Talk:SpaceX Dragon

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SpaceX Dragon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 6 months

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Spaceflight High‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:Hidden infoboxes

Archives

Index

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Reusable

Is this capsule reusable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.63.77.142 (talk) 17:47, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not reusable. Elon Musk was asked in October 2014 what his plans are for a reusable second stage (i.e., Dragon); you can watch his answer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PULkWGHeIQQ&t=419. Essentially: In many missions (i.e. from a geostationary orbit, 36,000 km from Earth), using the current technology, getting the upper stage back is "really difficult". But the next generation of (much bigger) rockets will be designed for full reusability, because those are the ones that will be going to Mars and back many times. He believes (at the time of the video, 2014) that testing of those could begin around 2019 or 2020. But watch his answer, it's only 2 minutes long. --Jhertel (talk) 12:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"...reusable second stage (i.e. Dragon)" You are confusing Dragon (payload) and 2nd stage. Dragon capsule is designed for both reentry and reusability. They even designed the heatshield for multiple uses before replacement. Only the trunk and nosecone are expended. --IanOsgood (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for correcting me! --Jhertel (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon 2 Cargo name and usage

http://www.spacex.com/news/2017/02/27/spacex-send-privately-crewed-dragon-spacecraft-beyond-moon-next-year quotes Elon as saying:

"SpaceX is currently contracted to perform an average of four Dragon 2 missions to the ISS per year, three carrying cargo and one carrying crew."

While it doesn't clear up the naming issue, it does clear up that cargo flights to the ISS are going to use a Dragon 2-based capsule. Greg (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Split off the list of missions

SPLIT OFF SpaceX Dragon#List of Dragon missions to List of SpaceX Dragon missions

I suggest that the List of Dragon missions section be split off into a separate article. I suggest the new article be called List of SpaceX Dragon missions. This would be comparable to the Falcon 9 mission list at List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches and complementary to that. -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 17:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support I am the nominator -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 17:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The list of Dragon missions is very short, I don't see the necessity to hide them -- Special:Contributions/Aérospatial (talk) 09:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Not really useful per WP:NOPAGE, current article is the best place to aggregate all information. — JFG ^talk 09:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- If we're aggregating all info, why are you agreeing that we should remove the Dragon V2 and Red Dragon missions? -- 65.94.42.131 (talk) 05:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's quite a different spacecraft. — JFG ^talk 14:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is serving as the Dragon family article, so it isn't a different spacecraft, it is a version of the Dragon family. If we go for a different spacecraft approach, we'd need to split off a Dragon V1 article (and clearly make this a family article only), or split off a Dragon family article (and let this serve solely for V1 Dragon) -- 65.94.42.131 (talk) 05:42, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, reading this article again, it is not really acting as a Dragon family article; it mostly describes the Dragon CRS spacecraft and its re-badged DragonLab which has never flown and is essentially the same hardware. Dragon 2 has only a few lines and is fully described in its own article. Red Dragon has also just a few lines and its main article is focused on missions to Mars with a future Dragon variant (likely a close derivative of Dragon 2). So I would say that we do not have a "Dragon family" article right now, nor do we need one; we may want to fork one out later when new variants actually start flying, and if we find WP:RS analyzing the various Dragon-branded spacecraft as a family. In the meantime, this article should keep only Dragon CRS missions, Dragon 2 should show the test flights and planned early missions, and Red Dragon should keep focusing on the future missions to Mars. — JFG ^talk 05:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose —PSR B1937+21 (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now, but may be good to revisit at a later time (when more Dragon missions and variants have flown). Appable (talk | contributions) 06:34, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- PSR B1937+21 has proposed that all the Dragon variant flights be removed from this article, so whatever later time, the list will be fragmented across several different articles -- 65.94.42.131 (talk) 05:20, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Missions to Mars with Red Dragon have been cancelled in favor of a larger spacecraft with a different landing strategy. — JFG ^talk 22:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

I suggest all Dragon 2 and Red Dragon missions be moved to the corresponding articles. —PSR B1937+21 (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. — JFG ^talk 06:18, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it make more sense to just have a separate Dragon list article? FH and F9 are listed in a single list, instead of two separate locations for F9 and FH -- 65.94.42.131 (talk) 05:18, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I Oppose this alternate proposal, as it makes little sense to separate them into multiple different articles, when a single list in its own article makes more sense, akin to the Falcon 9 & Falcon Heavy list which is a single list article. Thus it makes more sense with my initial proposal of having a Dragon mission list article instead of 4 or more different mini lists at Cargo Dragon V1, Cargo Dragon V2, Crew Dragon V2, Red Dragon V2 -- 65.94.42.131 (talk) 05:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

Hello JFG and Sario528, I was the one who changed the name "Dragon 2" to "Crew Dragon" in the SpaceX_Dragon and Dragon 2 pages. The reason was that the http://www.spacex.com/crew-dragon page only mentioned the name "Crew Dragon" and not "Dragon 2" (anymore). SMApers (talk) 21:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SMApers: Thanks for the pointer. Remember that Wikipedia doesn't necessarily follow WP:official names; what counts is the most-used name by sources, and SpaceX is only a primary source. Let's wait a bit until secondary sources pick up the name; then we should conduct a WP:move request to change the article title. If that is approved, then the name can be changed everywhere. — JFG ^talk 22:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Before you start to change the names here, let's simply wait until it gets used in an actual flight. Naming conventions at SpaceX seem to be in a flux for most of its equipment until it goes into an actual flight.... where you have to admit that the public name is really mostly done for PR purposes. The first flight is upcoming and when that happens you will have more sources to be using than you can shake a stick at. --Robert Horning (talk) 08:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon logo?

Is the logo featured here [1] the Dragon logo, and if so, then it should appear on this page (if a cleaner version of the logo is found) -- 70.51.46.15 (talk) 08:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]