NASA CRS2 Contract Award Announcement - Jan 14, 2016

[Steven Pietrobon]

Shuttle is not the benchmark.

Why not? If the mission costs are starting to become comparable with Shuttle, then there hasn't been much progress.

It's how much the Russians were charging for Soyuz seats and the whole "assured access" requirement.

This thread is for cargo, not crew, so I'm not sure what your point is.

You are just piling bad assumptions on top of each other.

Which of my assumptions are bad and why are they bad?

NASA is not limited to 4 missions per year, they could order more, for example the chart at https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37802.msg1799634#msg1799634 shows 5 CRS2 missions in FY2021.

Thanks for pointing that out! I was using the same chart (not edited by NSF) and I missed the SpaceX CRS2 mission in FY2021. As FY2022 and FY2023 are four missions, FY2024 is also likely to be planned as four missions, so that makes 21 missions at $667M each.

The contract doesn't have to end in 2024, it can be extended like the original CRS contract. The original CRS contract has a 7 years span (2008 to 2015), but now it's extended to 2019/2020.

Yes, but NASA said the maximum of $14B is for 2016 to 2024, not after. Any extension beyond 2024 may require additional funding.

Looking historically at CRS missions and the upcoming plan, they have averaged 4-5 per year. Assuming 5 per year, that would be 25 missions, 7 more than the minimum in the contracts. To give themselves maximum flexibility NASA would have given each of the providers all of those extra missions as an option, or 13 per provider, 39 total.

Thanks for pointing that out! I hadn't realised that NASA could be giving the same number of options for each provider and including them all in the $14B. You are of course assuming worst case of five missions per year and that each provider got the same maximum of 7 missions each. We know that NASA has only scheduled 17 missions to FY2023 which NASA has likely scheduled FY2024 as four missions, as I explained above. That gives a total of 18+3*(21-18) = 27 missions or $519M each, compared to your value of 18+3*(25-18) = 39 missions or $359M each.

The actual cost per mission would probably be at least 10% less than this (probably no single mission would be a maximum cost one anyway, because that would involve different payloads that need every type of special late load, quick return, mission assurance and whatever other options may exist at the same time.)

Yes, I agree with that. So that would put each mission from $323M to $467M. Thanks again for your reply!

[su27k]

NASA is not limited to 4 missions per year, they could order more, for example the chart at https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37802.msg1799634#msg1799634 shows 5 CRS2 missions in FY2021.

Thanks for pointing that out! I was using the same chart (not edited by NSF) and I missed the SpaceX CRS2 mission in FY2021. As FY2022 and FY2023 are four missions, FY2024 is also likely to be planned as four missions, so that makes 21 missions at $667M each.

If you read the fine print, it says the 4 "Future Cargo+" missions per year is notional and will be changed in the future. Given they have 6 CRS/CRS2 missions planned for FY2020, I wouldn't be surprised they'll have 5 to 6 missions every year afterwards.

The contract doesn't have to end in 2024, it can be extended like the original CRS contract. The original CRS contract has a 7 years span (2008 to 2015), but now it's extended to 2019/2020.

Yes, but NASA said the maximum of $14B is for 2016 to 2024, not after. Any extension beyond 2024 may require additional funding.

That may be a simple misunderstanding or miscommunication about the contract. I don't think CRS2 contract is publicly released (Maybe someone should FOIA it), but in CRS1 contract, it has the following wording:

I.A.2 PERIOD COVERED BY PROCUREMENT
This effort covers a contract period of 7 years. The total period of performance for this effort is
December 23, 2008 through December 31, 2015.

I.A.3 INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ), FIRM FIXED
PRICE CONTRACT
In accordance with Clause VI.A.5, Single or Multiple Awards (FAR 52.216-27) (Oct 1995),
NASA may elect to award multiple contracts. The guaranteed minimum value of this contract is
the negotiated value of 20,000 kg (20 MT) ofupmass to the International Space Station (ISS)
based on the values established in Clause I.A.4. If the contract includes the acceptance of Sub-
CLIN 0001AC, an additional guaranteed minimum value of this contract is increased by the
negotiated value of 3,000 kg (3 MT) of Return Cargo Downmass, based on the values
established in Clause I.A.4.
The total maximum value of each contract awarded is $3.1 billion.

The bold is done by me, it's pretty easy to mistaken these two parts to mean maximum of $3.1 billion is for 2008 to 2015, but that is not the case as we have seen.

[woods170]

That may be a simple misunderstanding or miscommunication about the contract. I don't think CRS2 contract is publicly released (Maybe someone should FOIA it), but in CRS1 contract, it has the following wording:

I.A.2 PERIOD COVERED BY PROCUREMENT
This effort covers a contract period of 7 years. The total period of performance for this effort is
December 23, 2008 through December 31, 2015.

I.A.3 INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ), FIRM FIXED
PRICE CONTRACT
In accordance with Clause VI.A.5, Single or Multiple Awards (FAR 52.216-27) (Oct 1995),
NASA may elect to award multiple contracts. The guaranteed minimum value of this contract is
the negotiated value of 20,000 kg (20 MT) ofupmass to the International Space Station (ISS)
based on the values established in Clause I.A.4. If the contract includes the acceptance of Sub-
CLIN 0001AC, an additional guaranteed minimum value of this contract is increased by the
negotiated value of 3,000 kg (3 MT) of Return Cargo Downmass, based on the values
established in Clause I.A.4.
The total maximum value of each contract awarded is $3.1 billion.

The bold is done by me, it's pretty easy to mistaken these two parts to mean maximum of $3.1 billion is for 2008 to 2015, but that is not the case as we have seen.

CRS-1 contract for SpaceX was eventually maxed-out at the reported maximum of $3.1 billion. That is for 20 CRS-1 missions in total. The last 5 missions were awarded just a week before the original contract period ran out.

Contract period in this case doesn't indicate the period within which the missions must be flown, but the period within which the missions must be awarded.

Same goes for the CRS-2 contract. NASA must award the final missions, covered under the CRS-2 contract, no later than 2024. But those awarded missions can fly years after that (assuming that ISS is still active beyond 2024).

In short: the CRS-2 contract has a maximum value of $14 billion, but only 18 missions have been awarded so far (a minimum of six missions per provider, for 3 providers).
My hunch is that NASA can have at least double that amount of missions for that $14 billion. And IMO likely even more.

[john smith 19]

CRS-1 contract for SpaceX was eventually maxed-out at the reported maximum of $3.1 billion. That is for 20 CRS-1 missions in total. The last 5 missions were awarded just a week before the original contract period ran out.

So that's 2 suppliers at (2x$3.1Bn) total for 20 missions? that's $310m/each?

In short: the CRS-2 contract has a maximum value of $14 billion, but only 18 missions have been awarded so far (a minimum of six missions per provider, for 3 providers).
My hunch is that NASA can have at least double that amount of missions for that $14 billion. And IMO likely even more.

If that's $14Bn split across 3 suppliers and 18 missions that about $777m a flight. More than double the cost of CRS1.

On that basis it would seem they will be awarding more flights.

BTW let's recall one of the justifications for CRS was to return crew launch capability tot he US. On that basis CRS1 were a 7 person Dragon with a pilot that would be $44mm/seat, or 51/seat if it returned immediately with the pilot. But at the current $777m that would be  $111m/seat.

[woods170]

CRS-1 contract for SpaceX was eventually maxed-out at the reported maximum of $3.1 billion. That is for 20 CRS-1 missions in total. The last 5 missions were awarded just a week before the original contract period ran out.

So that's 2 suppliers at (2x$3.1Bn) total for 20 missions? that's $310m/each?

No. Twenty (20) missions for SpaceX, ten (10) for Orbital. A total of 30 missions under CRS-1.

See here: http://spacenews.com/spacex-wins-5-new-space-station-cargo-missions-in-nasa-contract-estimated-at-700-million/

The contract, signed just before Christmas, was not announced at the time by either party but has been confirmed by both. It brings to 20 the number of missions now assigned to SpaceX under the Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract first signed in 2008.

In contrast, the other company performing CRS missions, Orbital ATK of Dulles, Virginia, has been assigned just 10 flights and was not part of the end-year orders.

In short: the CRS-2 contract has a maximum value of $14 billion, but only 18 missions have been awarded so far (a minimum of six missions per provider, for 3 providers).
My hunch is that NASA can have at least double that amount of missions for that $14 billion. And IMO likely even more.

If that's $14Bn split across 3 suppliers and 18 missions that about $777m a flight. More than double the cost of CRS1.

On that basis it would seem they will be awarding more flights.

Is a little more subtle that that. People keep dividing the $14 billion number by the number of (currently) contracted missions.

That is flat out wrong

The 18 missions now contracted under CRS-2 will not cost NASA $14 billion. Not even remotely close. Remember, that $14 billion figure is a maximum contract value whereas the number of 18 missions is a minimum missions number.

There is no publically available information on price-per-mission so it is impossible to exactly determine the price per mission. Therefore there is also no basis to state that a CRS-2 mission has a price-tag of $777 million. Educated guesses, from extrapolating the average mission price of CRS-1, is the best we can do.

Take an example from CRS-1. It eventually became clear that the maximum contract value of CRS-1 was $6.2 billion (two providers with a maximum contract value of $3.1 billion each).
When announced in 2008 just 20 missions were awarded under CRS-1: 12 for SpaceX and 8 for Orbital.
But, given that those 20 missions did not max out the values of the contract NASA was able to buy additional missions within the maximum value of the CRS-1 contract. Two additional missions for Orbital and 8 additional missions for SpaceX. So, what began as a 20 mission deal ended up being a 30 mission deal without breaking the max value of the CRS-1 contracts.

CRS-2 is repeating this. The maximum contract value is $14 billion. So far, just 18 missions have been awarded. Those 18 missions will cost NASA substantially less than $14 billion. So, within the boundaries of that $14 billion contract value, there remains a serious amount of money to buy additional CRS-2 missions. My hunch is that the CRS-2 contract value can buy as much as 45 CRS-2 missions.

[gongora]

No. Twenty (20) missions for SpaceX, ten (10) for Orbital. A total of 30 missions under CRS-1.

11 for Orbital, 31 total.

I've always assumed CRS-2 has enough money to run through 2028.

[woods170]

No. Twenty (20) missions for SpaceX, ten (10) for Orbital. A total of 30 missions under CRS-1.

11 for Orbital, 31 total.

I've always assumed CRS-2 has enough money to run through 2028.

Just checked the FPIP at L2. It is actually 12 for Orbital. So 32 missions in total for CRS-1.
And I agree that the contract value for CRS-2 is enough to run through 2028.

[gongora]

No. Twenty (20) missions for SpaceX, ten (10) for Orbital. A total of 30 missions under CRS-1.

11 for Orbital, 31 total.

I've always assumed CRS-2 has enough money to run through 2028.

Just checked the FPIP at L2. It is actually 12 for Orbital. So 32 missions in total for CRS-1.
And I agree that the contract value for CRS-2 is enough to run through 2028.

Orbital has 11 in CRS-1.

[Steven Pietrobon]

11 for Orbital, 31 total.

Yes, OA-12 is the first CRS2 flight. See capture below.

If SpaceX and OA got $3.1B each (maximising their contracts) that makes it $155M per mission for SpaceX and $281M per mission for OA. For CRS2, I think its likely that each provider got an equal value contract or $4,677M each, which is a 51% increase compared to CRS1. Assuming the same mission costs as CRS1, that would be 30 missions (enough for six years at five missions per year!) for SpaceX. For OA, we know their mission cost is $200 to $250M, which would range from 19 to 23 missions, or 21 missions on average. Its anyone's guess how many missions SNC could fly with their share, but I imagine flying on an Atlas V552 is not going to be cheap. Its $153M for an 551, so a 552 would probably cost about $163M. Say $137M for the payload or $300M, which would be about 15 missions.

[GWH]

Not indicative of what may be charged to recoup dev costs,  but this tweet about dreamchaser costs vs launch vehicle is interesting https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/972938342760361984?s=19

[yg1968]

Article on CRS2 and an OIG Report:
http://spacenews.com/nasa-will-pay-more-for-less-iss-cargo-under-new-commercial-contracts/

[yg1968]

Here is the full OIG report on CRS2:
https://oig.nasa.gov/docs/IG-18-016.pdf

[Steven Pietrobon]

The relevant paragraph.

"Under the existing CRS contracts awarded in 2008, Orbital ATK and SpaceX will deliver an estimated 93,800 kilograms of cargo to the ISS over 31 missions for a total cost of $5.93 billion. With the CRS-2 contracts, those two companies and Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) will transport 87,900 kilograms to the station on 21 missions for a projected cost of $6.31 billion."

CRS-1 average mission cost was $191M compared with $300M for CRS-2. Per kg costs are an eye watering $63,200/kg for CRS-1 and $71,800/kg for CRS-2.

[MATTBLAK]

What were the per-kg costs for Shuttle delivering cargo payload again? Anyone know?

[dror]

What were the per-kg costs for Shuttle delivering cargo payload again? Anyone know?

I join your question and ask how does shuttle compare to 7 crew and 20 ton cargo commercials?

[john smith 19]

The relevant paragraph.

"Under the existing CRS contracts awarded in 2008, Orbital ATK and SpaceX will deliver an estimated 93,800 kilograms of cargo to the ISS over 31 missions for a total cost of $5.93 billion. With the CRS-2 contracts, those two companies and Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) will transport 87,900 kilograms to the station on 21 missions for a projected cost of $6.31 billion."

CRS-1 average mission cost was $191M compared with $300M for CRS-2. Per kg costs are an eye watering $63,200/kg for CRS-1 and $71,800/kg for CRS-2.

So just to be completely clear here the payload has gone down 6.28% and the price has gone up 6.4% over 10 years.
But that $/Kg cost is 13.6% higher, an annual "inflation rate " of 1.283%
While US inflation had <1% inflation in 2014 and 2015 most of those years had annual inflation rates of > 1.5%
My issue was I thought the original contract award was very generous, if you didn't hand most of it out in the form of shareholder dividends.

[john smith 19]

What were the per-kg costs for Shuttle delivering cargo payload again? Anyone know?

Well if the shuttle delivered 25 000Kg to ISS and a mission cost $500m that would be $20 000/Kg.

but with Shuttle gone you've got to look at what Russian Soyuz seats (or cargo) were being sold to the USG for.

And of course the most important thing of all.

The principle of US astronauts flying on US vehicles to a space station 50% built by the US (although people forget the other half was built in Italy). 

[gongora]

The OIG audit of CRS has already been posted in a couple other threads.

[yg1968]

The OIG audit of CRS has already been posted in a couple other threads.

Here is one of the other threads on the OIG report (but it's SpaceX centric):
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45573.0

There is also this ISS thread:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45571

[yg1968]

Looks like there will be 21 CRS2 missions:

By the end of 2017, NASA had ordered 8 CRS-2 missions that followed this strategy; however, it is unclear whether the Agency will continue this pattern for the remaining 13 CRS-2 missions.