NASA lines up four additional CRS missions for Dragon and Cygnus

[Chris Bergin]

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/03/nasa-crs-missions-dragon-cygnus/

Via the L2 FPIP (expanded version).

[averagespacejoe]

So from what I understand this is just an automatic extension of the original contract and the 2nd contract is still up for consideration past 2017. Just making sure I am summarizing correctly. Also right now we call missions CRS SpX(some number) what would the 2nd ones be called?

[Chris Bergin]

So from what I understand this is just an automatic extension of the original contract and the 2nd contract is still up for consideration past 2017. Just making sure I am summarizing correctly. Also right now we call missions CRS SpX(some number) what would the 2nd ones be called?

Yes sir.

CRS contract. CRS extension. Then on to CRS2.

PS This is part one of two for an update on Commercial vehicles. The second one is on Commercial crew and was going to be part of this article, but I felt it best to do two articles to keep their specific.

[yokem55]

I wonder if the extension specifies a Dragon v1 vehicle or if SpaceX could use a cargo variant of Dragon v2?

[freds]

I wonder if the extension specifies a Dragon v1 vehicle or if SpaceX could use a cargo variant of Dragon v2?

Does the time line support this?

[king1999]

Have they published the price tag yet? Hope SpaceX can get their price inflation adjusted

[ChrisWilson68]

I wonder if the extension specifies a Dragon v1 vehicle or if SpaceX could use a cargo variant of Dragon v2?

SpaceX has said they plan to continue to use Dragon 1 as the cargo vehicle at least for several years after Dragon 2 is being used for crew.  If that's their plan, I don't see why they would use Dragon 2 for cargo on the extended CRS missions.

[arachnitect]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

[StuffOfInterest]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

[Zed_Noir]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

[docmordrid]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

But at what cost, and how often can they go to that well before they lose money by doing it?

[king1999]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

But at what cost, and how often can they go to that well before they lose money by doing it?

NASA needs the redundancy of two providers even they have to pay more for that.

[Impaler]

Well Orbital/ATK as a larger company can in principle afford to absorb any over-runs better then Orbital alone could have.  I'm not saying that was a reason for the merger but it certainly helps make the whole Antares failure less of an issue when it just one program in a much bigger company.

[arachnitect]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

But at what cost, and how often can they go to that well before they lose money by doing it?

Atlas is cheaper than you think. Antares is more expensive than you think.

[Tomness]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

But at what cost, and how often can they go to that well before they lose money by doing it?

1.9 billion for 20,000 kg of cargo ,enigines at good price both times. Cygnus Enhanced, Super-Cygnus & never know but they could offer unpressuredized cygnus. Which would be nice for some extra ORUs and getting rid of some trash.

Edited - thanks QauntomG

[QuantumG]

1.9 billion i ll say again billion for 20 k tons of cargo

Really? $95/kg sounds pretty low.

[ChrisWilson68]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

There is the Atlas V back up option.

But at what cost, and how often can they go to that well before they lose money by doing it?

Atlas is cheaper than you think. Antares is more expensive than you think.

How much is OrbATK paying for its Atlas launch?  How much does docmordrid think it costs?  How much does each Antares cost OrbATK?  How much does docmordrid think it is?

[TrevorMonty]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

NASA are buying services of Cygnus, the LV Orbital uses is not that important.

[woods170]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

The extension of the CRS contract was done before Antares blew up. The number of extra flights is completely unrelated to the launch failure. It is NASA who decides what the additional service should be: emphasis on upmass, or emphasis on down-mass, or a mix of the two.

Also:
NASA is buying a service, not a specific launcher or even a specific system. Testing is not the responsibility of NASA and it is most certainly not up to NASA to call for freezing the flights. It was Orbital's choice to suspend flights.


Edit: Oh crud, now I've done it: discussing Cygnus/Antares in the SpaceX section. Who set up this thread here? Oh wait.... 

[Chris Bergin]

In the last OrbATK conference call Thompson said they already had a signed contract for CRS-1 extension, but wouldn't give details.

I guess it's just the one Cygnus.

Considering that their system is currently grounded and will require a major redesign I'm surprised they are getting even one additional launch.  Until their replacement vehicle is tested I'd think their future launches to ISS should be frozen.

The extension of the CRS contract was done before Antares blew up. The number of extra flights is completely unrelated to the launch failure. It is NASA who decides what the additional service should be: emphasis on upmass, or emphasis on down-mass, or a mix of the two.

Also:
NASA is buying a service, not a specific launcher or even a specific system. Testing is not the responsibility of NASA and it is most certainly not up to NASA to call for freezing the flights. It was Orbital's choice to suspend flights.


Edit: Oh crud, now I've done it: discussing Cygnus/Antares in the SpaceX section. Who set up this thread here? Oh wait.... 

Heh! Every SpaceX thread turns into an Orbital thread! Honestly, you Frank Culbertson fans are impossible!

Actually, I did put this thread in the Orbital section, but then redirected it here (as we only need one thread).