Author Topic: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024  (Read 421242 times)

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4412
  • Liked: 2269
  • Likes Given: 950
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #520 on: 03/12/2015 10:36 pm »
This would be capable of more payload than Cygnus. The per-launch spacecraft cost could also be significantly lower since the tug is reusable (without refurbishment other than refueling).

Could be.  Keep in mind that CRS-2 is intended primarily to be a cargo service contract; meeting NASA's CRS-2 requirements and price over the term of the contract is what will win.

Anyone want to venture a guess at how cost-competitive this might be in the context of CRS-2?  The CRS-2 price evaluation and contract award does not care about how cool it may be, or whether it has a longer term payoff.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1549
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 704
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #521 on: 03/12/2015 10:55 pm »
If anything, this system is less flexible than a disposable vehicle like Cygnus because of the way it appears to use the centaur upper stage to deorbit the old cargo module.

I can picture a couple ways the orbital handoff works, and neither of them make much sense.

What did you have in mind? Just from looking at the picture, here's what I was envisioning, that would only require one arm:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) The Centaur jettisons the new pod.
3) Jupiter uses its arm to position itself and the old pod on the Centaur, attaching the old pod to the centaur in the process.
4) Jupiter undocks from the old pod, which stays with the Centaur.
5) Jupiter chases after the new pod, grapples and berths it with itself, then proceeds to station, while the Centaur with the old pod deorbits.

So how is the new cargo container stabilized while it drifts free?

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17935
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 649
  • Likes Given: 7418
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #522 on: 03/12/2015 10:56 pm »


Sierra Nevada Corporation to Debut Dream Chaser® Cargo System
Company Unveils New Design for Uncrewed Missions
...
WHY:
SNC’s Dream Chaser spacecraft is a multi-mission-capable space utility vehicle (SUV) suitable for crewed or uncrewed missions. The Dream Chaser Cargo System is an uncrewed system developed to provide cargo transportation services to the International Space Station (ISS). The Dream Chaser Cargo System utilizes a mission variant of the Dream Chaser crewed spacecraft that meets or exceeds all of NASA’s goals for cargo transportation to the ISS, including rapid return of critical science.

Hope springs eternal!

(not that I have a problem with Lockheed Martin's tug that features an MDA robotic arm (Canadian)  ;)

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #523 on: 03/12/2015 11:04 pm »
This proposal is legit.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6715
  • California
  • Liked: 8140
  • Likes Given: 5184
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #524 on: 03/12/2015 11:38 pm »
If anything, this system is less flexible than a disposable vehicle like Cygnus because of the way it appears to use the centaur upper stage to deorbit the old cargo module.

I can picture a couple ways the orbital handoff works, and neither of them make much sense.

What did you have in mind? Just from looking at the picture, here's what I was envisioning, that would only require one arm:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) The Centaur jettisons the new pod.
3) Jupiter uses its arm to position itself and the old pod on the Centaur, attaching the old pod to the centaur in the process.
4) Jupiter undocks from the old pod, which stays with the Centaur.
5) Jupiter chases after the new pod, grapples and berths it with itself, then proceeds to station, while the Centaur with the old pod deorbits.

Now when you phrase it as simple as that...  ;D No, this seems like quite the awkward solution.

Offline NovaSilisko

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1828
  • Liked: 1440
  • Likes Given: 1301
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #525 on: 03/12/2015 11:41 pm »
To be honest, I'm more interested in the possibilities besides ISS resupply for Jupiter. I like the idea of a situation with a company purchasing a launch on a small rocket to get their satellite to LEO, then contracting with Lockheed to have a Jupiter Electric push it to GEO. Business-wise I think it makes sense as well, it could allow Lockheed to profit on its competitors' launches.  :P

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23390
  • Liked: 1857
  • Likes Given: 972
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #526 on: 03/13/2015 12:54 am »
If anything, this system is less flexible than a disposable vehicle like Cygnus because of the way it appears to use the centaur upper stage to deorbit the old cargo module.

I can picture a couple ways the orbital handoff works, and neither of them make much sense.

What did you have in mind? Just from looking at the picture, here's what I was envisioning, that would only require one arm:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) The Centaur jettisons the new pod.
3) Jupiter uses its arm to position itself and the old pod on the Centaur, attaching the old pod to the centaur in the process.
4) Jupiter undocks from the old pod, which stays with the Centaur.
5) Jupiter chases after the new pod, grapples and berths it with itself, then proceeds to station, while the Centaur with the old pod deorbits.

Try this:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) Jupiter maneuvers itself so the POA like end effector on the satellite bus ( end of the robot arm sticking out of the top) grabs the new pod
3) the new pod is released, the robot arm flips the stack around and berths the old one to the centaur
4) the Jupiter releases the old pod, arm moves away and releases the arm
« Last Edit: 03/13/2015 01:16 am by Ronsmytheiii »

Offline Port

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Germany
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #527 on: 03/13/2015 01:05 am »
nobody seemed to have posted for LM-Jupiter proposal so far.

I really like the idea and it took me by surprise that they could come up with something worthwhile after all this liberty-stuff nobody seemed to take seriously  (imo)

Offline GraniteHound92

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #528 on: 03/13/2015 01:12 am »
nobody seemed to have posted for LM-Jupiter proposal so far.

I really like the idea and it took me by surprise that they could come up with something worthwhile after all this liberty-stuff nobody seemed to take seriously  (imo)

It's frustrating that the video doesn't show the cargo exchange with Centaur.  None of the solutions to the exchange proposed here are entirely satisfactory.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4987
  • Likes Given: 6458
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #529 on: 03/13/2015 01:17 am »
This is great!  I'm glad to see LM not just trying to duplicate Cygnus but actually moving ahead in a substantial way.  A real space tug will enable all sorts of things going forward.

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1549
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 704
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #530 on: 03/13/2015 01:30 am »
If anything, this system is less flexible than a disposable vehicle like Cygnus because of the way it appears to use the centaur upper stage to deorbit the old cargo module.

I can picture a couple ways the orbital handoff works, and neither of them make much sense.

What did you have in mind? Just from looking at the picture, here's what I was envisioning, that would only require one arm:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) The Centaur jettisons the new pod.
3) Jupiter uses its arm to position itself and the old pod on the Centaur, attaching the old pod to the centaur in the process.
4) Jupiter undocks from the old pod, which stays with the Centaur.
5) Jupiter chases after the new pod, grapples and berths it with itself, then proceeds to station, while the Centaur with the old pod deorbits.

Try this:

1) Jupiter rendezvouses with the new pod and upper stage, grappling the Centaur (NOT the new pod) with its arm, as depicted in the picture.
2) Jupiter maneuvers itself so the POA like end effector on the satellite bus ( end of the robot arm sticking out of the top) grabs the new pod
3) the new pod is released, the robot arm flips the stack around and berths the old one to the centaur
4) the Jupiter releases the old pod, arm moves away and releases the arm

I think we have a winner.

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #531 on: 03/13/2015 01:34 am »
So who is threatened more with this proposal SpaceX or OrbitalATK?  If you were betting who would you now pick as the likely winners or CRS2?

Offline GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1689
  • Likes Given: 1089
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #532 on: 03/13/2015 01:35 am »
It's frustrating that the video doesn't show the cargo exchange with Centaur.  None of the solutions to the exchange proposed here are entirely satisfactory.

I doubt it needs to be anything that extraordinary - as one possible example a simple hinge mounted to the adapter to the centaur would allow  the new pod to swing out of the way while the disposal pod is connected.  Grab the new pod with the arm and connect  to the Jupiter.

Offline Port

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Germany
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #533 on: 03/13/2015 01:38 am »
So who is threatened more with this proposal SpaceX or OrbitalATK?  If you were betting who would you now pick as the likely winners or CRS2?

if it would be just between OSC, SpX and LM obviously the LM prop is a direct threat to OSC's CRS vehicle since the LM prop does not provide downmass.

if you take Boing and SNC into the boat i'm not so sure, SNC seems more desperate than ever, CST-100 is even more volume-restricted and not as proven as Dragon to date but i would not count on SpX just going through just so easy as that.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4412
  • Liked: 2269
  • Likes Given: 950
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #534 on: 03/13/2015 01:42 am »
Yes, a longshot. But look at how CST-100 won NASA's interest with the potential additional capabilities/mission features. This looks to do same.

I might see LM getting a small piece of the pie--potentially one of those six-mission minimums or positioning themselves for later on-ramp.  I think it unlikely they will displace anyone unless LM's per mission price is competitive and DDT&E (ISS certification) is on their own dime.

Unlike CRS-1 or CCtCap, ISS certification costs and the time-value of any payments are added.[1]  Incumbents who are already ISS certified and do not require substantive advance payments thus have a significant advantage.

In short, there is little wriggle room in the CRS-2 evaluation criteria; NASA is clearly looking to minimize cost and risk for ISS cargo; anything else takes a very distant second place.


[1] Specific formula is: (CLIN 0002A ISS Integration Certification Price) + the sum of (CLIN 0001 Contract Years 2018-2024 NTE Standard Mission prices at ½ annual demand for pressurized upmass).  Pricing for CLIN 0002A includes GFE + The time value of financed milestone payments.
« Last Edit: 03/13/2015 02:03 am by joek »

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4412
  • Liked: 2269
  • Likes Given: 950
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #535 on: 03/13/2015 01:44 am »
So who is threatened more with this proposal SpaceX or OrbitalATK?  If you were betting who would you now pick as the likely winners or CRS2?
SpaceX and Orbital/ATK. [edit] With maybe CST-100 getting a distant third placeholder position (six mission minimum award) followed by possibly LM a very distant fourth (potential future on-ramp two-mission minimum, but no initial award). ... now back to MMS.
« Last Edit: 03/13/2015 01:54 am by joek »

Offline GraniteHound92

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #536 on: 03/13/2015 01:59 am »
So who is threatened more with this proposal SpaceX or OrbitalATK?  If you were betting who would you now pick as the likely winners or CRS2?

I think Cygnus is more threatened with this proposal because Dragon provides downmass.  However, my picks for CRS2 winners are SpaceX and OrbitalATK, as they are the incumbents.  Having said that, Jupiter is an awesome proposal, and I hope LM pursues development regardless of the outcome of CRS2.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36094
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20421
  • Likes Given: 10602
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #537 on: 03/13/2015 02:01 am »
Fascinating all-around. This is almost better than commercial crew.
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 Space Junkie

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • IL, USA
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 95
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #538 on: 03/13/2015 02:05 am »
And here I thought the CRS2 competition would be boring. :)

I'm trying not to get too excited though. NASA puts a large premium on risk reduction and this concept is definitely riskier than a disposable Cygnus-style vehicle.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7910
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 9213
  • Likes Given: 10995
Re: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2024
« Reply #539 on: 03/13/2015 02:28 am »
Fascinating all-around. This is almost better than commercial crew.

Too bad they can't all win - imagine the capabilities we'd have then.  Too much for just supporting the ISS of course, but between the almost off-the-shelf Lockheed Martin Jupiter and SpaceX saying the Dragon V2 is BEO capable, it's starting to look like the private sector could, on it's own, support operations near the region of the Moon or EML.

Yes, yes, I know, we lack a business model for the private sector to do that, and NASA isn't funded to do anything like that, but having the capability means that we're that much closer to someone saying "you know, we're ready to fund a beyond-LEO effort".

And certainly we have Commercial Cargo and Crew to thank for that.  CRS-2 is getting fun to watch...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0