canoe76 - 16/4/2008 12:39 PMI think it is guaranteed that the 3 engines used in the demonstratuion test were not F9 Qualified engines. Going to those engines will be a small step compared to the learning curve associated with going from single engine to 9 engine testing.
LIVINGSTON "How closely connected is the development of a commercial development program to the structure of the VSE as we know it today not what it may evolve into."DAVIDIAN "Well it wasn't built in from the beginning but because this is all new, I mean, Obviously the vision was articulated by the President back in Jan of '04. We've been working on this policy since late '06 and in fact this policy is coming after the fact that we already have programs that are implementing it, for example the most obvious one is the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services contract or COTS. That is a specific instance of this policy of how it can be implemented and it's basically because that program was in place - and also other programs like Centennial Challenges - which are encouraging individuals to do large scale, to produce large scale, or at least medium scale commercial space capabilities That we wanted to have a policy that incorporates those not only to legitimize those but to encourage new programs of that same sort. So the Vision or the US Space Exploration Policy is still very flexible. It's still very wide open and these kind of activities can still be incorporated NASA has to obey the law that says that if there is a commercial capability that NASA can use and meets it needs then NASA has to buy it.instead of do it itself. So we're trying to keep reminding NASA of that kind of thinking, That we want to buy commercial instead of use government provided capabilities whenever it's possible."
SIETZEN "...and I asked at a conference this winter Doug Cook in the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate and I said Doug I don't quite understand the logic of COTS D vs Orion and Ares."He said what do you mean"I said you know COTS D would be the crew rotation component of COTS which has not been demonstrated yet. But lets say these commercial entreprneurial companies are successful in demonstrating both cargo return from station and crew return from station. I know it's a big leap but lets say it happens. Would you then develop Orion and Ares for low earth orbit access which is what you currently plan to do."He said No, of course not. He said we'd buy COTS vehicles if there was a COTS vehicle to buy."And I turned around and looked at the LM folks in the audience and they turned white as a ghost. "And here's the reason why. The current models for the Orion and Ares talk about 4 flights to the ISS every year."Once you have the lunar program you're talking about 2 lunar missions per year. You're talking about 6 Orion Ares missions on an annual basis. 4 of them goes to the ISS. "Since Orion is largely an expendable spacecraft that means you build a new capsule for every mission. You're the company building and selling the capsule. So you make your profit on as many of these as you can sell.If the government takes four of them away - 2 thirds of your market away for COTS - all your profit is then generated from the lunar program.2 flights a year."A successful commercial COTS - which we admit has not yet happened. May never happen - But a successful commercial COTS will change forever the way civil space is funded in America because if I am a new President and there is a successful COTS demonstration and it's carrying the American flag on gthe side of it, that's an Americian spaceship. Why do I need then to spend $50B to duplicate the same function in a government funded Orion and Ares space vehicle."If there is such as case to be made for that - and I'm not saying there isn't. It hasn't been made yet."
Frediiiie - 19/4/2008 2:56 AMQuote"I said you know COTS D would be the crew rotation component of COTS which has not been demonstrated yet. But lets say these commercial entreprneurial companies are successful in demonstrating both cargo return from station and crew return from station. I know it's a big leap but lets say it happens. Would you then develop Orion and Ares for low earth orbit access which is what you currently plan to do."He said No, of course not. He said we'd buy COTS vehicles if there was a COTS vehicle to buy."And I turned around and looked at the LM folks in the audience and they turned white as a ghost. "And here's the reason why. The current models for the Orion and Ares talk about 4 flights to the ISS every year."Once you have the lunar program you're talking about 2 lunar missions per year. You're talking about 6 Orion Ares missions on an annual basis. 4 of them goes to the ISS. "Since Orion is largely an expendable spacecraft that means you build a new capsule for every mission. You're the company building and selling the capsule. So you make your profit on as many of these as you can sell.If the government takes four of them away - 2 thirds of your market away for COTS - all your profit is then generated from the lunar program.reminds me of the Chinese curse"May you live in interesting times."
"I said you know COTS D would be the crew rotation component of COTS which has not been demonstrated yet. But lets say these commercial entreprneurial companies are successful in demonstrating both cargo return from station and crew return from station. I know it's a big leap but lets say it happens. Would you then develop Orion and Ares for low earth orbit access which is what you currently plan to do."He said No, of course not. He said we'd buy COTS vehicles if there was a COTS vehicle to buy."And I turned around and looked at the LM folks in the audience and they turned white as a ghost. "And here's the reason why. The current models for the Orion and Ares talk about 4 flights to the ISS every year."Once you have the lunar program you're talking about 2 lunar missions per year. You're talking about 6 Orion Ares missions on an annual basis. 4 of them goes to the ISS. "Since Orion is largely an expendable spacecraft that means you build a new capsule for every mission. You're the company building and selling the capsule. So you make your profit on as many of these as you can sell.If the government takes four of them away - 2 thirds of your market away for COTS - all your profit is then generated from the lunar program.
Frediiiie - 22/4/2008 1:55 AMPut it another way:The model of how NASA contracts work in changing.4 of 6 flights per year of Ares 1 will never happen..
This seems like the closest thread for this observation. This is an "economic impact".There was a NASA news release http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/jun/HQ_C08038_ELVIS.html on the ELVIS (way too cute acronym) support contract (emphasis mine):NASA EXTENDS EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLES SUPPORT CONTRACTWASHINGTON -- NASA has awarded Analex Corporation of Fairfax, Va., an option for the Expendable Launch Vehicles Integrated Support, or ELVIS, contract.This second option period award is a hybrid performance-based, cost-plus-award-fee, fixed-price-award-fee, and fixed-price indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract. It extends ELVIS through Sept. 30, 2011. The award has a potential value of approximately $90 million.Analex Corporation currently is performing work under the contract's first option period, a three-year option that ends Sept. 30, 2008. The potential contract period, if all options are exercised, is nine years, three months, with a total approximate value of $258 million.The contract provides integrated support services in the areas of business and administration, safety and mission assurance, engineering, and technical, facility, and launch operations. Launch vehicles include the Atlas, Delta, Pegasus, Taurus, and Falcon rockets. The contract specifically provides engineering services and analyses, communications, telemetry, special studies, and technical services for ground and flight expendable launch vehicle systems and payloads.I wonder exactly what they are doing for these rocket families for $30M/year and what role they would play in Falcon or Taurus launches.
Yes, but....What specifically constitute "Operations Support" and "Acquisition support"?