Author Topic: NASA ISS Commercialization  (Read 33274 times)

Offline Arb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 543
  • London
  • Liked: 504
  • Likes Given: 412
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #100 on: 04/27/2022 05:17 pm »
...
It seems from the text of question 4 that SpaceX has an exclusive deal with Axiom for private astronaut missions to the ISS.
The other way of reading it is that SpaceX has indeed chosen not to engage with at least one of the listed interested parties (as they did recently with an aggregator for Transporter flights).  Might be interesting to speculate on which and why.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
« Last Edit: 04/29/2022 02:49 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #102 on: 04/29/2022 02:57 pm »
I will add my comment to this news. This is a big deal. It shows again that there is indeed a commercial market for space. Congrats to the UAE and Axiom! Hopefully, other countries will follow! Very exciting news!

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36074
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20408
  • Likes Given: 10589
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #103 on: 04/29/2022 03:24 pm »
I will add my comment to this news. This is a big deal. It shows again that there is indeed a commercial market for space. Congrats to the UAE and Axiom! Hopefully, other countries will follow! Very exciting news!
And it also shows there's no sharp line between "space tourism" and "legit astronaut." This UAE astronaut is procuring services as if a "space tourist" but is doing everything that a "legit astronaut" would do. The first Axiom mission to ISS on Dragon was full of private "space tourists," but again, they did almost identical work as the national astronauts do.

My comment is partly in response to this:
Jebbo sorry but in my opinion you are looking at the wrong thing. You look at sleeping quarters, while the thing you have to look at is ECLSS systems capability. To show you graphically I've updated the system rack topology.
You only looked at the orange racks, direct crew utility racks like the crew quarters, CASA, Galley rack, T2 treadmill and most likely the lavatory (WHC).
What you're overlooking is all the green and blue racks. This is what is limiting the ISS crew for longtherm at 7 astronauts. I don't have the full picture of the ECLSS system capabilities. I expect Water recovery is the most limiting.

Indeed the Axiom Hab modules will provide all facilities for four crew members. So they require:
- 4x Crew quarter
- Lavatory
- most likely another Galley
- a OGS (Oxygen Generation System)
- a CO2 scrubber / ARS (Air Revitalization System) [also humidity control / water condenser]
- a TCS (Thermal Control System)
- most likely a water recovery system
As a result of all these required systems, these modules can only accommodate the equivalence of two ISPR/ER-xB (Basic Express Racks) for science.

I think the important thing to do in the ISS is micro gravity research/science/production. Not accommodating for as many as possible visiting and micro-G ruining astronauts/tourists.
In my opinion space tourism and microG science can't be combined in the same station.
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 TrevorMonty

Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #104 on: 04/29/2022 04:01 pm »
Either Dragon has 5th seat or NASA is giving up one of their seats.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk


Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #105 on: 04/29/2022 04:04 pm »
Either Dragon has 5th seat or NASA is giving up one of their seats.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

Axiom gave NASA a Soyuz seat in 2021 (that Axiom had purchased from the Russians) in exchange for a crew 6 seat. 

Quote from: the article
This is the Falcon 9 seat that Axiom Space got in exchange from Nasa, after the company gave up its Russian Soyuz rocket seat for American astronaut, Mark Vande Hei, in 2021.

https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/science/2022/04/29/emirati-astronaut-set-for-six-month-mission-to-international-space-station/
« Last Edit: 04/29/2022 04:10 pm by yg1968 »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #106 on: 04/29/2022 08:02 pm »
So in a way Axiom are taking Cosmonaut's place on ISS.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk


Offline gemmy0I

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Liked: 512
  • Likes Given: 1720
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #107 on: 04/30/2022 12:41 am »
So in a way Axiom are taking Cosmonaut's place on ISS.
Actually, it is a US astronaut seat that Axiom is taking. Essentially, NASA traded a US astronaut seat on Crew-6 for a Soyuz seat (Vande Hei's) much earlier. This provided them with extra insurance to have a US astronaut on station at all times if Crew Dragon's first operational mission was delayed past the completion of the last Soyuz seat obtained through the old arrangement (purchased through Boeing as part of the Sea Launch deal). But in exchange, they gave up one crew spot on a future expedition.

Basically, you can think of it as Vande Hei having been "assigned" the Crew-6 seat, and having just taken his flight really early. :)

In the end, it looks like NASA got a great deal that was better than the sum of its parts. In exchange for giving up a Crew-6 expedition member for the usual 180-day duration, they got an extra expedition member to get work done earlier, whose mission ended up getting doubled to nearly a year due to the crew logistics surrounding the Russian movie filming (which NASA was happy to take since it meant getting more "mileage" out of their seat swap). And as for Crew-6, even though NASA will be down a US crew member, the UAE astronaut who's flying instead will be serving as a full-time station participant, meaning that a lot of the same work on-station will still get done (just not by NASA) that would've otherwise been done by the US crew member who got "bumped".

I wouldn't be surprised if NASA and Axiom knew the whole time that the plan was for the UAE to buy this seat from Axiom, but they held off on announcing it until now to avoid jumping the gun before Axiom had solidified its reputation with a successful first mission.

Offline jmt27

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #108 on: 04/30/2022 01:00 am »
So in a way Axiom are taking Cosmonaut's place on ISS.
Actually, it is a US astronaut seat that Axiom is taking. Essentially, NASA traded a US astronaut seat on Crew-6 for a Soyuz seat (Vande Hei's) much earlier. This provided them with extra insurance to have a US astronaut on station at all times if Crew Dragon's first operational mission was delayed past the completion of the last Soyuz seat obtained through the old arrangement (purchased through Boeing as part of the Sea Launch deal). But in exchange, they gave up one crew spot on a future expedition.

Basically, you can think of it as Vande Hei having been "assigned" the Crew-6 seat, and having just taken his flight really early. :)

In the end, it looks like NASA got a great deal that was better than the sum of its parts. In exchange for giving up a Crew-6 expedition member for the usual 180-day duration, they got an extra expedition member to get work done earlier, whose mission ended up getting doubled to nearly a year due to the crew logistics surrounding the Russian movie filming (which NASA was happy to take since it meant getting more "mileage" out of their seat swap). And as for Crew-6, even though NASA will be down a US crew member, the UAE astronaut who's flying instead will be serving as a full-time station participant, meaning that a lot of the same work on-station will still get done (just not by NASA) that would've otherwise been done by the US crew member who got "bumped".

I wouldn't be surprised if NASA and Axiom knew the whole time that the plan was for the UAE to buy this seat from Axiom, but they held off on announcing it until now to avoid jumping the gun before Axiom had solidified its reputation with a successful first mission.

Oh, so right now Stephen Bowen and Warren Hoburg are assigned to Crew-6 but you're saying that one of them (presumably Hoburg) would lose their seat ?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #109 on: 04/30/2022 01:20 am »
So in a way Axiom are taking Cosmonaut's place on ISS.
Actually, it is a US astronaut seat that Axiom is taking. Essentially, NASA traded a US astronaut seat on Crew-6 for a Soyuz seat (Vande Hei's) much earlier. This provided them with extra insurance to have a US astronaut on station at all times if Crew Dragon's first operational mission was delayed past the completion of the last Soyuz seat obtained through the old arrangement (purchased through Boeing as part of the Sea Launch deal). But in exchange, they gave up one crew spot on a future expedition.

Basically, you can think of it as Vande Hei having been "assigned" the Crew-6 seat, and having just taken his flight really early. :)

In the end, it looks like NASA got a great deal that was better than the sum of its parts. In exchange for giving up a Crew-6 expedition member for the usual 180-day duration, they got an extra expedition member to get work done earlier, whose mission ended up getting doubled to nearly a year due to the crew logistics surrounding the Russian movie filming (which NASA was happy to take since it meant getting more "mileage" out of their seat swap). And as for Crew-6, even though NASA will be down a US crew member, the UAE astronaut who's flying instead will be serving as a full-time station participant, meaning that a lot of the same work on-station will still get done (just not by NASA) that would've otherwise been done by the US crew member who got "bumped".

I wouldn't be surprised if NASA and Axiom knew the whole time that the plan was for the UAE to buy this seat from Axiom, but they held off on announcing it until now to avoid jumping the gun before Axiom had solidified its reputation with a successful first mission.

Oh, so right now Stephen Bowen and Warren Hoburg are assigned to Crew-6 but you're saying that one of them (presumably Hoburg) would lose their seat ?

There is 4 seats. I don't think that anybody is losing a seat.

Offline gemmy0I

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Liked: 512
  • Likes Given: 1720
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #110 on: 04/30/2022 04:36 am »
Oh, so right now Stephen Bowen and Warren Hoburg are assigned to Crew-6 but you're saying that one of them (presumably Hoburg) would lose their seat ?

There is 4 seats. I don't think that anybody is losing a seat.
It will likely depend on whether or not the NASA/Roscosmos crew swap arrangement goes through as hoped. If it does, then the "standard" Dragon loadout going forward will be 2x NASA crew, 1x ESA/JAXA/CSA, and 1x Roscosmos, with an additional NASA expedition member flying on Soyuz. So for NASA to give up one of its seats to the UAE by way of Axiom, one of their two crew would either have to switch to training for Soyuz, or get bumped to a future expedition.

If one of them is moved to Soyuz, we'll likely see him heading to Moscow relatively soon to start training, as (from what I've gathered) NASA astronauts are typically prepared for that role by first being assigned as NASA's liaison-in-residence in Moscow for a term. If we don't see Bowen or Hoburg make such a move relatively soon, they're probably staying on Dragon (with someone else picked for the prospective Soyuz seat), which means one of them will have to get bumped to Crew-7.

Of course, it's also possible that the Soyuz/Dragon swap will be further delayed. (Roscosmos has been dragging its feet on this since well before the Ukraine crisis went hot, so one has to wonder if they have internal reasons for not wanting it to go forward.) If that's the case, then the UAE astronaut could take the cosmonaut's place and not have to bump anyone else. (The one "bumped" would instead be whoever NASA has assigned to train for Soyuz.)

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1409
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 538
  • Likes Given: 205
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #111 on: 04/30/2022 10:52 am »
As far as I understand the ISS situation from now until 2024, the end of the current agreement. ISS-expeditions are made of 4 USA-segment crew members and 3 Russian-segment crew members. The addition of MLM allowed one additional crew member on the Russian side of the station.
Vande Hei was allocated to the Russian-segment crew members, so the US-side operated with five instead of four crew members when he was onboard the ISS. This means more work hours per week on the USA side.
I haven't read to which crew side the UAE astronaut will be allocated.
Is percurrent of a 6-month expedition seat for a national astronaut commercial or institutional?

The whole ISS project would benefit if the Russian crewmembers perform more work on the US-side. There is far more scientific equipment and work to be done on the USA compared to the Russian side. But getting this arranged means that they have to manoeuvre trough a political minefield, with the current Russia/Ukraine + NATO situation.

The crew member swop means on a US-crewed visiting vehicle on of the Russian crew members is launched in stead of the 4th USA-crew member. The seat for the Russian crew member on the Soyuz will be used by the Russian crew member. This is useful if something goes wrong with a crew visiting vehicle, there is still one crew member that used the other crew launch system onboard to keep the ISS-system operational.
It still could be that the UAE astronaut will use the 'Russian seat, and a Russian crew member's spot. While the 4th US-segment crew member will be launched by a Soyuz (Russian crew visiting vehicle).
We don't have the details of the deal jet.
« Last Edit: 04/30/2022 11:05 am by Rik ISS-fan »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 05:45 pm by yg1968 »

Offline AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3348
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 1445
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #113 on: 08/16/2022 11:51 am »
Source Selection Statements for Private Astronaut Missions PAM 2 and PAM 3 have been posted by NASA.

Private Astronaut Mission Flight Opportunities
https://sam.gov/opp/1427b726890d4eeeaa397d27cc02ef4e/view

PAM 2 is for a flight opportunity between fall of 2022 and mid-2023.  Only one company, Axiom Space, submitted a proposal which was rated "good" and therefore they were selected for an award of PAM 2.

PAM 3 is for a flight opportunity between mid-2023 and the end of 2023.  Two companies submitted proposals: Axiom Space and Shuttle IO Technologies.  Proposals from both companies were rejected and both with the comment: "Due to the overwhelming weaknesses in merit and supportability, I agreed with the PEP on the overall rating of “Poor” and find them unselectable."

[note: PEP is Private Astronaut Mission (PAM) Evaluation Panel]

Both source selection statements are attached.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2022 01:02 pm by AnalogMan »

Offline gemmy0I

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Liked: 512
  • Likes Given: 1720
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #114 on: 08/16/2022 10:17 pm »
PAM 3 is for a flight opportunity between mid-2023 and the end of 2023.  Two companies submitted proposals: Axiom Space and Shuttle IO Technologies.  Proposals from both companies were rejected and both with the comment: "Due to the overwhelming weaknesses in merit and supportability, I agreed with the PEP on the overall rating of “Poor” and find them unselectable."
It looks like the Axiom proposal that got rejected for PAM 3 was (most likely) the oft-mooted Tom Cruise movie project. They attempted to redact the details of the mission in most of the document, but neglected to redact one of the sentences on page 14:

Quote from: PAM 3 source selection document
I found strength in the description of the Axiom team mission and the role of PAMs to stimulate demand through entertainment activities, which demonstrates a thorough understanding of what is required to enable a broad LEO marketplace.

The word "entertainment" (my bold added above) was redacted when this same phrase was first stated earlier on page 9, but not on page 14.

It seems that Axiom attempted to propose both a primary mission (the "entertainment" project) and an alternate one for PAM 3 "in the event interest is not sufficient to proceed with this mission" - indicating that they were well aware the entertainment project was light on details at this point in time and stood a high chance of getting rejected on that basis. However, the source selection officer determined that this was a backdoor attempt at an "alternate proposal", which was expressly prohibited in the rules: applicants were required to choose just one mission proposal to submit for each of the two PAMs (2 and 3). As such, the "alternate proposal" was categorically not considered, although the wording seems to suggest that its mission plan was much more detailed and would likely have been considered high-quality enough to be selected if not for this technicality.

My guess is that Axiom will try again either with the "alternate proposal" in the upcoming next round of proposal opportunities for PAM 3, or perhaps try to nail down the details of the Cruise mission better to make it acceptable to NASA.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2022 10:18 pm by gemmy0I »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #115 on: 08/20/2022 05:33 pm »
Here are some of the highlights from the PAM2 source selection statement:

Quote from: page 7 of the PAM2 source selection statement
The proposal received three weaknesses related to insufficient data associated with plans for an a [redacted] and details associated with their proposed research and outreach activities.

I am guessing that the redacted word in this sentence is EVA. I remember NASA saying that it hadn't finalized its policy in respect of EVAs for private missions at one of the Axiom press conferences. It seems that Axiom was encouraged to remove this [EVA] activity from its proposal:

Quote from: page 9
[...] discussions were required to address a mission activity proposed by Axiom for which NASA policy decisions are currently in work and which could impact that activity. As a result of those discussions, Axiom submitted a proposal revision removing that activity.

Quote from: page 11
I also took into consideration the discussions held between the contracting officer and Axiom (discussed above). I noted the proposal revision submitted by Axiom and agreed with the PEP the proposal no longer contained a provision which is still pending a NASA policy decision. Based on this revision, I found the Axiom proposal could be selected for contract negotiation.

NASA is still not happy about what happened on the first mission (too many activities on ISS were planned during the time that the private astronauts had on the ISS)...

Quote from: page 8
Axiom received a weakness due to the broad range of research, and utilization and outreach objectives which are not achievable in the specified timeframe for their proposed mission and as outlined in their proposed integrated schedule.
« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 06:28 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #116 on: 08/20/2022 06:26 pm »
Here are some of the highlights from the PAM3 Source Selection Statement.

Not really surprising but Axiom had a commitment from SpaceX to be a subcontractor for PAM3:

Quote from: page 8 of the PAM3 Source Selection Statement
In addition, Axiom received a strength based on their proposal containing a letter of commitment with a vehicle provider that has a demonstrated performance of flying astronauts to and from the ISS, and meets ISS interface requirements which increases the likelihood of their executing a safe and successful mission as proposed.

In case there was any doubt, NASA called Axiom's proposed PAM3 mission, the proposed movie mission (obviously referring to Tom Cruise's movie project as mentioned by gemmy0I above):

Quote from: page 14
I assessed the Relevance of the Axiom proposal as stated in the NRA focus area 4A. I found strength in the description of the Axiom team mission and the role of PAMs to stimulate demand through entertainment activities, which demonstrates a thorough understanding of what is required to enable a broad LEO marketplace. This is consistent with NASA's commercialization strategy, as well as findings from internal studies outlining potential commercial markets for the ISS. This provides confidence that the proposal will contribute to NASA's mission to broaden and expand the low Earth orbit commercial market. However, the Strength was somewhat offset by the lack of information or description which did not allow for an assessment of the potential contribution to NASA's mission and the objective of successfully executing a private astronaut mission. Additionally, without any detail, I could not assess whether the proposed movie mission would reflect poorly on NASA, ISS partners, or related entities. Overall, I agreed with the PEP and found the Axiom proposal had “good” relevance.

As mentioned by gemmy0I above, the alternate mission (if the movie project didn't proceed) was indeed not evaluated:

Quote from: page 13
[H]owever, I did not evaluate that alternative mission proposal due to the requirements laid out in Focus Area 4A.1 of the NRA stating "Proposers will be allowed to submit up to two (2) proposals for this solicitation, one (1) per flight opportunity." (e.g. one for PAM 2 and one for PAM 3). Given this limitation in the NRA, neither I nor the PEP were able to evaluate what would essentially be a second alternative Axiom proposal for PAM 3. Any implied information associated with the administration’s position or other data not received as part of this proposal could not be used in any assessment by the PEP or myself.

Given that no awards were made for PAM3, a new solicitation for PAM3 will be announced in the future:

Quote from: page 11
Follow on solicitations for the PAM 3 opportunity will be announced in the future.
« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 06:41 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15671
  • Liked: 5969
  • Likes Given: 2636
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #117 on: 09/06/2022 04:10 pm »
NASA, Axiom Sign Second Private Astronaut Mission to Space Station Order:
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-axiom-sign-second-private-astronaut-mission-to-space-station-order

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30946
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55423
  • Likes Given: 25047
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #118 on: 09/14/2022 03:35 pm »
https://www.nasa.gov/leo-economy/nasa-wants-to-open-space-to-more-people-supports-private-missions/

Quote
Sep 14, 2022
NASA Wants to Open Space to More People, Supports Private Missions

NASA is seeking proposals for two new private astronaut missions to the International Space Station as part of the agency’s efforts to open space to more people than ever before. With these opportunities, U.S. commercial companies will continue to play an essential role in establishing a sustained presence in low-Earth orbit (LEO) through the agency’s Commercial LEO Development Program.

The targeted flight opportunities will occur between late 2023 and 2024.

A private astronaut mission involves U.S. commercial spacecraft transporting private astronauts to the space station, where they conduct activities aboard the orbiting laboratory or a commercial structure attached to it. NASA is enabling up to two short-duration private astronaut missions per year.

“We are truly in an exciting era, witnessing a significant increase in access to space and expansion of the commercial marketplace in low-Earth orbit,” said Angela Hart, manager of the Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Program at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. “We recognize the importance of NASA’s continued support, and are dedicated to working with industry to identify areas where our expertise and unique capabilities support expansion, as with private astronaut missions. These provide a unique opportunity for industry to gain critical experience needed to select, train, and manage crews on future commercial low-Earth orbit destinations, as well as work with new science partners, future commercial partners and grow this non-traditional market.”

The new targeted flight opportunities will be the third and fourth private astronaut missions to the International Space Station coordinated by NASA. The first mission was accomplished by Axiom Space in April 2022. Axiom Space was also selected by NASA for the second private astronaut mission, scheduled for the second quarter of 2023.

Each of the new missions may be up to 14 days while docked to the space station. Specific dates are dependent on spacecraft traffic to the space station and in-orbit activity planning and constraints. Private astronaut missions must be brokered by a U.S. entity and use U.S. transportation spacecraft that meet NASA’s International Space Station visiting vehicle requirements, policies, and procedures. Refer to Focus Area 4A of NASA Research Announcement (NRA) NNJ13ZBG001N for additional details.

Enabling private astronaut missions to the International Space Station is part of the agency's goal to develop a robust low-Earth orbit economy where NASA is one of many customers, and the private sector leads the way. This strategy will provide services the government needs at a lower cost, enabling the agency to focus on its Artemis missions to the Moon ahead of human missions to Mars, while continuing to use low-Earth orbit as a training and proving ground for deep space exploration.

Proposals are due at 5 p.m. EDT on Oct. 27, 2022. NASA will host a pre-proposal conference to address questions related to the solicitation at 11 a.m. on Friday, Sept. 16, 2022. To confirm attendance, please email Kelly Rubio at [email protected] no later than 4 p.m. Sept. 15, 2022.

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2345
  • Liked: 1552
  • Likes Given: 532
Re: NASA ISS Commercialization
« Reply #119 on: 09/15/2022 06:48 pm »
NASA is now saying that private astronaut EVAs at the ISS will not be permitted. Hurray for ISS commercialization! I guess Axiom will have to find retired NASA astronauts to test their Artemis spacesuits. Or maybe conduct the spacesuit tests from a free-flying Dragon. Or just wing it and have the Artemis 3 crew try them out in space for the first time on the Moon. It's not like we've heard anything substantial from NASA about spacesuit testing. Seems like a bunch of sour grapes Polaris envy.

Tags:
 

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