Considering the odds of Starliner surviving past the ISS contract are getting increasingly tenuous, all the CLD providers are looking nervously at a SpaceX monopoly in the short term, which suggests crew dragon by definition will need to fly beyond 2030 for at least a few years.
Quote from: Asteroza on 01/22/2024 09:52 pmConsidering the odds of Starliner surviving past the ISS contract are getting increasingly tenuous, all the CLD providers are looking nervously at a SpaceX monopoly in the short term, which suggests crew dragon by definition will need to fly beyond 2030 for at least a few years. Why? SpaceX will be trying very hard to crewed Starship operational by then. If they succeed, they have little incentive to try to extend the life of Crew Dragon, and IMO they won't unless NASA insists. There is substantial overlap between crewed Starship and Starship CLD.The big unknown for me is the structure of the Commercial Crew Program in the crewed Starship era.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/01/2023 03:56 pmhttps://twitter.com/jenakuns/status/1697442574099947530QuoteCool fact: the CSCC2 SAA's have listed near term planned Starship milestones such as:- First Starship launch with payload Q1 2024- Successful Starship Recovery Q3 2024- Starship LEO crewed space station PDR Q4 2028Also details to the Blue Origin orbital crew capsule timeline.I think this is the SAA mentioned in the previous post?Edit to add: a few years before we get to the more interesting milestones
https://twitter.com/jenakuns/status/1697442574099947530QuoteCool fact: the CSCC2 SAA's have listed near term planned Starship milestones such as:- First Starship launch with payload Q1 2024- Successful Starship Recovery Q3 2024- Starship LEO crewed space station PDR Q4 2028Also details to the Blue Origin orbital crew capsule timeline.
Cool fact: the CSCC2 SAA's have listed near term planned Starship milestones such as:- First Starship launch with payload Q1 2024- Successful Starship Recovery Q3 2024- Starship LEO crewed space station PDR Q4 2028Also details to the Blue Origin orbital crew capsule timeline.
How Did Commercial Crew Dodge That Bullet?Phil McAlisterDirector, Commercial Space Division at NASA -…Published Feb 28, 2024[The following article was written by Phil McAlister, Director of NASA’s Commercial Space Division. The views reflected here are those of Phil McAlister and do not necessarily reflect the views of NASA.]
Interesting article about how the commercial crew program nearly didn’t start, due to the NASA 2010 Appropriations Act prohibiting the starting of any new program in FY2010:https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-did-commercial-crew-dodge-bullet-phil-mcalister-onxneQuoteHow Did Commercial Crew Dodge That Bullet?Phil McAlisterDirector, Commercial Space Division at NASA -…Published Feb 28, 2024[The following article was written by Phil McAlister, Director of NASA’s Commercial Space Division. The views reflected here are those of Phil McAlister and do not necessarily reflect the views of NASA.]TL;DR - they called it CCDev2 and argued it was a continuation of the existing (largely) cargo program.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/27/2024 11:00 pmIf SpaceX and NASA agree on the new 15-mission lifetime, they probably don't really need the fifth Crew Dragon, but it's good insurance.Apart from the NASA/ISS, Axiom/ISS and Polaris Dawn missions, there's also missions to the proposed VAST space station and maybe others. This will be offset somewhat if Starliner becomes operational.
If SpaceX and NASA agree on the new 15-mission lifetime, they probably don't really need the fifth Crew Dragon, but it's good insurance.
NASA's Steve Stich says they are preparing Starliner-1 and Crew-10 in parallel for the Feb 2025 crew rotation mission to the ISS, so some time before they have to decide which one they fly as they work on Starliner certification. (Unclear how much time, though.)
SpaceX was awarded $266,678 to study an emergency response.
Boeing’s Starliner has cost at least twice as much as SpaceX’s Crew Dragon"Risk remains that we may record additional losses in future periods."by Stephen Clark - Aug 1, 2024 9:27amBoeing announced another financial charge Wednesday for its troubled Starliner commercial crew program, bringing the company's total losses on Starliner to $1.6 billion.
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1806762658122895651QuoteNASA's Steve Stich says they are preparing Starliner-1 and Crew-10 in parallel for the Feb 2025 crew rotation mission to the ISS, so some time before they have to decide which one they fly as they work on Starliner certification. (Unclear how much time, though.)Does this mean potentially training two crews in parallel and which flys first depends on whether Starliner is certified in time?Personally I can’t see Starliner being certified for February.
At the Crew 9 mission overview press conference, Stich announced Crew-10 is taking the February 2025 slot. The August 2025 slot will now be either Crew-11 or Starliner-1 with a decision to be made at a later date.
Ok, a high level thread on how decisions get made at NASA for the Commercial Crew program. This is going to be a freshman level lecture, not a grad school one, so please forgive me for the many small errors I will inevitably make (plus, its been a few years for me!).🧵On the front line are the NASA requirement owners. Each requirement levied on a Commercial Crew partner, has an owner. They are the first to decide if a requirement is sufficiently verified or not, or if there is some controversy/disagreement.Above the requirement owners and their offices (eg., Struct/Mech, Prox-Ops, Software, etc.) sit two boards: The Engineering Review Board (ERB) and the Safety Technical Review Board (STRB).The ERB handles dissent, disagreement (e.g., between engineering requirement owners and the commercial partner), or nuances related to the verification of engineering requirements. Lots of negotiation between ERB and commercial partner. It is chaired by the CCP's chief engineer.The STRB handles the verification of controls within the Hazard Reports (HRs) written by the contractor, leading to ultimate sign off on the HRs. It is chaired by CCP's safety chief.Next, things start to split a bit. Commercial Crew is really a marriage of two separate programs with two program managers: CCP and ISS.Space Station requirements go up the ISS side of the split, for closure or debate. All other requirements go up the CCP side. There is close coordination between programs to make sure everyone in sync.Next stop above the ERB and STRB is the Transportation Integration Control Board (TICB). This is the first real place where, if there is disagreement, either between NASA stakeholders or between NASA and the contractor, things get "aired out" or "shopped." Got to read the room!The TICB is also where the contractor can bring a request for variance or waiver to NASA. The TICB can't grant those requests (only PCB can), but they can listen and give pointed feedback. Again, you have to be able to read the room here or you are sunk.Pause: Remember that the NASA Admin, AAs and Program managers DON'T give up their authority as deciders. All these board chairs so far make recommendations, not official decisions. However, 90% of the time it’s the same thing. But the 10% is very relevant to rest of this thread.Back to the chain of decision making. Above the TICB sits the CCP Program Control Board (for CCP requirements), the ISS PCB (for ISS requirements) or the Joint PCB (for requirements that fall under both program managers). Joint PCBs are infrequent as they are usually overkill.Steve Stich is the PCB chair (the decider) for CCP and Dana Weigel is the PCB chair (the decider) for ISS. The PCB chair has to (obviously) be technically sharp (as we've witnessed), but they also need a 3-sigma high EQ.The PCB Chair's job is to get to/drive unanimous consensus, especially on any controversial issue. Critical: they need to know the time on the clock and the score at all times. Every decision has its own unique timeline and its own concerns and/or dissenters.The chair (and their point person for a given issue) has a job to figure out who has what concerns and why, and address them or figure out how to collect more relevant data to bring focus on/resolution to the dissenters' concerns.I don't support the characterization some have made that Starliner is "stranded" or "not stranded." That's a bit of a side show. Right now the PCB chairs know how much time they have on the clock, the score in the room, and probably also their internal decision.Some stakeholder(s) are currently dissenting/want more (specifically identified) data at the PCB. I can likely guess who. Because the clock is ticking, that kicks off the chain that goes from the PCB chair up to the Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) AA for decision.But...at that level, the SOMD AA's counterparts can dissent on behalf of their person on the PCB. The decision then goes to the NASA Administrator.NASA has a robust process in place to weigh risk and make sure all parties are heard. This process is very much informed by the Columbia's lessons learned. As you can see, they don't optimize for time when they don't have to. They don't optimize for the public's impatience.For time critical issues NASA/Boeing have trained flight operators and a whole different process/chain, and they act with speed and within their training. NASA determined this issue had a longer fuse, so it went to the PCB.I hope this has been helpful. I don't want people to criticize NASA's process by comparing to a commercial company's decision making process. I have experience with both. They are different for a reason.Processes can/should always be improved, but not by comparing apples to oranges. NASA should always conduct an after action review in instances like this to see if the process can improve.
#SpaceX's #Dragon2 & #Boeing's #Starliner fleet overview as of Aug 1, 2024
Robyn Gatens has become acting head of Commercial Spaceflight Division, taking over from Phil McAlister, who as of Friday is a senior advisor. McAlister headed the division for 19 yrs.
https://x.com/Free_Space/status/1825661368239824938Quote from: Irene Klotz Robyn Gatens has become acting head of Commercial Spaceflight Division, taking over from Phil McAlister, who as of Friday is a senior advisor. McAlister headed the division for 19 yrs.Interesting timing...
It's kind of wild that the NASA official who is arguably most responsible for SpaceX getting a commercial crew contract a decade ago is getting pushed out at the same time Dragon saves the agency's astronauts.
To be clear, the timing of the CFT debate and McAlister's reassignment may or may or be related. NASA has not responded to why the change was made.
They probably aren't related. But the point remains, the guy who stood on the table for SpaceX during the commercial crew selection meeting is being demoted at the same time SpaceX is coming to the aid of the company that almost got the sole-source contract.
