Author Topic: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts  (Read 104697 times)

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #20 on: 01/30/2012 05:07 am »
Not bad price , ~$2B a year for about 6 years.
New common US , fuel depot , and lunar cargo and crew lander ( crew ascender reusable )( descent stage usable on lunar surface ).

I suppose it's just too bad it would likely be a violation of federal acquisition regulations  for NASA to procure it in the way you seem to suggest, i.e. from a sole-source contractor?

The contracts for each part can be bid in different years.  By reusing components the winner of the lander development contract is in a position to submit the lowest bid for the other items.
Start with Basic ACES and depot then, less funding needed at first also , plus less risk per dollar invested.

ULA on their PDF calls for others to supply the depot with fuel, so at least for suppling the depot it would not be a sole-source supplier or contract. ULA would need to make it easy and cost effective for the suppliers tanker ( or upper stage ) to be compatible with the depot.

This could then if we get the depot, for others to develop lunar landers that us the depot concept as well as US and space tugs ( multi source contract or full commercial use ).

Offline Warren Platts

Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #21 on: 01/31/2012 04:39 am »
Not bad price , ~$2B a year for about 6 years.
New common US , fuel depot , and lunar cargo and crew lander ( crew ascender reusable )( descent stage usable on lunar surface ).

I suppose it's just too bad it would likely be a violation of federal acquisition regulations  for NASA to procure it in the way you seem to suggest, i.e. from a sole-source contractor?

Arguably, it's not sole-source contracting, since all sorts of parts (e.g., the Pratt & Whitney RL-10's for starters) would be coming from other subcontracting companies. The beauty of the ACES system is the commonality: ACES 3rd stage-->passive, low boiloff depot-->DTAL lander. This commonality will allow a single assembly line to achieve a semblance of an economy of scale through relatively mass production. It would be a shame to screw this up for artificial, political reasons.
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7201
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #22 on: 01/31/2012 04:54 am »
Quote from: Warren Platts
The beauty of the ACES system is the commonality: ACES 3rd stage-->passive, low boiloff depot-->DTAL lander. This commonality will allow a single assembly line to achieve a semblance of an economy of scale through relatively mass production.

We're in total agreement on that much.

Quote from: Warren Platts
Arguably, it's not sole-source contracting

Arguably, pigs have wings.

You're absolutely right that large government contracts commonly involve sub-contracted suppliers.  But are you suggesting NASA would negotiate with those suppliers directly?  Or do you acknowledge that NASA would be acquiring this system from a single source, and that there is only one entity that could effectively bid for the contract?
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #23 on: 01/31/2012 05:31 am »
There are so many loopholes in FAR as applies to NASA that they could easily justify giving ULA a sole-source contract, if ACES is what they want.

Or just do what they're doing with ICPS: put out a request for proposals that ACES will meet. If they happen to get a better and credible proposal, they can go with that, otherwise ULA gets the gig,

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #24 on: 01/31/2012 06:06 am »
There are so many loopholes in FAR as applies to NASA that they could easily justify giving ULA a sole-source contract, if ACES is what they want.

Or just do what they're doing with ICPS: put out a request for proposals that ACES will meet. If they happen to get a better and credible proposal, they can go with that, otherwise ULA gets the gig,
So put out a request for proposals for a fuel depot that can be used be everyone ( putting in or taking out of fuel ). Keeping the interface universal would allow for multiple suppliers to make depots, tankers to fill them, upper stages that can be refuel, and tugs to be fueled.

So DoD and Nasa could both benifit and both could put out the proposal ( same specs ). Each could select and fund a different supplier. That way we could at least get one and if both succeed we most likely need more than one depot anyway. Universal fill line each others tanker could fill the other if needed or transfer fuel from one to the other using a tanker. And others could launch the tankers.

This is starting to look even better ( a lot of good posts here ).

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #25 on: 01/31/2012 09:59 am »
ULA can not make a DTAL lander or a depot. 
They can only build the ACES for their EELV's. 

Offline Warren Platts

Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #26 on: 01/31/2012 11:21 am »
ULA can not make a DTAL lander or a depot. 
They can only build the ACES for their EELV's. 

Don't tell us, tell the senior engineers at ULA to stop writing white papers on the subject...
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #27 on: 01/31/2012 11:21 am »
ULA can not make a DTAL lander or a depot. 
They can only build the ACES for their EELV's. 

I think that there is potentially something of a contracting opportunity here: Basically, put out the construction of the various vehicles or even parts of the archetecture to competitive bids.  For example:

1) Basic 5.4m diameter hulls/tankage;

2) Vacuum Lander;

2(a) Ascent/descent engines;

3) Static orbital depot version;

4) Deep space booster version (ACES-121);

5) EDS version;

6) Tanker version;

7) Common MPS.

The winner of (1) would supply the basic 'keels' to the contractors for (2) to (6), who would then finish them and deliver them back to NASA for utilisation.  Lots of funding spread around several contractors (hopefully).

I, for one, would be very interested to watch the fight between PWR, Aerojet and maybe even SpaceX for (7) and 2(a).  It would also be interesting to see if anyone dares challenge LM for (1); as ACES is Centaur-heritage, I would imagine they would have a big in-built advantage on such a bid.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #28 on: 01/31/2012 11:25 am »
ULA can not make a DTAL lander or a depot. 
They can only build the ACES for their EELV's. 

Don't tell us, tell the senior engineers at ULA to stop writing white papers on the subject...

They can write all the papers they want, nothing is preventing them from doing it.  Just Boeing and LM are not going to let ULA build the results.
« Last Edit: 01/31/2012 11:26 am by Jim »

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #29 on: 01/31/2012 05:18 pm »
As far as who builds the DTAL or an ascender for it for the crew version can be another contractor. Take the basic ACES and add to it. They do it to cars, motor homes, planes, ect. Custumizing.

So Boeing or Lockheed could build the DTAL and the other build the ascender. Any contractor could possible make an ascender for the DTAL, just like a truck can pull many different brands of trailers with different brands of boats on them or cargo.

Are first step though is to get the basic ACES US and depot.
« Last Edit: 01/31/2012 05:20 pm by RocketmanUS »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #30 on: 01/31/2012 05:39 pm »
As far as who builds the DTAL or an ascender for it for the crew version can be another contractor. Take the basic ACES and add to it. They do it to cars, motor homes, planes, ect. Custumizing.


no, not feasible

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7201
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #31 on: 01/31/2012 07:43 pm »
As far as who builds the DTAL or an ascender for it for the crew version can be another contractor. Take the basic ACES and add to it. They do it to cars, motor homes, planes, ect. Custumizing.

Customizing.  It works for cars, etc., because customers can purchase and own those items, and do with them what they wish.  No customer has ever yet purchased and owned a ULA-built rocket or rocket stage.  ULA provides launch services, not vehicles.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #32 on: 01/31/2012 08:19 pm »
Ok so if we get ACES US then how can we get the ACES depot and DTAL through all the red tape and such?

It looks to good an idea to pass up as one of the possible future ways for humanity to explore and possible colonies our soloar system.

Offline Warren Platts

Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #33 on: 01/31/2012 08:27 pm »
ULA can not make a DTAL lander or a depot. 
They can only build the ACES for their EELV's. 

Don't tell us, tell the senior engineers at ULA to stop writing white papers on the subject...

They can write all the papers they want, nothing is preventing them from doing it.  Just Boeing and LM are not going to let ULA build the results.

What is the evidence for this? Why wouldn't they "let" ULA build a lander? ULA is doing some hard research into depots that is costing real $$$--not just guys writing some white papers in their off hours. A depot isn't a LV, yet they are the acknowledged leaders when it comes to depot technology. Perhaps Zegler, Kutter and Barr know something you don't?

Not saying you're wrong, Jim.

But if you're not wrong, then this is clearly an unacceptable result: in which case Congress should pass a special antitrust law that splits away ULA from Boeing and LM!
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #34 on: 01/31/2012 09:21 pm »

What is the evidence for this? Why wouldn't they "let" ULA build a lander? ULA is doing some hard research into depots that is costing real $$$--not just guys writing some white papers in their off hours. A depot isn't a LV, yet they are the acknowledged leaders when it comes to depot technology. Perhaps Zegler, Kutter and Barr know something you don't?

Not saying you're wrong, Jim.

But if you're not wrong, then this is clearly an unacceptable result: in which case Congress should pass a special antitrust law that splits away ULA from Boeing and LM!

Huh?  How is it not acceptable?  ULA only exists to produce and operate EELV's, no more.  It is part of the agreement that set up the joint venture. ULA can do a depot no more than it can provide cargo services to the ISS.

And it is common sense.  Why would a partner in a joint venture would want to compete against itself? 

No, Zegler, Kutter and Barr don't know something I don't, depots are a way for ULA to sell more launch services.
« Last Edit: 01/31/2012 09:26 pm by Jim »

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #35 on: 02/01/2012 01:50 am »
Warren, you should start a dialogue with Zegler, Kutter and Barr. Follow the "can't". If you really had time, see what happens if Tea Party Space and ULA brain trust bounce ideas.

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
« Last Edit: 06/21/2012 05:11 am by RocketmanUS »

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #37 on: 06/20/2012 05:28 am »
New PDF by ULA dated April 14, 2012

A step towards ACES

http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/publications/Space_Access_Society_2012.pdf

That's really awesome, thanks for posting.
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1681
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #38 on: 06/20/2012 10:10 pm »
Yeah, that was a pretty neat presentation, and a very neat idea. The technologies here are important for making useful in-space transportation stages.

~Jon

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: The Development of ACES for numerous concepts
« Reply #39 on: 06/21/2012 08:24 am »
Nice to see how XCOR's piston pump technology is used in this.
Douglas Clark

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1