Author Topic: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3  (Read 242139 times)

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #760 on: 09/06/2022 10:12 pm »
Price per seat went from $55M to $64M to $72M. That's probably to account for inflation.

OK, I did some fact checking. The initial award to SpaceX was $2,600M. This increased to $3,490.9M for Crew-7 to Crew-9 and $4,927.3M for Crew-10 to Crew-14. Thus I get (3490.9-2600)/(3*4) = $74.2M/seat for Crew-7 to Crew-9 and (4927.3-3490.9)/(5*4) = $71.8M/seat for Crew-10 to Crew-14! Thus, there was no price increase, but a price decrease!

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-awards-spacex-additional-crew-flights-to-space-station
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-awards-spacex-more-crew-flights-to-space-station

No, 64M is the right amount for the 3 awards in February. Ireke Klotz said that $766M was added in February for the 3 extra flights. The initial contracts sometimes get increased after the initial award. In this case the CCtCap contract as of 12/31/21 was worth $2.725B (an increase of 4.9% over original 2014 $2.599B award) per Irene Klotz.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49156.msg2346989#msg2346989
« Last Edit: 09/06/2022 10:32 pm by yg1968 »

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
  • California
  • Liked: 2196
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #761 on: 09/07/2022 12:14 am »
It was easy to do and keeping Dragon and Falcon going is because Starship is not a viable replacement .
Why would they decline?
We are talking about missions after 2028, here. By that time, there is a real possibility that CRS and CCP are the only remaining customers for Dragon and for F9. Under these circumstances, SpaceX would need to keep the entire Dragon and F9 infrastructures functioning to support a total of about four flights per year, which means those four flights must pay the entire operational costs of that infrastructure. I don't see how the mission price in the ammendment can support that infrastructure at four flights per year.

SpaceX may or may not agree with you about Starship as a viable replacement: I don't know. I am not knowledgeable enough to assess it, but SpaceX claims that they will have crewed Starship and Cargo Starship functioning by then, and I'm fairly sure their engineers can come up with something that uses them in conjunction with a "taxi" if Starship cannot dock with ISS and other stations.

As I have told you before, during a press conference Jessica Jensen of SpaceX and Steve Stich of NASA said that there was no issues for SpaceX to continue Dragon and Falcon 9 until 2030.

It's at 24 and 41 minutes of this video:
Thanks for reminding me yet again, and I apologize for forgetting. This time, I carefully listened to both of those Q&A. Yes, both the NASA folks and the SpaceX folks stated that SpaceX is committed to Crew missions to ISS using Crew Dragon basically as long as ISS needs it. I'm willing to accept a joint press confrence in place of an actual policy statement, especially in conjunction with the NASA sole-source procurement of Crew-10 through Crew-14. There was no mention of Falcon 9 in either of those two segments. I think it is reasonable to assume Crew Dragon on F9, but it was not stated.

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.

Offline jmt27

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #762 on: 09/07/2022 12:48 am »

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.

Why? Why all this complication? Make absolutely no sense! SpaceX will fly Crew Dragons on Falcon 9 until at least 2030... end of story. Why do you want F9 to retire so bad? F9 and Starship can coexist just fine!

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
  • California
  • Liked: 2196
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #763 on: 09/07/2022 01:05 am »

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.
Why? Why all this complication? Make absolutely no sense! SpaceX will fly Crew Dragons on Falcon 9 until at least 2030... end of story. Why do you want F9 to retire so bad? F9 and Starship can coexist just fine!
Minimum cost of a Starship flight: $5 million (Elon said $2 million, I say BS). Minimum cost of an F9 flight: $30 Million, but only if there are sufficient F9 flights/yr to cover the infrastructure. All rockets eventually retire, usually when they are superseded by a more cost-effective rocket. Just because it's the most successful rocket in the history of spaceflight does not mean it will not retire.

Offline jmt27

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #764 on: 09/07/2022 01:12 am »

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.
Why? Why all this complication? Make absolutely no sense! SpaceX will fly Crew Dragons on Falcon 9 until at least 2030... end of story. Why do you want F9 to retire so bad? F9 and Starship can coexist just fine!
Minimum cost of a Starship flight: $5 million (Elon said $2 million, I say BS). Minimum cost of an F9 flight: $30 Million, but only if there are sufficient F9 flights/yr to cover the infrastructure. All rockets eventually retire, usually when they are superseded by a more cost-effective rocket. Just because it's the most successful rocket in the history of spaceflight does not mean it will not retire.

NASA doesn't care about Starship being cheaper than F9. Starship (as far as we know) will not have a crew escape system. Dragon does. As long as SpaceX gets NASA money they will keep flying Dragons on F9.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36072
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20407
  • Likes Given: 10587
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #765 on: 09/07/2022 01:27 am »
Because to make a reusable launch vehicle make sense, you need a high launch rate. Splitting launch demand between F9 and Starship would halve the Starship launch rate and increase cost per launch.

The key will be making the marginal per-launch cost of Starship lower than that of F9. That probably requires full reuse. And once that’s achieved, you can save a ton of money by consolidating on just Starship.
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 DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
  • California
  • Liked: 2196
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #766 on: 09/07/2022 01:50 am »

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.
Why? Why all this complication? Make absolutely no sense! SpaceX will fly Crew Dragons on Falcon 9 until at least 2030... end of story. Why do you want F9 to retire so bad? F9 and Starship can coexist just fine!
Minimum cost of a Starship flight: $5 million (Elon said $2 million, I say BS). Minimum cost of an F9 flight: $30 Million, but only if there are sufficient F9 flights/yr to cover the infrastructure. All rockets eventually retire, usually when they are superseded by a more cost-effective rocket. Just because it's the most successful rocket in the history of spaceflight does not mean it will not retire.

NASA doesn't care about Starship being cheaper than F9. Starship (as far as we know) will not have a crew escape system. Dragon does. As long as SpaceX gets NASA money they will keep flying Dragons on F9.
You may very well  be correct and NASA may refuse to allow astronauts to launch on crewed Starship in 2028. Alternatively, they might. If Elon's dreams come true, they will be launching hundreds of people on Starship by then. NASA may not care about the money, but SpaceX would prefer to charge the same amount of money and keep more of it as profit. This is a "what-if" scenario, not a prediction.

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #767 on: 09/07/2022 12:50 pm »

2030 is a long time from now. It is still possible that SpaceX may propose to fly an uncrewed Crew Dragon on a cargo Starship and bring the crew up on a crewed Starship and let the crew taxi over to ISS using the Dragon, thus permitting retirement of F9, but there is no indication whatsoever that SpaceX is contemplating this approach. If NASA declines to allow their crew to EDL on Starship, the Dragon can EDL with the crew. Otherwise, Dragon can taxi the crew to crewed Starship and come back on cargo Starship for replenishment after its six-month ISS mission, saving the wear and tear of EDL and saving the water recovery. SpaceX could demonstrate this approach using Cargo Dragon  on a CRS flight.
Why? Why all this complication? Make absolutely no sense! SpaceX will fly Crew Dragons on Falcon 9 until at least 2030... end of story. Why do you want F9 to retire so bad? F9 and Starship can coexist just fine!
Minimum cost of a Starship flight: $5 million (Elon said $2 million, I say BS). Minimum cost of an F9 flight: $30 Million, but only if there are sufficient F9 flights/yr to cover the infrastructure. All rockets eventually retire, usually when they are superseded by a more cost-effective rocket. Just because it's the most successful rocket in the history of spaceflight does not mean it will not retire.

NASA doesn't care about Starship being cheaper than F9. Starship (as far as we know) will not have a crew escape system. Dragon does. As long as SpaceX gets NASA money they will keep flying Dragons on F9.
You may very well  be correct and NASA may refuse to allow astronauts to launch on crewed Starship in 2028. Alternatively, they might. If Elon's dreams come true, they will be launching hundreds of people on Starship by then. NASA may not care about the money, but SpaceX would prefer to charge the same amount of money and keep more of it as profit. This is a "what-if" scenario, not a prediction.

I would expect HLS-Starship to be ready by 2025 or 2026. Crewed Starship might be a couple of years after that. Best case scenario is that crewed Starship is certified for the Commercial LEO destinations (CLD) program in 2028. It will be interesting to see if NASA allows spacecrafts without a LAS to be certified under CLD.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36072
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20407
  • Likes Given: 10587
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #768 on: 09/07/2022 03:17 pm »
NASA doesn’t proscribe LAS, they proscribe a certain LOC value, and LAS is just one method of achieving that.

Commercial Crew has a LOC probability requirement of 1:270 flights. 300 consecutive successful launch and landings of Starship would be approximately enough. Maybe 100 if there’s good analysis, insight, and maybe additional survivable abort modes.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2022 03:18 pm by Robotbeat »
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 DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
  • California
  • Liked: 2196
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #769 on: 09/07/2022 03:59 pm »
NASA doesn’t proscribe LAS, they proscribe a certain LOC value, and LAS is just one method of achieving that.

Commercial Crew has a LOC probability requirement of 1:270 flights. 300 consecutive successful launch and landings of Starship would be approximately enough. Maybe 100 if there’s good analysis, insight, and maybe additional survivable abort modes.
The problem is that Elon's dreams of hundreds of launches are not coming true on the original schedule. The plan in mid-2021 was to launch dozens of Starlink-on-Starship launches in 2022, but we aren't there yet. I remain hopeful that we are only a year late and we will see them in 2023 instead, but it's getting late. Those are the launches they need to demonstrate launch and EDL for crewed Starship.

Online JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 813
  • Liked: 758
  • Likes Given: 1287
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #770 on: 09/07/2022 04:48 pm »
NASA doesn’t proscribe LAS, they proscribe a certain LOC value, and LAS is just one method of achieving that.

Commercial Crew has a LOC probability requirement of 1:270 flights. 300 consecutive successful launch and landings of Starship would be approximately enough. Maybe 100 if there’s good analysis, insight, and maybe additional survivable abort modes.
The problem is that Elon's dreams of hundreds of launches are not coming true on the original schedule. The plan in mid-2021 was to launch dozens of Starlink-on-Starship launches in 2022, but we aren't there yet. I remain hopeful that we are only a year late and we will see them in 2023 instead, but it's getting late. Those are the launches they need to demonstrate launch and EDL for crewed Starship.
"At SpaceX we specialize in converting the impossible into late" -- Elon.

Online mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • United States
  • Liked: 615
  • Likes Given: 224
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #771 on: 09/07/2022 07:29 pm »
Contracts have changed and will continue to change after being signed all the time.

If come 2028 it makes sense for NASA and SpaceX to send crew on some form of starship they will adjust the contract as needed.

The current agreement does not preclude that in any way.

Meanwhile the current contract was written as is because as of TODAY, that is what makes sense.

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6380
  • Liked: 482
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #772 on: 09/07/2022 11:09 pm »
NASA doesn’t proscribe LAS, they proscribe a certain LOC value, and LAS is just one method of achieving that.

I think you mean "prescribe", not "proscribe", which means "forbid".

NASA doesn't require a Launch Abort "System", per se, but they do require pad abort and launch abort *capability*. People need to realize these requirements are publicly available and actually read them:

Quote from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20170001943/downloads/20170001943.pdf
3.3.1.3 Pad Abort
The CTS shall provide pad abort capability to protect the crew from a hazardous condition on the
launch pad with a 95% probability of success with at least 90% confidence.

3.3.1.4 Ascent Abort
The CTS shall provide continuous autonomous launch abort capability from lift-off through
orbital insertion with a 95% probability of success with at least 90% confidence in the event of a
loss of thrust or loss of attitude control.

Note that these requirements are separate from the overall LOC probability requirement (3.2.1.1).

Quote
Commercial Crew has a LOC probability requirement of 1:270 flights. 300 consecutive successful launch and landings of Starship would be approximately enough. Maybe 100 if there’s good analysis, insight, and maybe additional survivable abort modes.

Only if those "survivable abort modes" meet NASA's definition of "continuous [...] capability from lift-off through orbital insertion".
JRF

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #773 on: 09/08/2022 02:26 am »
NASA doesn't require a Launch Abort "System", per se, but they do require pad abort and launch abort *capability*. People need to realize these requirements are publicly available and actually read them:

Yes and this document was also posted in this thread:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26489.msg1650808#msg1650808
« Last Edit: 09/08/2022 02:33 am by yg1968 »

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #774 on: 09/08/2022 02:29 am »
Contracts have changed and will continue to change after being signed all the time.

If come 2028 it makes sense for NASA and SpaceX to send crew on some form of starship they will adjust the contract as needed.

The current agreement does not preclude that in any way.

Meanwhile the current contract was written as is because as of TODAY, that is what makes sense.

As Jorge pointed out, it's not in the contract, it's in the certification requirements. The certification requirements will be updated as part of the Commercial LEO Destinations program:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26489.msg1650808#msg1650808
« Last Edit: 09/08/2022 02:31 am by yg1968 »

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36072
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20407
  • Likes Given: 10587
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #775 on: 09/08/2022 02:54 am »
NASA doesn’t proscribe LAS, they proscribe a certain LOC value, and LAS is just one method of achieving that.

Commercial Crew has a LOC probability requirement of 1:270 flights. 300 consecutive successful launch and landings of Starship would be approximately enough. Maybe 100 if there’s good analysis, insight, and maybe additional survivable abort modes.
The problem is that Elon's dreams of hundreds of launches are not coming true on the original schedule. The plan in mid-2021 was to launch dozens of Starlink-on-Starship launches in 2022, but we aren't there yet. I remain hopeful that we are only a year late and we will see them in 2023 instead, but it's getting late. Those are the launches they need to demonstrate launch and EDL for crewed Starship.
We’re getting over 50 F9 and maybe 100 Falcons next year tho.
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 AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3348
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 1445
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #776 on: 09/08/2022 09:43 pm »
NASA has posted a Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) for PCMs 10 thru' 14.

Modification to SpaceX Commercial Crew Transportation Capabilities (CCtCap) contract
Notice ID NNK17MA01T
Published: September 8, 2022

https://sam.gov/opp/cd11e1827fab496493ef999026fdac15/view

Copy of pdf also attached

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #777 on: 09/08/2022 10:38 pm »
NASA seems a little pessimistic about the certification of Starliner (says that it may not happen in 2023 because of various issues).

Quote from: JOFOC page 5
Based on the technical challenges associated with the Starliner development and testing, it is possible that Boeing will not be certified in 2023 due to issues that still need to be resolved prior to launch of the Crewed Flight Test and Certification.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2022 02:45 am by yg1968 »

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #778 on: 09/08/2022 10:41 pm »
Roscosmos is not interested in using commercial crew until PCM-3 (presumably, this should be the case for Starliner).

Quote from: JOFOC page 11
ROSCOSMOS has been firm that it will not fly on a provider’s PCM until the third PCM flight to demonstrate mission success and safety of flight for that transportation system.

« Last Edit: 09/09/2022 02:36 am by yg1968 »

Online yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15667
  • Liked: 5968
  • Likes Given: 2635
Re: Commercial Crew - Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #779 on: 09/08/2022 10:44 pm »
No other company expressed an interest after the notice of intent was issued.

Quote from: JOFOC page 11
Also, a notice of NASA’s intent to award this sole-source action was synopsized on the GPE website (SAM.gov) per FAR Subpart 5.2 (See Section 6 above). No sources expressed an interest in response to the NOI (issued on June 1, 2022 with a closing date of June 16, 2022).
« Last Edit: 09/09/2022 02:40 am by yg1968 »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1