More importantly, Kilopower can be modified to work with LEU. Cuts margins for error, kills the elegance, and adds mass, but it's a viable alternative to HEU if political barriers prove impenetrable. PI discusses that briefly in an email quoted here. https://beyondnerva.wordpress.com/2018/05/02/krusty-we-have-fission-kilopower-part-iii/
Industry Day is ongoing. I recommend checking out Marcia Smith’s twitter timeline for real-time updates if you can’t listen to the webex call.
And here's her full write-up:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/bridenstine-promises-this-wont-be-lucy-and-the-football-again/
The simplest way to ensure the football does not get taken away is to
Here are the slides for Industry Day.They're in an imgur album as I had trouble uploading the pdf. Even if you already the pdf, you may want these instead, as I've rotated them correctly.
Statement of Work (SOW) at contract level provides top level functional requirements.The SOW at the Task Order Level provides specific requirements for each Task Order.
The prime contractor shall provide in performance in performance of this contract (or any task orders awarded thereunder) only launch vehicles that are domestic end products.
The Technical Acceptability Standards are as follows:- The offeror's ability to provide an intact lunar landed mission that delivers at least 10 kg of NASA payload before December 31, 2021.
* Initial 2019 payloads will be whatever we've got lying around. Retro-reflectors, engineering models/spares, student built hardware, or off-the-shelf hardware. This is solicited under SALMON-3 (Standalone Mission of Opportunity Notice). 15kg limit per instrument. Expect to select 8-12 instruments by Summer 2019. No guarantee that all instruments will fly.
Quote from: NASAThe Technical Acceptability Standards are as follows:- The offeror's ability to provide an intact lunar landed mission that delivers at least 10 kg of NASA payload before December 31, 2021.And this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.
Nice to see NASA adhere to metric units.And this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.However, this RFI/RFP should be very interesting to several of the former Google Lunar X-prize competitors.
Quote from: woods170 on 05/14/2018 07:09 amNice to see NASA adhere to metric units.And this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.However, this RFI/RFP should be very interesting to several of the former Google Lunar X-prize competitors.Not entirely. There are "on ramps" at 2 yearly intervals up until year 8 of the 10 year programme. So while I agree it's unlikely SX will make the limit with BFS it could certainly through F9 in the ring and (at a stretch) FH, assuming it picks up more successful flights before the closing date, which seems possible as well.
Quote from: NASAStatement of Work (SOW) at contract level provides top level functional requirements.The SOW at the Task Order Level provides specific requirements for each Task Order.IMO this is exactly the kind of RFI/RFP language that will turn CLPS in yet another CCP-like bureaucratic mess of too many highly detailed requirements and the overly intrusive NASA insight that comes with it.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 05/14/2018 03:08 pmQuote from: woods170 on 05/14/2018 07:09 amNice to see NASA adhere to metric units.And this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.However, this RFI/RFP should be very interesting to several of the former Google Lunar X-prize competitors.Not entirely. There are "on ramps" at 2 yearly intervals up until year 8 of the 10 year programme. So while I agree it's unlikely SX will make the limit with BFS it could certainly through F9 in the ring and (at a stretch) FH, assuming it picks up more successful flights before the closing date, which seems possible as well.CLPS is for a lander. F9 and FH are not landers. They would be appropriate LV's for someone else's lander, but that's not the same thing.
And this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.
Quote from: woods170 on 05/14/2018 07:09 amAnd this deadline rules out the use of BFR/BFS by SpaceX to compete for this contract.In theory they could offer a Dragon2 based lander. If it weren't such a dud.