Author Topic: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 1  (Read 641029 times)

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2780
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2925
  • Likes Given: 2247
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #240 on: 10/14/2014 07:08 pm »
No surprise in any of this. Just the usual budget politics around HSF.

Commercial crew is a direct threat to Orion/SLS. The BLEO/LEO artificial differentiation is a political mechanism to allow Orion arbitrary budget inflation while all the pseudo "fiscal responsibility" is directed at the "less necessary", cheaper program of commercial crew. Now the fiscal hawks can look good at saving the nation billions by brilliantly observing that one can dual use a single capsule. "Simple".

I begin to dimly understand why Musk didn't do the "quick and dirty" approach to a manned Dragon 1 capsule, but instead focused on the much more elaborate Dragon 2 design.

The moment COTS-D vanished as a possibility, the game changed. COTS was intended as a failure to washout Kistler cheaply, and the additions of SpaceX and Orbital were unexpected. It was supposed to be "oh dear, we tried that, what can be done, and back to Constellation  level bad spending and Ares IX results, is best we can do".

The trick pony was allowing Boeing's failed OSP bid back into the tent of CC as a security against what happened with COTS.

The advantage of Dragon 2 taking longer was to make it less like Orion/CST-100. Because by the way Congress worked things, all capsules would appear to be alike (perhaps also why DC biased from selection as well?),  and Congress can "save the day" with this masterful move. Meaning there was nothing to be gained by a fast, minimalist capsule ... because it would be slowed down by perhaps more/different "hobbling" moves all along.

So maybe Musk was right in his showmanship with the Dragon-2 reveal, which reminded me nothing so much as a new car introduction. And what we are about to watch from Congress, is a variation on the Wall Street badmouthing of the Tesla Model D. By my read, its not as successful in dampening interest as Tesla's adversaries had hoped - so perhaps Congress might also not bring this off as well.

There's a lot at stake now, and the performance in the next few months may turn things in different directions. Each of the HSF vehicles has something underway that can affect this game. As well as the "unintended consequences" of some. Remember the EELV "winners" ...

Congress will wait, now having set the stage for the outcome it desires. They will side with the "winners" of this drama in the next act.

1, 2 , or 3.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #241 on: 10/14/2014 07:29 pm »
Some congressmen ask Bolden, why not use Orion for commercial crew purposes?
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/42165smith-to-bolden-why-not-orion-for-commercial-crew

A thread was started on this yesterday and is located in the Space Policy Discussion section:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35833.0
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 59
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #242 on: 10/14/2014 07:54 pm »
(Ventura star, spaceplane,).
Please keep your facts straight.  Though I agree Boeing tends towards cost and schedule overruns (and they are not the only one by far), VentureStar was a Lockheed-Martin project, not one of Boeing's.  That particular project died largely because it was too ambitious.
You are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget. You will not find such project. The only project that was deliver on budget was Commercial to ISS. Tell me that Spacex project to make reusable is not ambitious, but didn't effect cost of their deliver to ISS.

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 59
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #243 on: 10/14/2014 08:00 pm »
Been hearing this "Musk could go it alone" fairy tale for years now. Hasn't happened. If anything, they're behind where NASA would like them to be, not ahead, and for the same reasons.

Where would NASA like SpaceX to be at this time from a manned spacecraft perspective right now?
I hear in this forum 8 years ago doubt, that Musk rocket will  ever fly and compete with Delta or Atlas. Now these rocket are not competition for them except environment where their lobby overcome their superior price and services. Spacex is feared by  Ariane, chinese and russian, who could imagine that 5 years ago.

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 59
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #244 on: 10/14/2014 08:17 pm »
Are you serious? Boeing never deliver under budget and on time maybe last time at Apollo time. Why so much project was canceled in the last 35 years,because over budget not because delay(Ventura star, spaceplane,). Spacex is first company that deliver little bite late but on budget. Spacex is probably the only company that in next 10 years deliver all components that NASA wants to have to explore our solar system.
-Earth to orbit heavy lunch.
-spacecraft able to and on mars or together solar body and deliver significant payload
-interplanetary vehicle
-new better spacesuit
-reusable system

If Boeing performs so poorly as you are asserting then why did NASA associatte administrator William Gerstenmaier write this in a internal document about the contract award?  If you are serious that must mean SpaceX really sucks as far as program management, because NASA thinks they are worse than Boeing in this category.   So what say you?

Quote
Commenting on the two winning capsule concepts, Gerstenmaier clearly singles out the Boeing design for most praise, being “the strongest of all three proposals in both mission suitability and past performance. Boeing’s system offers the most useful inherent capabilities for operational flexibility in trading cargo and crew for individual missions. It is also based on a spacecraft design that is fairly mature in design.” He also points to Boeing’s “well-defined plan for addressing the specific issues from Phase 1,” and says of the three bidders Boeing “has the best management approach, with very comprehensive and integrated program management, and an effective organizational structure, further ensuring they will be able to accomplish the technical work in a manner that meets NASA’s standards.” Phase 1, the Certification Products Contract (CPC), covered hazard reports, plans for verification, validation and certification.
1/NASA wants to do same thing that is doing last 40 years to fly to Earth orbit, it is safe who is going to send astronauts on long trip without  assurance to bring them back.
2/NASA has plans for Mars trip but hopes it will be cancel, because it will be safer for NASA reputation not to do risky human endeavor  and blame congress for canceling mission because the cost  overrun.
3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.
4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.
5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.
6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.
7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years.
8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 59
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #245 on: 10/14/2014 08:19 pm »
Some congressmen ask Bolden, why not use Orion for commercial crew purposes?
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/42165smith-to-bolden-why-not-orion-for-commercial-crew

Read the whole article - Smith and Pallazo (sp?) are saying replace one of the Commercial Crew vehicles with Orion. Then read Gerst's document - would they replace the "clearly superior" bid, regardless of cost? I am just old enough and cynical enough to think that this may be the opening shot in the battle for the ultimate dream of Congress (and some at NASA, and some on this site): two ways to get into space - in a Boeing capsule on top of a Lockheed launch vehicle, or in a Lockheed capsule on top of a Boeing launch vehicle.
wov ULA complete victory

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 59
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #246 on: 10/14/2014 08:20 pm »

Read the whole article - Smith and Pallazo (sp?) are saying replace one of the Commercial Crew vehicles with Orion. Then read Gerst's document - would they replace the "clearly superior" bid, regardless of cost? I am just old enough and cynical enough to think that this may be the opening shot in the battle for the ultimate dream of Congress (and some at NASA, and some on this site): two ways to get into space - in a Boeing capsule on top of a Lockheed launch vehicle, or in a Lockheed capsule on top of a Boeing launch vehicle.

Ha!  I think that would be the official death of any hope for NASA.  The way I see it, the $2.6 billion or whatever it is going to SpaceX is the only ray of hope right now in an otherwise hopelessly aimless agency that seems to exist more for political pork than for advancing aeronautics or space exploration.
amen

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #247 on: 10/14/2014 09:14 pm »
1/NASA wants to do same thing that is doing last 40 years to fly to Earth orbit, it is safe who is going to send astronauts on long trip without  assurance to bring them back.
2/NASA has plans for Mars trip but hopes it will be cancel, because it will be safer for NASA reputation not to do risky human endeavor  and blame congress for canceling mission because the cost  overrun.
3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.
4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.
5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.
6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.
7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years.
8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.

Also odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37442
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21452
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #248 on: 10/14/2014 09:46 pm »

Also odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.

Wrong.  Boeing did parachute drops.  Just drop the bias, SNC is way behind Boeing.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #249 on: 10/14/2014 10:02 pm »

Also odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.

Wrong.  Boeing did parachute drops.  Just drop the bias, SNC is way behind Boeing.

.. of a Styrofoam and plywood mockup. Don't forget, their subcontractor also dropped it off the back of a pickup truck to test the airbags. Soooo much more impressive than a glide test.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1285
  • United States
  • Liked: 828
  • Likes Given: 1797
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #250 on: 10/14/2014 10:06 pm »
[1/NASA wants to do same thing that is doing last 40 years to fly to Earth orbit, it is safe who is going to send astronauts on long trip without  assurance to bring them back.
No that is what Congress wants them to do.  NASA had plans they are just stuck in the funding model that Congress has provided. 
 
2/NASA has plans for Mars trip but hopes it will be cancel, because it will be safer for NASA reputation not to do risky human endeavor  and blame congress for canceling mission because the cost  overrun.

Really?  That is the first to hear that NASA hopes that the Mars trip will be canceled.  Any evidence besides Congres not funding a Mars Trip? 

3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.

The point of the Boeing spacecraft and the entire Commerical Crew contract is to go to LEO and the ISS.  Discussing going further is pointless.  The only Capsule design that can go BEO is SpaceX DragonV2.   Are you saying the DreamChaser has BEO capability as designed?

4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.

A possibility but NASA still gave SpaceX high marks and selected them. 

5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.

How is that relevant?  Boeing has meet all the current milestone goals that NASA has set for them as part of the Commerical crew contract process. 

6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.

Yes and if SpaceX does that it will be what the first time they will actually meet a projected scheduled completion date for development of a flight vehicle.  They missed on Falcon 9, 9v1.1, Dragon and they what are two +years late on Falcon Heavy and counting.  It will be great if SpaceX can get a vehicle up and flight ready by 2015.  However if they are actually that close to being flight ready (February 2015) then their is almost no development left to be done on DragonV2.  I don't think that is the case.   Crewed spacecraft are complicated and I have a hard time seeing a flight ready system in February of next year.  I would love to be proven wrong. 

Quote
Despite SpaceX only showing “satisfactory” performance during CPC, Gerstenmaier says the young space company has “performed very well” on other relevant work and has the benefit of more schedule margin than the other companies.

This could indicate that NASA does believe that SpaceX is ahead of Boeing.

Quote
Space X had the best price of the three contenders and Gerstenmaier expressed a “high” overall level of confidence in the company’s ability to successfully perform the CctCap contract. However he acknowledged “some technical concerns about this proposal,” and worries that the schedule could be affected by having to tackle redesign issues late in the program.


However NASA is concerned that design issues (probably because of SpaceX's limited experience in manned spaceflight) could set that schedule back. 


7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years.

What matters is if Boeing meets the scheduled completion dates that they set out in the Commerical Crew proposal that they submitted to NASA.  If SpaceX meets its hardware goals first, that is great for SpaceX.  They can start to demonstrate to NASA and aerospace observers they can meet or beat scheduled dates for getting a vehicle flight ready.  However based on past experience NASA administrators feel that Boeing has a greater chance of meeting it's proposed project schedule dates than SpaceX.   

8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.

NASA prefers a partner with with previous manned spacecraft experience.  SpaceX and SNC don't have this.  Hopefully SpaceX will have this experience soon.  Also the SNC Dream Chaser had more technical risk in their design than either the Boeing or SpaceX.
« Last Edit: 10/14/2014 10:56 pm by brovane »
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #251 on: 10/14/2014 10:09 pm »
There are no "deadlines" for the commercial crew contracts.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1285
  • United States
  • Liked: 828
  • Likes Given: 1797
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #252 on: 10/14/2014 10:14 pm »
There are no "deadlines" for the commercial crew contracts.

Except for the goal of being full flight ready by 2017 so additional Soyuz seats don't have to be purchased. 
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #253 on: 10/14/2014 10:24 pm »
There are no "deadlines" for the commercial crew contracts.

Except for the goal of being full flight ready by 2017 so additional Soyuz seats don't have to be purchased.

Which isn't a deadline.. it's just a desire.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1285
  • United States
  • Liked: 828
  • Likes Given: 1797
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #254 on: 10/14/2014 10:38 pm »
There are no "deadlines" for the commercial crew contracts.

Except for the goal of being full flight ready by 2017 so additional Soyuz seats don't have to be purchased.

Which isn't a deadline.. it's just a desire.

There was a project plan submitted and that project plan had dates on it.  The companies submitted a schedule.  That schedule factored into the decision making process.  So it was more than a desire.  The companies where graded on it.       

Quote
Gerstenmaier goes on to say that Sierra’s proposal “has more schedule uncertainty. For example, some of the testing planned after the crewed flight could be required before the crewed flight, and the impact of this movement will greatly stress the schedule.”


Quote
Although the document praises Sierra’s “strong management approach to ensure the technical work and schedule are accomplished,” it cautions that the company’s Dream Chaser had “the longest schedule for completing certification.” The letter also states that “it also has the most work to accomplish which is likely to further extend its schedule beyond 2017, and is most likely to reach certification and begin service missions later than the other ‘Offerors’.”
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #255 on: 10/14/2014 10:41 pm »
so.. just curious.. what do you think a deadline is?

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1285
  • United States
  • Liked: 828
  • Likes Given: 1797
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #256 on: 10/14/2014 10:48 pm »
so.. just curious.. what do you think a deadline is?

I will freely admit I was intermixing to much deadline and schedule dates, my apologies.  The proposals included a schedule with dates attached.  You are correct, no specific deadlines from NASA in the project that would include financial penalties( or other penalties) for not meeting those deadlines.  However NASA did look at the proposed completion dates in the schedule that was submitted as part of each companies schedule.  However NASA is fully aware that funding issues could cause those dates to slip so it would be pointless to set a deadline.   
« Last Edit: 10/14/2014 10:53 pm by brovane »
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline mkent

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 118
  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #257 on: 10/14/2014 11:44 pm »
You are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget.

F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
E/A-18G Growler
C-17 Globemaster III for the last 20 years
CH-47F Chinook
AH-64 Block III Apache
JDAM
SDB
Atlas V
Delta IV Heavy
WGS

I believe these were as well:

GPS IIF
TDRS

You will not find such project.

I found ten (maybe 12).

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #258 on: 10/14/2014 11:56 pm »
You will not find such project.

I found ten (maybe 12).

You must be using some definition of "on budget" that the rest of us are not privy to. Boeing and Lockheed wouldn't agree with your list, they regularly talk about the losses they took on some of those projects for going overbudget.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37442
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21452
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Commercial Crew (CCtCAP) - Discussion Thread
« Reply #259 on: 10/15/2014 12:09 am »

You are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget. You will not find such project. 

You are very mistaken and must be overlooking data that greatly conflicts with your incorrect statement.

Tags:
 

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