SpaceX has completed half their CDR. Milestone 13A was completed a while ago and 13B was recently completed according to Reisman. We are not talking about a huge gap between the two companies.
Quote from: clongton on 10/23/2014 12:00 amIt's quite entertaining to watch someone with very little actual knowledge of the CDR process actually try to stare down a professional expert. Thanks for the light-hearted moments It's like listening to someone who's insisting to a physician that the body has chakras and that illnesses are the result of incorrect energy flows between those chakras.
It's quite entertaining to watch someone with very little actual knowledge of the CDR process actually try to stare down a professional expert. Thanks for the light-hearted moments
Quote from: TomH on 10/23/2014 04:44 pmQuote from: clongton on 10/23/2014 12:00 amIt's quite entertaining to watch someone with very little actual knowledge of the CDR process actually try to stare down a professional expert. Thanks for the light-hearted moments It's like listening to someone who's insisting to a physician that the body has chakras and that illnesses are the result of incorrect energy flows between those chakras. I really don't think it helps anything for people who have some experience to act smugly superior and denigrate others with different opinions. They are among the small fraction of people who actively support the space program, and deserve at least basic courtesy. After 40 years in the field I would match my experience and knowledge base against anybody here, but I try to remember that I can still learn new things, or even find out that something I thought was true may not be. If you think someone is wrong, tell them why; education is an obligation for those of us who have experience. If they don't want to accept it, that's their choice, but they still deserve some basic civility.
I really don't think it helps anything for people who have some experience to act smugly superior and denigrate others with different opinions. They are among the small fraction of people who actively support the space program, and deserve at least basic courtesy. After 40 years in the field I would match my experience and knowledge base against anybody here, but I try to remember that I can still learn new things, or even find out that something I thought was true may not be. If you think someone is wrong, tell them why; education is an obligation for those of us who have experience. If they don't want to accept it, that's their choice, but they still deserve some basic civility.
Quote from: obi-wan on 10/23/2014 04:57 pmI really don't think it helps anything for people who have some experience to act smugly superior and denigrate others with different opinions. They are among the small fraction of people who actively support the space program, and deserve at least basic courtesy. After 40 years in the field I would match my experience and knowledge base against anybody here, but I try to remember that I can still learn new things, or even find out that something I thought was true may not be. If you think someone is wrong, tell them why; education is an obligation for those of us who have experience. If they don't want to accept it, that's their choice, but they still deserve some basic civility.but this should work the other way around too... people who are not experts should not be arrogant and aggressively push their agendas just because they do not like what the experts are saying... or even accusing them of lying (even indirectly)... as is often happening on this forum...and they should listen what the experts tell them... at least a little bit... and they should be glad that they have the opportunity to even talk to the experts, ask them questions...show some respect... do not think you have all the knowledge in the world, as some of the non-experts are behaving here
Have there been any updates on the CST-100 lately?
A more detailed report on the Abu Dhabi visit in this article from the Kaleej Times:http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=data/uaebusiness/2014/November/uaebusiness_November65.xml§ion=uaebusiness
Does anyone know what this decision is to be made in May 2015? Seems to me that the first one ready would be the first one to transport astronauts to orbit. And NASA will know when someone is ready when they are ready, not in 7 months. So I am confused as to what Ferguson is referring to when referencing a NASA decision to be made this coming spring.
Thanks for all the replies, but I am still confused. May be a personal problem But I would hope I can liken the CCtCap program with the COTS program. CCtCap has two firms (Boeing and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of astronauts to ISS) whereas COTS had two firms (Orbital and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of cargo to ISS). For COTS both Orbital and SpaceX progressed through their milestones until they ultimately reached the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering cargo to ISS. So why would CCtCap be any different? Wouldn't (shouldn't) NASA allow both Boeing and SpaceX to progress as rapidly through their milestones as they are able to reach the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering astronauts to the ISS?I would hope the objective for NASA is to demonstrate that capability as soon as possible. Why would NASA make a decision in May 2015 about who will be first when they have no crystal ball to see who will actually be ready first? For that matter, the firm they choose in May 2015 may not even be ready by their goal of 2017 due to unforeseen challenges. May 2015 is just not a rational decision point from my, perhaps naive, perspective.
Quote from: getitdoneinspace on 11/11/2014 04:30 pmThanks for all the replies, but I am still confused. May be a personal problem But I would hope I can liken the CCtCap program with the COTS program. CCtCap has two firms (Boeing and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of astronauts to ISS) whereas COTS had two firms (Orbital and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of cargo to ISS). For COTS both Orbital and SpaceX progressed through their milestones until they ultimately reached the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering cargo to ISS. So why would CCtCap be any different? Wouldn't (shouldn't) NASA allow both Boeing and SpaceX to progress as rapidly through their milestones as they are able to reach the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering astronauts to the ISS?I would hope the objective for NASA is to demonstrate that capability as soon as possible. Why would NASA make a decision in May 2015 about who will be first when they have no crystal ball to see who will actually be ready first? For that matter, the firm they choose in May 2015 may not even be ready by their goal of 2017 due to unforeseen challenges. May 2015 is just not a rational decision point from my, perhaps naive, perspective.One key difference is that NASA has to select and train the crews that will fly on these spacecraft -- as opposed to cargo, which just sits there.
Quote from: SWGlassPit on 11/11/2014 04:39 pmQuote from: getitdoneinspace on 11/11/2014 04:30 pmThanks for all the replies, but I am still confused. May be a personal problem But I would hope I can liken the CCtCap program with the COTS program. CCtCap has two firms (Boeing and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of astronauts to ISS) whereas COTS had two firms (Orbital and SpaceX) on track to reach the same goal (delivery of cargo to ISS). For COTS both Orbital and SpaceX progressed through their milestones until they ultimately reached the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering cargo to ISS. So why would CCtCap be any different? Wouldn't (shouldn't) NASA allow both Boeing and SpaceX to progress as rapidly through their milestones as they are able to reach the goal of demonstrating the capability of delivering astronauts to the ISS?I would hope the objective for NASA is to demonstrate that capability as soon as possible. Why would NASA make a decision in May 2015 about who will be first when they have no crystal ball to see who will actually be ready first? For that matter, the firm they choose in May 2015 may not even be ready by their goal of 2017 due to unforeseen challenges. May 2015 is just not a rational decision point from my, perhaps naive, perspective.One key difference is that NASA has to select and train the crews that will fly on these spacecraft -- as opposed to cargo, which just sits there.I can certainly accept that crews must be trained for these spacecraft. But my response is, why not train crews for both vehicles? I thought NASA was planning on using both spacecraft in perpetuity (or until ISS is decommissioned) for dissimilar redundancy in getting crew to and from the ISS?
NASA has never said anything about using both forever. After the certs and first few flights NASA will re-compete. One or both could win or lose based on cost, customer satisfaction, frequent flyer programs...