Jump to content

Talk:Crew Dragon Demo-2: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 150: Line 150:


:The original backup crew for Demo-2 was Glover and Hopkins, but they were later assigned to be the next crew (Crew-1). Lindgren was put in as a backup for the Demo-2 crew in that if either Hurley or Behnken were unable to fly, Lindgren would have substituted for either. Beyond that, though, I don't know what kind of training he had. So yes, there was one backup person for the two-person crew. -- [[User:Wizardimps|Wizardimps]] ([[User talk:Wizardimps|talk]]) 04:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
:The original backup crew for Demo-2 was Glover and Hopkins, but they were later assigned to be the next crew (Crew-1). Lindgren was put in as a backup for the Demo-2 crew in that if either Hurley or Behnken were unable to fly, Lindgren would have substituted for either. Beyond that, though, I don't know what kind of training he had. So yes, there was one backup person for the two-person crew. -- [[User:Wizardimps|Wizardimps]] ([[User talk:Wizardimps|talk]]) 04:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

== Is the capsule named? ==

We say: "'''''The spaceship used in the launch was named Endeavour, in honor of its namesake Space Shuttle.'''''"

It's true that Bob & Doug did say that - but I have two questions and an observation about that:

# Did they have the right to name it? They are NASA employees - but the craft doesn't belong to NASA - it's the property of SpaceX. It's not like previous NASA craft where NASA owned it and could name it as they pleased.
# What EXACTLY is named? The "spaceship used in the launch" according to us - but what was "used in the launch" the ENTIRE spaceship - which kinda includes the booster? Was it just the capsule? It kinda has to be just the latter because both booster and capsule are likely to be re-used and on the next flight, this capsule could easily be paired with a different booster.
# Does anyone have ANY other reference to the fact of this naming? Aside from that small video snippet - I can't find any NASA or SpaceX announcement to that effect. NASA did not change the call sign from "DM-2" to "Endeavor" following the announcement - and the SpaceX commentators didn't use the "new" name.

I rather suspect that Bob & Doug thought this up together - and nobody else (and notably SpaceX) agreed with it.

My feeling is that we should say something like "'''''The crew named the capsule Endeavor, in honor of its namesake Space Shuttle.'''''" to clarify both WHAT was named and on who's authority the name was agreed upon (ie, probably just the crew themselves).

The whole thing seems kinda weird - and a bit awkward! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 20:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:35, 2 June 2020

Template:FSS

Infobox issue

The crew size is unable to become seen in the published infobox. What's the matter? --212.186.7.98 (talk) 07:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The issue is now fixed. OkayKenji (talk) 04:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:SpX-DM1 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:31, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Opening line

Gnuplex, ``The SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft carrying NASA astronauts Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley on their way to the International Space Station has safely reached orbit, and the nosecone has been opened."(https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2020/05/30/spacex-demo-2-crew-dragon-reaches-orbit-news-conference-at-630-p-m-edt/)(21:00 BST(DST))

At 4:09 p.m. EDT, the Crew Drago


Rosbif73, I'm uncertain as to what you mean by "NASA designation <> SpaceX designation" in your recent edit summary. Can you clarify? – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:05, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NASA calls this mission "SpaceX Demo-2", but SpaceX calls it "Crew Dragon Demo-2". Both are "official" names, so the previous wording was misleading. Sorry if the edit summary wasn't clear enough. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:33, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosbif73: Do you have a source for this? At best SpaceX calls it the "Crew Demo-1 Mission" in their press kit [1], and on the title of their archived live stream of its launch [2]. It is additionally referred to in the live stream as "SpaceX Crew Demo-1" at the bottom of the screen as part of the live stream's graphics. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 03:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I must have misremembered from the move discussion. Anyway, the important point about my edit is that the designation "SpaceX Demo-2" is NASA's name for the mission and not, as the previous wording implied, the sole official name. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Patch

Mission patch:

  • Twitter;
  • "Astronauts debut mission patch for SpaceX Dragon crewed flight test". collectspace.com. 11 October 2019. Retrieved 12 October 2019. Erick Soares3 (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mission name

@LoganBlade: I'll be the one to bring it to this talk page, then. You asked in a recent edit summary that editors should "please check the NASA and SpaceX websites before reverting corrections", yet you seem to have not followed your own advice as you once again removed the "SpaceX Demo-2" name from the lead despite primary sources having been added to verify that this is an official name for the mission. I'd ask once again to please leave "SpaceX Demo-2" in the lead as one of the mission names as it is an official name for the mission verified by primary sources. Pinging Rosbif73 for some potential input following a previous discussion on this talk page on a similar topic. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 05:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The names most prominently used on the NASA and SpaceX sites seem to be "SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2" or "SpaceX/DM-2" on the NASA side, and "Demo-2" or "Crew Dragon’s second demonstration (Demo-2) mission" on the SpaceX side. Whether these are the WP:OFFICIALNAMES isn't entirely clear, in that the designations and descriptors used have varied over time. The media are using countless combinations and permutations of the words "NASA", "SpaceX", "Crew", "Dragon"; "demo" or "demonstration", "mission", or the abbreviation "DM"; and the number "2" or the word "second"! Quite which of the many variants should be counted as the WP:COMMONNAME isn't clear either. Accordingly, I think we should continue to list the official names in the introduction, and maybe add the DM2 abbreviation too with an appropriate cite. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The name of the SpaceX livestream is "Crew Demo-2".[1] 146.255.182.190 (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjb9FdVdX5I
If I may join the conversation here, I'm a little surpised by the mention of Launch America. I read in #Timeline that "Astronauts (...) are to reveal a name for their Crew Dragon spaceship on the day of the launch", but failed to find out if the name and/or callsign has been revealed so far. I'm not sure that Launch America would be that name. I guess right now this mention matches the principle of least astonishment, but it looks like it's rather a social media tag. Any opinions about this? Gyrostat (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add a current event marker?

The launch is scheduled for the next 3 hours assuming nothing goes wrong, I would add this myself but I'm not exactly a Wikipedia editor so i don't know if it would be applicable or not — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.250.184.135 (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the idea. I added the template. Sam-2727 (talk) 18:56, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 May 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Clear consensus to keep the name, having had extensive deliberations and a clear previous outcome. Fuzheado | Talk 20:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Crew Dragon Demo-2 → SpaceX Demo-2 – See the above discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 07:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the discussion a year ago, Rowan Forest put it best when they said that "the Wikipedia article name should reflect what the test is testing". Important to note is that the article for SpaceX COTS Demo Flight 2 was originally called Dragon C2+; a similar non-requested move discussion from 2012 found an agreement between two editors that "Dragon C2+" was likely not a precise nor concise enough name to distinguish what the mission was; with confusion being expressed as to what "C2+" even meant. Soumya-8974, the editor who introduced this very move request, eventually made a bold move of the page back in March of this year to make the article's title more consistent with SpaceX COTS Demo Flight 1; a move agreeable per Wikipedia's policy on consistent article titles. In the 2019 discussion, Rosbif73 importantly noted of the names being used for Demo-1 at that time, saying "a quick search of news articles reveals a wide variety of names ("DM-1 mission", "SpaceX's Demo-1 Crew Dragon test flight", "the SpaceX Demo-1 mission", "SpaceX Crew Dragon test launch", "Crew Dragon Demonstration Mission 1", etc.)." In a response to a discussion on this talk page mere days ago, Rosbif alluded that this, for the most part, has not changed with Demo-2, writing that "the media are using countless combinations and permutations of the words "NASA", "SpaceX", "Crew", "Dragon"; "demo" or "demonstration", "mission", or the abbreviation "DM"; and the number "2" or the word "second"! Quite which of the many variants should be counted as the WP:COMMONNAME isn't clear either."
While it may be attractive to use two of the names officially used by NASA to refer to these missions, "SpaceX Demo-1" and "SpaceX Demo-2", we are not obligated to use official names per Wikipedia's policy on official names, which allow us to use a different name if such names are not that compatible with Wikipedia's guidelines on how articles should be titled. "SpaceX Demo-1" and "SpaceX Demo-2" are neither concise nor precise enough to be able to distinguish the subjects of their articles, nor do they have any merit to being commonly recognisable names among the swamp of names being used not only by reliable third party sources, but NASA and SpaceX themselves; NASA have used "SpaceX Demo-2",[1][2][3] and "SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2",[3][4], while SpaceX have used "Crew Demo-2",[5][6] and never "SpaceX Demo-2". Since "Crew Dragon Demo-1" and "Crew Dragon Demo-2" are some of the names used in reliable third party sources,[7][8][9] and thus do not violate Wikipedia's policy on disambiguation that states not to "use obscure or made-up names", they are the more concise and precise names available to us that would additionally be consistent with SpaceX COTS Demo Flight 1 and SpaceX COTS Demo Flight 2 to help distinguish these SpaceX "demo" missions from one another. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 11:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the specific change to SpaceX Demo-2. Firstly, although this name is used for concision by NASA in the current context, it is not precise enough in a wider context: SpaceX has previously performed demo missions for cargo Dragon. Secondly, SpaceX itself never refers to the mission this way. More generally, oppose on the basis that nothing significant has changed since the previous RM – and there's little point in rehashing the same arguments this time round! Rosbif73 (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If you all are reluctant to rename the article because the previous mission is called Crew Dragon Demo-1, why not renaming both as "SpaceX Demo-#" for consistency? --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 05:30, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mkay, I have to rewrite the lead section. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 06:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Launch America"

Launch America redirects here, but there is no mention of that in the article. I think there should be an explanation of the term. 137.226.68.247 (talk) 18:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a marketing name. See https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-invites-public-to-be-its-guests-to-celebrate-historic-launch-america/ . If it does not catch on as a common name, I doubt it need explanation. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:52, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Launch America is the name of Public-Private Partnership scheme between USA and private space companies, not the mission. Erkin Alp Güney 20:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid timelines

MOS recommends using summary style in prose. Please stop shifting to timelines. That is a horrible writing style we want to avoid from the start. See for example Apollo 11 for an example of a good writing format for this article. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This. Honestly. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 21:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That article has over 100k of prose. This article is featured on the main page and is a giant mess. Keep up the terrible work guys. 2601:602:9200:1310:CD83:9A1C:11EF:1B8 (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Coffeeandcrumbs: I disagree. Using timelines for things like the launch makes sense and makes it easier to read. sam1370 (talk / contribs) 05:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Booster and Capsule

Which Falacon booster and which Dragon capsule were used on this mission? Since both the first stage booster and capsule are reusable, identifiers for both of these would be good to add. We already have articles on individual boosters and capsules, so would be good to point out which were used on this mission -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 23:49, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@65.94.170.207: Both Crew Dragon Endeavour and Falcon 9 booster B1058 are now noted in {{Infobox spaceflight}}. I'm sure some editors may beat me to adding it to the article prose soon! Haha! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NASA Crew Demo-2

@PhilipTerryGraham: Look at the mission title at the top right, on NASA TV, and you will see: Mission - NASA Crew Demo-2 CRS-20 (talk) 00:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CRS-20: I'm assuming you're referring to one of Hawthorne's mission control screens, to which I say please come up with a better source, such as a press release or an article posted by NASA or SpaceX bearing the "NASA Crew Demo-2" name. In all likelyhood, SpaceX has suffixed the name of their customer in front of their name for the mission, "Crew Demo-2", which is found on their website, news releases, and on the titles of their broadcasts. "SpaceX Demo-2" is still used frequently in NASA media, so there's no reason to completely remove it from the lead entirely. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:46, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilipTerryGraham: It is the first time that I see this screen and I have no other references. Sorry. CRS-20 (talk) 01:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it makes sense that NASA clarifies that this is the Demo-2 mission by SpaceX and SpaceX clarifies that this is the Demo-2 mission for NASA. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:50, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilipTerryGraham: I have rewritten the lead section according to the MOS:FIRST and put the alternative names on the {{Infobox spaceflight}} and {{efn}}. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 07:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Backup crew

According to a tweet by NASA in April 2019, the backup crew for this mission consisted of two members, Michael Hopkins and Victor Glover. However, an article by the Atlantic published in March 2019 stated that Kjell Lindgren was a member of the backup crew, which currently is interpreted by this article to mean that he is the only member of the backup crew. Is there a citation I am missing, or are the backup crew assignments unclear? Rainclaw7 (talk) 01:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In August 2018 article on crew assignment I see that Michael Hopkins and Victor Glover are assigned to Crew 1, not to DM2. --Base (talk) 02:38, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both could be true, for example during the Apollo program backup crews flew as prime crews a few missions later. Rainclaw7 (talk) 02:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, this goes all the way back to Vostok 1 with Titov flying the second one. --Base (talk) 03:23, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Errors

At Crew Dragon Demo-2#Launch attempts. --NGC 54 (talk | contribs) 13:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Expedition 63

I found these NASA sources 1 and 2 stating that the Endeavour crew are part of the Expedition 63 - not just as visiting crew. Would be the case of updating both articles? I'm asking to see what the community thinks - since it seems to be the most official source stating this until now. Erick Soares3 (talk) 15:23, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The SpaceX live stream just stated that too! Erick Soares3 (talk) 16:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
When the mission was going to be just a week or so long, then this would have been a visiting crew and not part of the Expedition crew. Once the mission was extended, they were categorized as Expedition crewmembers. -- Wizardimps (talk) 04:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification re. docking times

10:29 (all times eastern) was the originally scheduled time for the docking (if this is even relevant, it can be included), but as was noted on the NASA live stream, things were running about a 1/4 hour ahead of schedule. After doing some test maneuvers, the spacecraft resumed its docking course with the station and what is termed "soft capture" was confirmed at 10:16, the time being re-confirmed a few minutes later in the stream. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Backup crew

There's no point in saying "is" once the mission is complete, right?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's no point when the mission has taken off, which this one has, so it should change tense. However, this mission is not complete yet, that would occur in 1 to 4 months, depending on how long NASA keeps them up there -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 01:23, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the mission of getting them into space.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Backup crew

Is this correct that there was only a single person? Shouldn't a two-man team have a backup of, well, a two-man team? PS. I read the discussion above plus the source and it is not very clear this he was the only person - it may be that the other name didn't get mentioned for some reason. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The original backup crew for Demo-2 was Glover and Hopkins, but they were later assigned to be the next crew (Crew-1). Lindgren was put in as a backup for the Demo-2 crew in that if either Hurley or Behnken were unable to fly, Lindgren would have substituted for either. Beyond that, though, I don't know what kind of training he had. So yes, there was one backup person for the two-person crew. -- Wizardimps (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is the capsule named?

We say: "The spaceship used in the launch was named Endeavour, in honor of its namesake Space Shuttle."

It's true that Bob & Doug did say that - but I have two questions and an observation about that:

  1. Did they have the right to name it? They are NASA employees - but the craft doesn't belong to NASA - it's the property of SpaceX. It's not like previous NASA craft where NASA owned it and could name it as they pleased.
  2. What EXACTLY is named? The "spaceship used in the launch" according to us - but what was "used in the launch" the ENTIRE spaceship - which kinda includes the booster? Was it just the capsule? It kinda has to be just the latter because both booster and capsule are likely to be re-used and on the next flight, this capsule could easily be paired with a different booster.
  3. Does anyone have ANY other reference to the fact of this naming? Aside from that small video snippet - I can't find any NASA or SpaceX announcement to that effect. NASA did not change the call sign from "DM-2" to "Endeavor" following the announcement - and the SpaceX commentators didn't use the "new" name.

I rather suspect that Bob & Doug thought this up together - and nobody else (and notably SpaceX) agreed with it.

My feeling is that we should say something like "The crew named the capsule Endeavor, in honor of its namesake Space Shuttle." to clarify both WHAT was named and on who's authority the name was agreed upon (ie, probably just the crew themselves).

The whole thing seems kinda weird - and a bit awkward! SteveBaker (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crew_Dragon_Demo-2&oldid=960413241"