Author Topic: NASA Selects Companies For Heavy-Lift Launch Vehicle Studies  (Read 12952 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

RELEASE: 10-292

NASA SELECTS COMPANIES FOR HEAVY-LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE STUDIES

WASHINGTON -- NASA has selected 13 companies for negotiations leading
to potential contract awards to conduct systems analysis and trade
studies for evaluating heavy-lift launch vehicle system concepts,
propulsion technologies, and affordability.

The selected companies are:

Aerojet General Corp., Rancho Cordova, Calif.
Analytical Mechanics Associates, Huntsville, Ala.
Andrews Space, Tukwila, Wash.
Alliant Techsystems, Huntsville, Ala.
The Boeing Co., Huntsville, Ala.
Lockheed Martin Corp., Huntsville, Ala.
Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Huntsville, Ala.
Orbital Sciences Corp., Chandler, Ariz.
Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Canoga Park, Calif.
Science Applications International Corp., Huntsville, Ala.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, Calif.
United Launch Alliance, Centennial, Colo.
United Space Alliance, Huntsville, Ala.

The awards total approximately $7.5 million with a maximum individual
contract award of $625,000. Each company will provide a final report
to help lay the groundwork for the transportation system that could
launch humans to multiple destinations, including asteroids, Lagrange
points, the moon and Mars.

"These trade studies will provide a look at innovative launch vehicle
concepts, propulsion technologies, and processes that should make
human exploration missions more affordable," said Doug Cooke,
associate administrator of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission
Directorate at the agency's Headquarters in Washington. "If we are to
travel beyond low-Earth orbit, industry's collaboration is essential
to reduce the cost associated with our future exploration goals and
approaches and make the heavy-lift vehicle affordable to build and
fly."

The studies will include heritage systems from shuttle and Ares, as
well as alternative architectures and identify propulsion technology
gaps including main propulsion elements, propellant tanks and rocket
health management systems. The reports will include assessments of
various heavy-lift launch vehicle and in-space vehicle that use
different propulsion combinations. The companies will examine how
these combinations can be employed to meet multiple mission
objectives.

NASA will use the recommendations to evaluate heavy-lift launch
vehicle concepts and propulsion technologies for affordability that
will be required to enable robust and sustainable future exploration
missions.

Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Commander Keen

  • Member
  • Posts: 98
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1953
  • Likes Given: 1144
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.
I can't imagine this will take too long considering the dollar amount.  I suspect that these companies are just getting paid to organize and present ideas they already have.  You can't do too much with $625,000 max per company.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.

They're supposed to be six month studies.  They were originally supposed to be announcing winners back in mid-September, but my guess is that they delayed things a bit to see how the NASA authorization goes.

It's interesting to see the different emphasis in the announcement from the original BAA solicitation--the solicitation was more focused on an HLV as part of a space architecture, including depots and other in-space propulsion elements.  The non rockety stuff seems a bit deemphasized now--at least in the presser. 

At least with Aerojet, we're likely to see thrust augmented nozzles, and probably at least some depot stuff with ULA.  Andrews should be interesting as well.  I wonder if they'll post the results of the Technical Interchange Meetings that they're going to be doing every two months during the contract.  Those could be interesting.

Ultimately though, NASA historically tends to just ignore the results of these studies if they don't agree with preexisting conclusions (see CE&R study back right before Griffin came in, and similar studies back during the Apollo Program), so it will be interesting to see if anyone a) suggests something actually innovative, and b) if NASA listens.

~Jon

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
so it will be interesting to see if anyone a) suggests something actually innovative, and b) if NASA listens.

~Jon

Who's to say yours is the only definition of innovation? 

Innovation can come in many forms, not just some shiny new tech gadget. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
so it will be interesting to see if anyone a) suggests something actually innovative, and b) if NASA listens.

~Jon

Who's to say yours is the only definition of innovation? 

Innovation can come in many forms, not just some shiny new tech gadget. 

As I said, we'll see.

~Jon

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 396
  • Likes Given: 80
This is where Jim usually chimes in to state that ULA and USA are not allowed to do anything other than EELV and Shuttle, respectively.

Is that not the case here, or am I misunderstanding something? (Ha ha like that would ever happen.)

Thanks!
Mark S.

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
What is the matter with the locations cited in the list ?
7 of 13 (more than half) companies are xxx, Huntsville, Ala.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
What is the matter with the locations cited in the list ?
7 of 13 (more than half) companies are xxx, Huntsville, Ala.


The HLV will be managed from MFSC, hence the reason those companies are advertising that address and the offices they have there.
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.

They're supposed to be six month studies.  They were originally supposed to be announcing winners back in mid-

Where does it says six months ?
For that money - I'll give them six days. =]
 OK two weeks, tops.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.

They're supposed to be six month studies.  They were originally supposed to be announcing winners back in mid-

Where does it says six months ?
For that money - I'll give them six days. =]
 OK two weeks, tops.


It did in the original solicitation.  Six months broken up into three chunks with technical interchange meetings every two months.  And it's quite possible for big companies to do small contracts like this--they're only putting their advanced concepts people on it.  It comes out to something like 6-9 FTEs depending on the burdened rate.  You can still do interesting work for that little, even in a big company.  I expect ULAs and Andrews stuff to be pretty interesting.

~Jon

Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
  • V
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Is there a due date for this study?  Hopefully, this study will not take too long to complete.  However, it certainly is prudent to get it done right.

They're supposed to be six month studies.  They were originally supposed to be announcing winners back in mid-

Where does it says six months ?
For that money - I'll give them six days. =]
 OK two weeks, tops.


It did in the original solicitation.  Six months broken up into three chunks with technical interchange meetings every two months.  And it's quite possible for big companies to do small contracts like this--they're only putting their advanced concepts people on it.  It comes out to something like 6-9 FTEs depending on the burdened rate.  You can still do interesting work for that little, even in a big company.  I expect ULAs and Andrews stuff to be pretty interesting.

~Jon

And United Space Alliance. Very interesting stuff will come out of them for sure.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
What is the matter with the locations cited in the list ?
7 of 13 (more than half) companies are xxx, Huntsville, Ala.

To be fair, most of those companies are actually headquartered elsewhere, and just have Huntsville-based units.  If there were a whole bunch of relatively no-name, politically-connected Hunstville contractors getting the awards, then I might agree that stuff looks fishy.  But this is LM, and Boeing, and ATK, and ULA, etc getting the contracts. 

~Jon

Offline Hopf

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
so it will be interesting to see if anyone a) suggests something actually innovative, and b) if NASA listens.

~Jon

Who's to say yours is the only definition of innovation? 

Innovation can come in many forms, not just some shiny new tech gadget. 

The innovation that has been lacking in the past is an architecture that is affordable.  It seems that very few of the past studies managed to provide meaningful exploration within likely budgets.  Going forward this is likely to be even more strained.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
To be fair, most of those companies are actually headquartered elsewhere, and just have Huntsville-based units.  If there were a whole bunch of relatively no-name, politically-connected Hunstville contractors getting the awards, then I might agree that stuff looks fishy.  But this is LM, and Boeing, and ATK, and ULA, etc getting the contracts. 

Or even more acutely, the parts of ATK, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, SAIC, and USA that would be directly working with MSFC on any potential contract. Likewise the Centennial, CO address for ULA rather than Decatur, AL, because the design work is done in Centennial, not Decatur.
« Last Edit: 11/08/2010 10:47 pm by simonbp »

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
so it will be interesting to see if anyone a) suggests something actually innovative, and b) if NASA listens.

~Jon

Who's to say yours is the only definition of innovation? 

Innovation can come in many forms, not just some shiny new tech gadget. 

The innovation that has been lacking in the past is an architecture that is affordable.  It seems that very few of the past studies managed to provide meaningful exploration within likely budgets.  Going forward this is likely to be even more strained.


Ok.....and?  I fail to see your ultimate point. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Pheogh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 39
Sorry to sound like a broken record here but aren't these studies restricted by the Authorization. The initial posts sounds like we are head back into fantasy land?

Are Marshall and NASA really going to be the only arbiters of these studies? We have been down this road before, and sorry folks but I am to damn tired to mount another offensive for common sense. Some advice for those involved in the next century of spaceflight,... forget PERFORMANCE...

BUDGET, BUDGET, BUDGET...
« Last Edit: 11/08/2010 11:18 pm by Pheogh »

Offline JohnF

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 2
Oh great, another study.......

Online Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
I can't imagine this will take too long considering the dollar amount.  I suspect that these companies are just getting paid to organize and present ideas they already have.  You can't do too much with $625,000 max per company.

I imagine this money is only for "seed" purposes, companies actually interested in fleshing ideas will add money in themselves.  Also, looking at the diverse range, perhaps some companies will not propose a total design but will push specific systems, such as USA doing processing work or AeroJet proposing either thruster or engine systems

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Also, looking at the diverse range, perhaps some companies will not propose a total design but will push specific systems, such as USA doing processing work or AeroJet proposing either thruster or engine systems

You would be correct. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1