Although you almost have to assume that NASA will choose at least 2 rockets for commercial crew in case one fails to deliver. I would guess ULA and SpaceX.
Quote from: neilh on 02/02/2010 02:30 amQuote from: HMXHMX on 02/02/2010 12:10 amHere is the source selection statement, which is public information.What I find interesting is that apparently the Blue Origin proposal involves a pusher abort system as well.Wow, thanks!For future reference, I've typed up the ratings from that doc below. Ratings are Blue (very high level of confidence), Green, White, Yellow, and Red (very low level of confidence). First color is for the evaluation of the Commercial Crew Capability Maturation Plan, while the second color is for the Company Information Evaluation. If there's values in parentheses, it's what the final evaluation was after due diligence by the company.Same info, just put it in a nice table.
Quote from: HMXHMX on 02/02/2010 12:10 amHere is the source selection statement, which is public information.What I find interesting is that apparently the Blue Origin proposal involves a pusher abort system as well.Wow, thanks!For future reference, I've typed up the ratings from that doc below. Ratings are Blue (very high level of confidence), Green, White, Yellow, and Red (very low level of confidence). First color is for the evaluation of the Commercial Crew Capability Maturation Plan, while the second color is for the Company Information Evaluation. If there's values in parentheses, it's what the final evaluation was after due diligence by the company.
Here is the source selection statement, which is public information.What I find interesting is that apparently the Blue Origin proposal involves a pusher abort system as well.
Boeing had issued this press release about its proposal last September. I am assuming this is the one that got chosen:http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=849It sound like an Orion lite (for lack of a better name).
1. Are the three solid rocket boosters considered a low safety risk? 2. Also one unflown configuration for the Atlas V is a two engined Centaur which boost payload to lower orbits. For flying crews to LEO is this being considered? Would this in addition to increased payload give a limited engine out capability?
I'd propose another possibility...http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/091022-x37b-testlaunch.html"...the U.S. Air Force has the X-37B manifested for an April 2010 liftoff. ...'NASA has a long history of involvement with the X-37 program. We continue to monitor and share information on technology developments,' said Gary Wentz, chief engineer Science and Missions Systems Office at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. 'We are looking forward to a successful first flight and to receiving data from some advanced technologies of interest to us, such as thermal protection systems, guidance, navigation and control, and materials for autonomous re-entry and landing.' ...
A little chat with ESA about man-rating Ariane 5 (at ESA's own expense obviously) wouldn't hurt either.
If I recall correctly, Ariane 5 is already human-rated.
Quote from: Bernie Roehl on 02/02/2010 11:38 amIf I recall correctly, Ariane 5 is already human-rated.It was originally intended to be human-rated, but the Arianespace representative who gave a presentation for the Augustine commission said it should not be considered human-rated in its current form.
Quote from: yg1968 on 02/02/2010 03:50 amAlthough you almost have to assume that NASA will choose at least 2 rockets for commercial crew in case one fails to deliver. I would guess ULA and SpaceX. Since ULA rockets are already demonstrated and they deliver, it's more likely any failure on that part will be related to actual spacecraft. With SpaceX of course, it's still in the open. Falcon 9 does look like a done deal now and any problems at this point would likely affect primarily its performance numbers as a function of the amount of rework/kludging needed if/when potential problems are identified.
Maybe it's just about needing an EDS and a LAS, but there have been upgrades to Ariane since its original design, so there might be issues with factors of safety too. Does anyone here know the details?
By the time the FY 2011 Budget comes into force, the Falcon 9 and the Cargo Dragon will have already flown.
Besides, ULA is getting money to man-rate their rocket, so even ULA doesn't think that their rockets are safe for carrying crew at this point.
Did anybody catch the Tuesday press conference with Charles Bolden announcing the commercial crew transportation selections? http://www.spaceref.com/calendar/calendar.html?pid=5805I woke up a little late, so I'm just catching the end of Q&A. Anything interesting announced or answered in Q&A? The last two questions I caught were a question from a Russian reporter about the US-Russia partnership (response mentioned desire to not just have single way to get to orbit), and reporter from Houston asking about job creation.
Quote from: yg1968 on 02/02/2010 01:54 pm Besides, ULA is getting money to man-rate their rocket, so even ULA doesn't think that their rockets are safe for carrying crew at this point. No, they are getting money for a common EDS.They might offer their vehicles as is but with an EDS.