wov ULA complete victory
Read the whole article - Smith and Pallazo (sp?) are saying replace one of the Commercial Crew vehicles with Orion. Then read Gerst's document - would they replace the "clearly superior" bid, regardless of cost? I am just old enough and cynical enough to think that this may be the opening shot in the battle for the ultimate dream of Congress (and some at NASA, and some on this site): two ways to get into space - in a Boeing capsule on top of a Lockheed launch vehicle, or in a Lockheed capsule on top of a Boeing launch vehicle.
3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years. 8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.
Quote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 08:17 pm1/NASA wants to do same thing that is doing last 40 years to fly to Earth orbit, it is safe who is going to send astronauts on long trip without assurance to bring them back. 2/NASA has plans for Mars trip but hopes it will be cancel, because it will be safer for NASA reputation not to do risky human endeavor and blame congress for canceling mission because the cost overrun.3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years. 8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.Also odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.
1/NASA wants to do same thing that is doing last 40 years to fly to Earth orbit, it is safe who is going to send astronauts on long trip without assurance to bring them back. 2/NASA has plans for Mars trip but hopes it will be cancel, because it will be safer for NASA reputation not to do risky human endeavor and blame congress for canceling mission because the cost overrun.3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years. 8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.
Quote from: mkent on 10/14/2014 11:44 pmQuote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 07:54 pmYou will not find such project.I found ten (maybe 12).You must be using some definition of "on budget" that the rest of us are not privy to. Boeing and Lockheed wouldn't agree with your list, they regularly talk about the losses they took on some of those projects for going overbudget.
Quote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 07:54 pmYou will not find such project.I found ten (maybe 12).
You will not find such project.
Quote from: Jim on 10/14/2014 09:46 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 10/14/2014 09:14 pmAlso odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.Wrong. Boeing did parachute drops. Just drop the bias, SNC is way behind Boeing... of a Styrofoam and plywood mockup. Don't forget, their subcontractor also dropped it off the back of a pickup truck to test the airbags. Soooo much more impressive than a glide test.
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 10/14/2014 09:14 pmAlso odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.Wrong. Boeing did parachute drops. Just drop the bias, SNC is way behind Boeing.
Also odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 10/14/2014 09:14 pmAlso odd that the only other conmpetator, who actually has a flight tested article, (Although not into orbit yet) was the one who got shafted, as Boeing has mockups, but no real flight testable article.Hmmm, could it be possible that Boeing focused on what was critical to advance the program and not a test that looked cool (and admittedly captured a lot of people's imagination) but maybe not as critical to achieving their goal? And which, if people will recall did not end well. And recall one of the milestones of CCDev2 was to test the landing gear. So what confidence does that provide?
Quote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 07:54 pmYou are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget.F/A-18E/F Super Hornet E/A-18G Growler C-17 Globemaster III for the last 20 years modified YC-15CH-47F ChinookAH-64 Block III ApacheJDAMSDBAtlas VDelta IV HeavyWGSI believe these were as well:GPS IIFTDRSQuote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 07:54 pmYou will not find such project.I found ten (maybe 12).
You are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget.
I assume you are being facetious, but it was a full boilerplate, not plywood.
Quote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 07:54 pmYou are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget. You will not find such project. You are very mistaken and must be overlooking data that greatly conflicts with your incorrect statement.
You are right,but tell me any big old company(Boeing, Lockheed,.ATK,..) got it project from NASA and defense budget and was done on budget. You will not find such project.
Quote from: raketa on 10/14/2014 08:17 pm3/Boeing spacecraft will not force them go farther, and let them focus on unmanned probes.4/Spacex is building real hardware to leave Earth orbit and build it cheap. I think it scares lot of folks in NASA management.5/Boeing spacecraft is paper craft. Spacex is real hardware that will be launch this month.6/If Pad abort and January inflight abort will be successful, Spacex will have system ready to flight in February 2015.7/If Boeing to start build today they will have something in 2-3 years. 8/Strange that NASA prefer paper before real hardware flying and testing.3/ Boeing's CST-100 is nearly as capable BLEO as SpaceX's Dragon 2. The only difference is Dragon 2's thicker heat shield, which is irrelevant to the CCtCap contract. Boeing could easily thicken the heat shield on the CST-100 were it not for the dead weight and the fact that it's completely unnecessary.4/ Both Dragon 2 and CST-100 will need significant (and almost identical) modifications to go BLEO.5/ Boeing's design has passed CDR, something SpaceX's design has yet to do. Sierra Nevada's design is years away from that milestone. That puts Boeing ahead of SpaceX and Sierra Nevada in this competition. SpaceX has no plans to launch anything this month.6/ No, it will not. Elon Musk himself has stated that Dragon 2 won't take its first manned flight until late 2016, though he said with the usual delays it may slip to mid 2017.7/ Mid 2017 is the same time as Boeing.8/ Boeing has tested more real hardware than Sierra Nevada. Sierra had one flight of their Engineering Test Article to test its landing characteristics, and that ended badly. They are now about 1-1/2 years late on their additional flight tests. Boeing, meanwhile, completed their landing tests years ago. They are the only one of the three competitors to have done so.Boeing completed all of its milestones and did so on time. That's why they won and why they were rated the highest by NASA.
give me at least one new aircraft or spacecraft they deliver under original budget, I gave my list a
Boeing completed all of its milestones and did so on time. That's why they won and why they were rated the highest by NASA.
What was the last complex new aerospace vehicle built by anybody that was delivered on time and on budget? You've been presented with a list of projects that Boeing has completed on time and budget, which under any reasonable standard represents a degree of competency in engineering management. How do SpaceX and SNC fare under your standard?
There was never going to be a CC winner that “didn’t” have the name Boeing on it...
Quote from: raketa on 10/15/2014 12:47 amgive me at least one new aircraft or spacecraft they deliver under original budget, I gave my list aYour list is bogus and wrong, so why should I bother? Your mind is made up and facts won't change it. You really don't know what you are talking about.
There is no aerospace project deliver on time.