Look at Telsa and Solar City.

        Hopefully SpaceX will be able to put NASA behind them soon and start focusing on serving commercial customers like Bigelow and offering Dragonlab flights.

Comments are closed.