It could be argued if you can only fund 1 then that should be Boeing, as they have had the most full awards and are least likely to continue on their own funding.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 08/18/2014 07:03 amQuote from: rcoppola on 08/18/2014 01:52 amI'll keep my eyes out for those dancing unicorns...That's an understandable PoV but consider BO have developed a 100 000lb LO2/LH2 engine.No one does that (especially the LH2 part) just as a pleasant diversion to pass away the afternoons. Something is in the works, the question is what (and when)?I've always found it curious that BO have felt the need to be so secretive about things, other than occasional public missives they really don't say much about their progress or otherwise.
Quote from: rcoppola on 08/18/2014 01:52 amI'll keep my eyes out for those dancing unicorns...That's an understandable PoV but consider BO have developed a 100 000lb LO2/LH2 engine.No one does that (especially the LH2 part) just as a pleasant diversion to pass away the afternoons. Something is in the works, the question is what (and when)?
I'll keep my eyes out for those dancing unicorns...
In the end, they become as know to the general public as Sea Launch sad to say. Without manned flights, SpaceX looses it's appeal.
I didn't say Boeing would be interested in that. I agree they wouldn't be. They have stated quite clearly they have no intention of self-fundning this without a clear path to an ROI. Which they don't have without NASA.
I'm expecting SpaceX to be the odd man out. Boeing has flight heritage...
...and big lobbyists.
Sierra Nevada has wings and that's something NASA wants it seems.
That leaves SpaceX holding the bag.
Without manned flights, SpaceX looses it's appeal.
What flight heritage? The last spacecraft they designed and built was last century. I'd be surprised if any of those employees even work on the CST-100.
Interesting that you claim Boeing has some sort of flight heritage, but forget that SpaceX is the only contender flying human-rated and NASA certified spacecraft that they designed and built.
Not sure how it makes sense to reward the company that has received the most money but is the least committed to creating a critical service.
Quote from: mr. mark on 08/19/2014 01:33 amI'm expecting SpaceX to be the odd man out. Boeing has flight heritage...What flight heritage? The last spacecraft they designed and built was last century. I'd be surprised if any of those employees even work on the CST-100.Quote...and big lobbyists.You must be assuming that NASA awards contracts based on bribes? That technical merit and superior business models have no influence? If that were true then Boeing deserves to be chosen...QuoteSierra Nevada has wings and that's something NASA wants it seems.I do agree with that, and I think most of us want Sierra Nevada to get fully funded.QuoteThat leaves SpaceX holding the bag.Interesting that you claim Boeing has some sort of flight heritage, but forget that SpaceX is the only contender flying human-rated and NASA certified spacecraft that they designed and built.QuoteWithout manned flights, SpaceX looses it's appeal. Not sure if you've heard of this Elon Musk guy, and his goal to reach Mars? And how he is currently dominating the news without having flown any humans?
I am pretty sure Boeing will be one of the two. As for Elon Musk, a tiger's bite only hurts if he has teeth. Not many people are going to have Occupy Mars shirts if it takes SpaceX five years or more just to fly their capsule to orbit. Losing the NASA contract would be a HUGE blow to their plans. I think Musk is talking it down but, we all know how hard it would be to field a capsule without adequate funding from NASA.
I am pretty sure Boeing will be one of the two.
As for Elon Musk, a tiger's bite only hurts if he has teeth.
I'm expecting SpaceX to be the odd man out.
Boeing has flight heritage and big lobbyists.
Sierra Nevada has wings and that's something NASA wants it seems. That leaves SpaceX holding the bag. I am one of SpaceX's biggest supporters but, I'm not sure that this wind is blowing in their direction. If not, they'll stay busy with cargo, commercial satellite launches and reuse for now. In the end, they become as know to the general public as Sea Launch sad to say. Without manned flights, SpaceX looses it's appeal.
Haha, makes me think of when I tell people I worked for Loral and the usual response is, the cosmetics company?
And wouldn't the flip side of that be that NASA would be able to spend less to create the same level of service with one of the other competitors?
It is not human rated. It can be human occupied.
Quite wrong. X-37 and ISS and they did Shuttle sustaining engineering. They have quite a lot of experience. Not to mention leftovers from OSP and Spacehab.
So no actual capsule design experience for several decades but quite a lot of sub systems work?
If closing the 'gap' and stopping the $70M/seat payments are NASA (political) goals near the top of the list, wouldn't significant criteria be who will be ready first and cost the least? SpaceX seems to win in both categories, and has a really nice pad being developed at the Cape to ice the deal. Not a great time for a NASA slapdown/footshot by selecting all but SpaceX.
Boeing has expressed doubts about moving forward if they are not selected. SNC will probably move forward if not selected, but probably needs the money more than SpaceX. SpaceX has stated they are moving forward no matter what happens.
If a NASA long term goal is to maximize competition to create a variety of capabilities and across the board cost reduction, wouldn't SpaceX be the obvious one to drop if NASA can't take all three forward?
Quote from: Scylla on 08/19/2014 04:57 pmIf a NASA long term goal is to maximize competition to create a variety of capabilities and across the board cost reduction, wouldn't SpaceX be the obvious one to drop if NASA can't take all three forward?Not sure I understand your logic.
IOW's Dragon 1 has cracked the core issues of building a vehicle solid enough and safe enough to be coupled to the ISS for the standard period of time. I'm sure Boeing and SNC can be made to do so also but the fact remains they have not done so yet.
TBH that sounds like they are on an equal footing with SNC, without the flight tests.