Author Topic: NASA Selects Commercial Firms to Begin Development of Crew Transportation  (Read 145322 times)

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Liked: 2211
  • Likes Given: 662
I know this thread is about the February 2010 CCDev award but in the next round of commercial crew development awards, I imagine that LM could also make a proposal.

If LM were to be selected in the next round, it is not impossible that Boeing's capsule or the Dream Chaser may not be selected for funding in the next round.  But I can't imagine NASA funding four spacecrafts: Boeing, LM, the Dream Chaser and the Dragon. That seems like a lot of spacecrafts to fund!
All four craft are already funded, all NASA is doing is rating them for NASA use and funding this rating task, much like how the military rates/tweaks civilian craft for it's own purposes.

None of these are or were fully funded, even LM (i.e, Orion).  NASA budgets year to year.  SpaceX has said that Dragon needs $300M, Dream Chaser needs well more than that from public statements during the past few years, and Boeing-Bigelow certainly haven't funded their concept.  In fact, the only one that may be fully funded is one left capsule-type vehicle unmentioned: Blue Origin.  We don't know what Bezos committed or intends.

Offline Bernie Roehl

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
None of these are or were fully funded, even LM (i.e, Orion).  NASA budgets year to year.  SpaceX has said that Dragon needs $300M, Dream Chaser needs well more than that from public statements during the past few years, and Boeing-Bigelow certainly haven't funded their concept.  In fact, the only one that may be fully funded is one left capsule-type vehicle unmentioned: Blue Origin.  We don't know what Bezos committed or intends.

I've heard that Dream Chaser needs $500M, but I suspect it will be a bit more than that when all is said and done.

I had actually forgotten about Blue Origin, since I still think of them as suborbital only.  But even for suborbital, they'll need to have a crew compartment, communications, recovery systems, probably thermal radiators... basically everything except the TPS and a life support system (and life support could be licensed from Paragon).  They even have their own "pusher" LAS.

So the possibilities are:

   * SpaceX Dragon
   * Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser
   * Blue Origin New Shepherd
   * Boeing capsule
   * Lockheed capsule (speculated)

Launchers are:

   * Atlas V (probably 402)
   * Delta IV
   * Falcon 9

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7082
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 1
None of these are or were fully funded, even LM (i.e, Orion).  NASA budgets year to year.  SpaceX has said that Dragon needs $300M, Dream Chaser needs well more than that from public statements during the past few years, and Boeing-Bigelow certainly haven't funded their concept.  In fact, the only one that may be fully funded is one left capsule-type vehicle unmentioned: Blue Origin.  We don't know what Bezos committed or intends.

I've heard that Dream Chaser needs $500M, but I suspect it will be a bit more than that when all is said and done.

I had actually forgotten about Blue Origin, since I still think of them as suborbital only.  But even for suborbital, they'll need to have a crew compartment, communications, recovery systems, probably thermal radiators... basically everything except the TPS and a life support system (and life support could be licensed from Paragon).  They even have their own "pusher" LAS.

So the possibilities are:

   * SpaceX Dragon
   * Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser
   * Blue Origin New Shepherd
   * Boeing capsule
   * Lockheed capsule (speculated)

Launchers are:

   * Atlas V (probably 402)
   * Delta IV
   * Falcon 9

Orbital Taurus II if any of the capsules are under 5,500kg.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
And perhaps Ariane 5, though I've heard that would be very expensive to "man-rate". And with higher flight rates for EELVs ESA would have even more reason to focus on reducing costs instead of man-rating, which is what is leading them towards Ariane 6.
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Orbital Taurus II if any of the capsules are under 5,500kg.

I assume that's the current Taurus II version with a solid upper stage. Don't think any crewed capsuled would like that much. The proposed higher energy upper stage upgrade would be much better and offer significantly greater performance.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Orbital Taurus II if any of the capsules are under 5,500kg.

I assume that's the current Taurus II version with a solid upper stage. Don't think any crewed capsuled would like that much. The proposed higher energy upper stage upgrade would be much better and offer significantly greater performance.

I think the high energy upper stage is a sure thing, now.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
There is also NG and OSC

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Assuming I understand correctly, CCDev, like COTS, has pre-defined milestones between NASA and the commercial companies, which the companies have to meet in order to get paid. Are these milestones public knowledge? Would we be able to do an FOIA or ARRA request to find out what the milestones are, or (ideally) just email them about it?

Actually, right after typing up the first part of this comment, I also noticed this in the CCDev solicitation document:
Quote
NASA and its CCDev partners will begin the project upon execution of the CCDev SAAs which is targeted for November 2009.  The CCDev milestones shall conclude by September, 2010, to enable close out of accounts by the end of the U. S. Government fiscal year as required by ARRA.  

The CCDev competition schedule milestones are posted on the following CCDev website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/CCDev/.  Participants are encouraged to refer regularly to this site for updates to the schedule and other current news and information.

Does this mean that all milestones for the initial $50M rewards have to be met by September of this year in order to get the full payment, or am I misreading it? Or is this just referring to milestones for the CCDev program itself?
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Liked: 2211
  • Likes Given: 662
Assuming I understand correctly, CCDev, like COTS, has pre-defined milestones between NASA and the commercial companies, which the companies have to meet in order to get paid. Are these milestones public knowledge? Would we be able to do an FOIA or ARRA request to find out what the milestones are, or (ideally) just email them about it?

Actually, right after typing up the first part of this comment, I also noticed this in the CCDev solicitation document:
Quote
NASA and its CCDev partners will begin the project upon execution of the CCDev SAAs which is targeted for November 2009.  The CCDev milestones shall conclude by September, 2010, to enable close out of accounts by the end of the U. S. Government fiscal year as required by ARRA.  

The CCDev competition schedule milestones are posted on the following CCDev website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/CCDev/.  Participants are encouraged to refer regularly to this site for updates to the schedule and other current news and information.

Does this mean that all milestones for the initial $50M rewards have to be met by September of this year in order to get the full payment, or am I misreading it? Or is this just referring to milestones for the CCDev program itself?

All the money must be spent prior to 1 October 2010. So yes, the milestones must be completed prior to that date.

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Assuming I understand correctly, CCDev, like COTS, has pre-defined milestones between NASA and the commercial companies, which the companies have to meet in order to get paid. Are these milestones public knowledge? Would we be able to do an FOIA or ARRA request to find out what the milestones are, or (ideally) just email them about it?

Actually, right after typing up the first part of this comment, I also noticed this in the CCDev solicitation document:
Quote
NASA and its CCDev partners will begin the project upon execution of the CCDev SAAs which is targeted for November 2009.  The CCDev milestones shall conclude by September, 2010, to enable close out of accounts by the end of the U. S. Government fiscal year as required by ARRA.  

The CCDev competition schedule milestones are posted on the following CCDev website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/CCDev/.  Participants are encouraged to refer regularly to this site for updates to the schedule and other current news and information.

Does this mean that all milestones for the initial $50M rewards have to be met by September of this year in order to get the full payment, or am I misreading it? Or is this just referring to milestones for the CCDev program itself?

All the money must be spent prior to 1 October 2010. So yes, the milestones must be completed prior to that date.

Wow, those companies are going to have to move very rapidly in the next 9 months.

Any idea on if/when the milestones have to be made public?
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Any idea on if/when the milestones have to be made public?

They do not HAVE to be made public.  The companies defer to NASA to anounce the milestones because they are the ones paying.  So basicly a COTS company makes a milestone, if NASA doesn't annouce the milestone they really can't.

We all know if SpaceX could they would have a Wired magazine article for every milestone they hit.
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73

All the money must be spent prior to 1 October 2010. So yes, the milestones must be completed prior to that date.

Unless Congress allows NASA to restructure the deal.
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Any idea on if/when the milestones have to be made public?

They do not HAVE to be made public.  The companies defer to NASA to anounce the milestones because they are the ones paying.  So basicly a COTS company makes a milestone, if NASA doesn't annouce the milestone they really can't.

We all know if SpaceX could they would have a Wired magazine article for every milestone they hit.

Wouldn't NASA have to release it under FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) or ARRA (the stimulus bill used to fund it, which has additional transparency requirements)?
« Last Edit: 02/09/2010 12:04 am by neilh »
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Absent any national security issues one would think so, but then again last summer at AIAA SpaceX's Max Vozoff did mention the DoD's interest in DragonLab for rendezvous/inspection  missions. The DoD comment starts @ 05:55, but shortly after he also mentioned DragonLab having a grapple feature. Lot's of possibilities there, some not so genteel. Maybe they could slam the door that way. 

« Last Edit: 02/09/2010 02:22 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Any idea on if/when the milestones have to be made public?

They do not HAVE to be made public.  The companies defer to NASA to anounce the milestones because they are the ones paying.  So basicly a COTS company makes a milestone, if NASA doesn't annouce the milestone they really can't.

We all know if SpaceX could they would have a Wired magazine article for every milestone they hit.

Wouldn't NASA have to release it under FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) or ARRA (the stimulus bill used to fund it, which has additional transparency requirements)?

Not necessarily, FOIA has an exception for proprietary/SBU information, and ITAR. Even with ITAR reform, proprietary/SBU is still protected.
JRF

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
I wanted to post this in the LC-39 Q&A thread, but couldn't find it. Could an observation deck be added to the VAB? If so, it seems like a good spot to watch any and all launches from CCAFS or KSC.
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Safety doesn't like it.  There's a camera up there anyway.  Maybe upgrade it to a nice HD.  The LCC roof is where the astronaut families watch.  After the first half minute, it's all the same anyway.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline MP99

Quote from: HMXHMX link=topic=20268.msg538586#msg53858
All the money must be spent prior to 1 October 2010. So yes, the milestones must be completed prior to that date.
[/quote

This is skin-in-the-game, I think.

Could they spend the CCDEV funds by 10/2010, then add their own funds and deliver later?

Martin

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Quote from: HMXHMX link=topic=20268.msg538586#msg53858
All the money must be spent prior to 1 October 2010. So yes, the milestones must be completed prior to that date.
[/quote

This is skin-in-the-game, I think.

Could they spend the CCDEV funds by 10/2010, then add their own funds and deliver later?

Martin
I'm assuming payments are still based on milestones, so they'd only get paid for whichever milestones they complete by 10/2010. However, the CCDev program will also get considerably more funding in FY2011, so if the companies are selected for the second round despite milestone slippage, they can still get money for those milestones. Of course, if they screw up too badly, they likely won't be selected at all for the second round.
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Assuming I understand correctly, CCDev, like COTS, has pre-defined milestones between NASA and the commercial companies, which the companies have to meet in order to get paid. Are these milestones public knowledge? Would we be able to do an FOIA or ARRA request to find out what the milestones are, or (ideally) just email them about it?

Actually, right after typing up the first part of this comment, I also noticed this in the CCDev solicitation document:
Quote
NASA and its CCDev partners will begin the project upon execution of the CCDev SAAs which is targeted for November 2009.  The CCDev milestones shall conclude by September, 2010, to enable close out of accounts by the end of the U. S. Government fiscal year as required by ARRA.  

The CCDev competition schedule milestones are posted on the following CCDev website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/CCDev/.  Participants are encouraged to refer regularly to this site for updates to the schedule and other current news and information.

Does this mean that all milestones for the initial $50M rewards have to be met by September of this year in order to get the full payment, or am I misreading it? Or is this just referring to milestones for the CCDev program itself?

Last week I sent an inquiry to the email listed for questions about CCDev, asking "Will there be a public release of the milestones for the CCDev contracts, as was done for the COTS contracts? If so, do you have an estimate for when this will occur?"

I got back the following response:
Quote
Thanks for your question.   I don’t have an exact date of when they will be released.    We will do so as soon as possible. 
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0