Quote from: mike robel on 07/08/2018 04:11 pmQuote from: RonM on 07/08/2018 03:31 pmNASA is planing on using commercial space stations after ISS. They even said they would be the anchor tenant.Congress, the current administration, and the past administration support NASA helping establish commercial use of space. NASA isn't going to "shut it all down" to support NASA programs.Who are these companies planning to orbit a commercial space station?https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nextstep-partnerships-develop-ground-prototypesAs implied by RonM's post NASA is helping the companies developing habitats. Forward plans for these companies vary, but multiple have explicit intent to build LEO stations. In addition to the companies listed there, Axiom Space is also working on a station, and is one of the companies interested in using an ISS port as an initial staging point.
Quote from: RonM on 07/08/2018 03:31 pmNASA is planing on using commercial space stations after ISS. They even said they would be the anchor tenant.Congress, the current administration, and the past administration support NASA helping establish commercial use of space. NASA isn't going to "shut it all down" to support NASA programs.Who are these companies planning to orbit a commercial space station?
NASA is planing on using commercial space stations after ISS. They even said they would be the anchor tenant.Congress, the current administration, and the past administration support NASA helping establish commercial use of space. NASA isn't going to "shut it all down" to support NASA programs.
Quote from: woods170 on 07/08/2018 03:51 pmI've got a question for you Ed: Why are you seemingly under the impression that only government agencies are allowed to do human spaceflight? I'm not under that impression. I merely note that NASA has the big funding that has made this all happen. There is no equivalent commercial customer for this service. NASA is the only customer for Falcon 9/Dragon, Antares/Cygnus, CST-100/Atlas 5, and Dream Chaser/Atlas 5. No one even bought the unmanned Dragon Lab missions suggested by SpaceX. The rich people mission around the Moon seems to have gone by the wayside. Etc.
I've got a question for you Ed: Why are you seemingly under the impression that only government agencies are allowed to do human spaceflight?
Quote from: edkyle99 on 07/08/2018 04:28 pmQuote from: woods170 on 07/08/2018 03:51 pmI've got a question for you Ed: Why are you seemingly under the impression that only government agencies are allowed to do human spaceflight? I'm not under that impression. I merely note that NASA has the big funding that has made this all happen. There is no equivalent commercial customer for this service. NASA is the only customer for Falcon 9/Dragon, Antares/Cygnus, CST-100/Atlas 5, and Dream Chaser/Atlas 5. No one even bought the unmanned Dragon Lab missions suggested by SpaceX. The rich people mission around the Moon seems to have gone by the wayside. Etc.No, you're not "merely noting", you are coming to the conclusion that because no non-NASA customers yet exist that NASA now owns the Commercial Cargo and Commercial Crew transportation systems. Which is completely false.Did you miss the many congressional hearings where Boeing and SpaceX were asked if they were offering their crew transportation services to non-NASA customers? And they both said yes, and that their business cases assumed commercial customers. Boeing even has an agreement with Bigelow for crew transportation services.All of the commercial transportation services own their own equipment, and have the right to offer their services to non-NASA customers. NASA has no ownership rights.That there are no commercial customers besides NASA today is just a reflection of how expensive space is, not an indication that NASA owns the rights to all crew and cargo transportation to space.
Once certification is complete, and NASA crew are being flown to ISS, the two vendors will have freedom to use their returned vehicles as they choose.
I'll also make another prediction: neither of these vehicles will ever be allowed to go to the ISS ferrying exclusively non-government astronauts.
If either system ever flies for non-government customers, which I doubt, it'll be a free-flying mission or to some other space station, but not ISS.
No, you're not "merely noting", you are coming to the conclusion that because no non-NASA customers yet exist that NASA now owns the Commercial Cargo and Commercial Crew transportation systems. Which is completely false.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 07/08/2018 08:03 pmNo, you're not "merely noting", you are coming to the conclusion that because no non-NASA customers yet exist that NASA now owns the Commercial Cargo and Commercial Crew transportation systems. Which is completely false.You are simply making your own, incorrect interpretation about what I wrote.
I don't know why.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 07/09/2018 01:29 amQuote from: Coastal Ron on 07/08/2018 08:03 pmNo, you're not "merely noting", you are coming to the conclusion that because no non-NASA customers yet exist that NASA now owns the Commercial Cargo and Commercial Crew transportation systems. Which is completely false.You are simply making your own, incorrect interpretation about what I wrote.An incorrect interpretation of an incorrect statement? There is a joke in there somewhere...
There's a topic? I read the first post and still didn't know what y'all are talking about.
The Agency is looking for ideas, likely from those same Commercial Crew and Cargo providers among others. It was signaling that it might be a customer for some of these services, post-ISS, but it was also signaling that the money wouldn't flow as readily, it seems to me. See the last page of attached.
Quote from: woods170 on 07/08/2018 03:51 pmI've got a question for you Ed: Why are you seemingly under the impression that only government agencies are allowed to do human spaceflight? I'm not under that impression. I merely note that NASA has the big funding that has made this all happen. There is no equivalent commercial customer for this service. NASA is the only customer for Falcon 9/Dragon, Antares/Cygnus, CST-100/Atlas 5, and Dream Chaser/Atlas 5. No one even bought the unmanned Dragon Lab missions suggested by SpaceX. The rich people mission around the Moon seems to have gone by the wayside. Etc. - Ed Kyle
I find it useful to think in terms of aim, roadmap, strategies, objectives (goals, missions), and tactics.The aim is the highest level. It points in a particular direction. It is generally open ended, not specifying an end state, you cannot ask the question "have I reached my aim?". Instead you can ask the questions "am I going in the direction of my aim?" and "does my aim need to change?"A roadmap lays out the landscape go get from one place to another. So if you are in New York and the aim in get to the west coast, then the roadmap shows the ways you can get there. It has a number of interesting properties: firstly there is not a single route, there are a number with different properties (shortest, quickest, cheapest); secondly, there are intermediate waypoints which may act as short term goals; thirdly, it is not necessary to plan the entire route in advance; lastly, the goal (get to San Francisco) can change (get to LA) while the aim stays the same. The roadmap may change as new technologies come along, which give new ways of reaching your destination. Questions you can ask are "where next?"Strategies are overall ways of achieving aims, so in the context of the roadmap above a strategy might be go to the next city west of your current position. Questions you can ask about an objective are "is it working?", or "is there a better strategy?"Objectives are shorter term and are either met or not, you can fail to meet the objective. Questions you can ask are "is the objective achievable with the available resources?", "have I reached my objective?" and "is the mission a success?"Tactics are ways of achieving an objective.
There is also the unspoken aim "use HSF as a tool of american foreign policy, demonstrating soft power by doing things that other countries cannot technically or economically accomplish, why binding potential rivals into programs under american leadership".
Who are these non-NASA customers, who would be willing to spend, what is it, something like $500-700 million dollars or more per flight? And where will they go? Where will their non-NASA owned launch facilities be located?
NASA will use Commercial Crew only as long as it is needed, which is to say only as long as ISS remains in orbit unless some other NASA LEO destination is created. After that I do believe it will be shuttered because a program like that can't survive on a couple of billionaire joy rides. It needs steady annual funding.