Author Topic: Boeing’s CST-100 leases OPF-3 following NASA agreement with Space Florida  (Read 31015 times)


Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6957
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 535
  • Likes Given: 609
Should be interesting to see what they actually do there.  Will they just pre-flight there or will they do post-flight and refurbishing for future missions?
"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 Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Should be interesting to see what they actually do there.  Will they just pre-flight there or will they do post-flight and refurbishing for future missions?

It seems to me it will be something like this:

OPF 3 - Final manufacturing and vehicle processing.  Possible/Probable turnaround of already flown vehicles

SSME Processing Facility - Vehicle manufacturing prior to final assembly.  Logistics support, manufacturing support for previously flown vehicles.

PCC - Office space and mission control for monitoring launch ops and then on-orbit oprations and revcovery. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 39
I love how Chris termed Boeing a "Suitor." :D

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1434
  • Likes Given: 4475
They will actually put the factory there? Might then be the case that's bigger than 3.6m?

Online butters

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Liked: 307
  • Likes Given: 70
The OPFs are broadly useful for NASA's commercial launch providers. The less convincing prospect is whether any commercial launch service will elect to utilize LC-39 or the VAB. The CT/MLP infrastructure is a big operational burden which isn't readily compatible with existing pad flow concepts for Atlas, Delta, and Falcon. Maybe if ATK does that Liberty Stick thing, but otherwise I find it difficult to imagine an EELV crawling out to LC-39B on an MLP.

Online Chris Bergin

I love how Chris termed Boeing a "Suitor." :D

Heh - that works though, right? You've got me all worried now :o

Offline simpl simon

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 0
Is anybody discussing money? Has Space Florida acquired OPF-3 free of charge? Any info on what Boeing is paying for the lease?

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Any info on what Boeing is paying for the lease?


I would be very, very surprised if that is ever disclosed.  That is between Boeing and NASA and is likely proprietary.
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline kch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
  • Liked: 466
  • Likes Given: 8318
I love how Chris termed Boeing a "Suitor." :D

Heh - that works though, right? You've got me all worried now :o

It looked and sounded "suitor-ble" to me ... ;)

Offline simpl simon

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 0
Any info on what Boeing is paying for the lease?


I would be very, very surprised if that is ever disclosed.  That is between Boeing and NASA and is likely proprietary.
I would be very, very surprised as well, but no harm in asking.
And why is it between Boeing and NASA if Space Florida has acquired the building?

Online Cherokee43v6

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 572
  • Garner, NC
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 79
Any info on what Boeing is paying for the lease?


I would be very, very surprised if that is ever disclosed.  That is between Boeing and NASA and is likely proprietary.
I would be very, very surprised as well, but no harm in asking.
And why is it between Boeing and NASA if Space Florida has acquired the building?


Supposition on my part.  Space Florida is acting as a Commercial Realtor, recruiting appropriate businesses on behalf of NASA for the available facilites.  Without knowing more about the specifics of the relationship between NASA and Space Florida, this makes the most sense.
"I didn't open the can of worms...
        ...I just pointed at it and laughed a little too loudly."

Online Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22301
  • Liked: 569
  • Likes Given: 239
Should be interesting to see what they actually do there.  Will they just pre-flight there or will they do post-flight and refurbishing for future missions?

It seems to me it will be something like this:

OPF 3 - Final manufacturing and vehicle processing.  Possible/Probable turnaround of already flown vehicles

SSME Processing Facility - Vehicle manufacturing prior to final assembly.  Logistics support, manufacturing support for previously flown vehicles.

PCC - Office space and mission control for monitoring launch ops and then on-orbit oprations and revcovery. 

Was Boeing actually awarded the SSME processing facility, or just speculation?
"Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." - Robert Goddard

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Was Boeing actually awarded the SSME processing facility, or just speculation?

That's my understanding. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 1
The OPFs are broadly useful for NASA's commercial launch providers. The less convincing prospect is whether any commercial launch service will elect to utilize LC-39 or the VAB. The CT/MLP infrastructure is a big operational burden which isn't readily compatible with existing pad flow concepts for Atlas, Delta, and Falcon. Maybe if ATK does that Liberty Stick thing, but otherwise I find it difficult to imagine an EELV crawling out to LC-39B on an MLP.
I would recommend you look at the 21st Century Space Complex slideshows on L2.
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 collectSPACE

  • The Source for Space History & Artifacts
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
  • Houston, TX
    • collectSPACE
  • Liked: 242
  • Likes Given: 4


(We also posted a new Boeing CST-100 overview video here: http://www.collectspace.com/cst100_opf3)

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5476
  • "With peace and hope for all mankind."
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 676
Is anybody discussing money?

Well, if you believe what other sites are reporting:
Former shuttle commander Robert Cabana, director of the Kennedy Space Center, said the deal was a win-win arrangement for the government.

"There is no financial exchange of funds between space Florida and KSC," he said. "We are turning over the use of the OPF bay three, which NASA no longer has a definitive need for and that we do not have funding to maintain. We would be tearing it down, so we are allowing Space Florida, through this use agreement, to have it for 15 years ... at no cost to NASA."

Space Florida, in turn, will lease the building to Boeing
-- sdsds --

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26864
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6773
  • Likes Given: 4803
The OPFs are broadly useful for NASA's commercial launch providers. The less convincing prospect is whether any commercial launch service will elect to utilize LC-39 or the VAB. The CT/MLP infrastructure is a big operational burden which isn't readily compatible with existing pad flow concepts for Atlas, Delta, and Falcon. Maybe if ATK does that Liberty Stick thing, but otherwise I find it difficult to imagine an EELV crawling out to LC-39B on an MLP.
Have to agree with that, from my limited perspective not being in Florida myself (not right now, at least).

OPF and other similar facilities do seem to provide useful space for NASA's commercial launch and spacecraft providers.
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 sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5476
  • "With peace and hope for all mankind."
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 576
  • Likes Given: 676
The less convincing prospect is whether any commercial launch service will elect to utilize LC-39 or the VAB. The CT/MLP infrastructure is a big operational burden which isn't readily compatible with existing pad flow concepts for Atlas, Delta, and Falcon. [...] I find it difficult to imagine an EELV crawling out to LC-39B on an MLP.

For AV-402 ULA called the concept "ULA-K39-02."  The image attached is from http://ulalaunch.com/site/docs/publications/AtlasDeltaCrewLaunch2010.pdf
-- sdsds --

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 664
  • Likes Given: 195
Any info on what Boeing is paying for the lease?


I would be very, very surprised if that is ever disclosed.  That is between Boeing and NASA and is likely proprietary.

Don't they have to disclose it since it is a lease of a govt owned property? No national security secrecy would seem to be required here.

Just wondering, it seems odd.  :)
« Last Edit: 10/31/2011 07:03 PM by Lars_J »

Tags: