The official RFP has been released today:https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-asks-american-companies-to-deliver-supplies-for-artemis-moon-missionsQuoteThis solicitation is for a multi-award, firm-fixed price, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 15 years, with a maximum $7 billion value. The guaranteed minimum value for any award is two missions.NASA is also asking responders to address logistics spacecraft design, cargo mass capability, pressurized volume, power availability for payloads and, transit time to Gateway.Following initial award, there may be future contract opportunities for new service providers to ensure capabilities remain competitive. If approved in advance by NASA, a commercial provider may also use a mission to deliver, remove and/or return non-NASA cargo as long as it does not interfere with the agency mission, furthering the development of a robust deep space economy.Complete RFP can be found here: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fc4c9359483f1fa92e25e2425780e935&tab=core&_cview=1A general update on Artemis in the press statement:QuoteThis solicitation is the latest in a line of work by the agency to accelerate its Moon to Mars exploration plans by working with American aerospace companies. NASA recently awarded a contract to Maxar Technologies to design, develop, launch and demonstrate the power and propulsion element by 2022. Negotiations are ongoing for development of the habitation and logistics outpost (HALO) module. The agency is also working on another draft solicitation for the integrated human landing system. A final solicitation will be released in the future.
This solicitation is for a multi-award, firm-fixed price, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 15 years, with a maximum $7 billion value. The guaranteed minimum value for any award is two missions.NASA is also asking responders to address logistics spacecraft design, cargo mass capability, pressurized volume, power availability for payloads and, transit time to Gateway.Following initial award, there may be future contract opportunities for new service providers to ensure capabilities remain competitive. If approved in advance by NASA, a commercial provider may also use a mission to deliver, remove and/or return non-NASA cargo as long as it does not interfere with the agency mission, furthering the development of a robust deep space economy.
This solicitation is the latest in a line of work by the agency to accelerate its Moon to Mars exploration plans by working with American aerospace companies. NASA recently awarded a contract to Maxar Technologies to design, develop, launch and demonstrate the power and propulsion element by 2022. Negotiations are ongoing for development of the habitation and logistics outpost (HALO) module. The agency is also working on another draft solicitation for the integrated human landing system. A final solicitation will be released in the future.
NASA has committed to buy at least two Dragon XL missions (see below) as part of its contract with SpaceX. I wonder if NASA would be willing to replace those two Dragon XL missions with two cargo Starship missions. I don't know if that would be possible under the contract. Quote from: GWH on 08/19/2019 04:33 pmThe official RFP has been released today:https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-asks-american-companies-to-deliver-supplies-for-artemis-moon-missionsQuoteThis solicitation is for a multi-award, firm-fixed price, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for 15 years, with a maximum $7 billion value. The guaranteed minimum value for any award is two missions.NASA is also asking responders to address logistics spacecraft design, cargo mass capability, pressurized volume, power availability for payloads and, transit time to Gateway.Following initial award, there may be future contract opportunities for new service providers to ensure capabilities remain competitive. If approved in advance by NASA, a commercial provider may also use a mission to deliver, remove and/or return non-NASA cargo as long as it does not interfere with the agency mission, furthering the development of a robust deep space economy.Complete RFP can be found here: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fc4c9359483f1fa92e25e2425780e935&tab=core&_cview=1A general update on Artemis in the press statement:QuoteThis solicitation is the latest in a line of work by the agency to accelerate its Moon to Mars exploration plans by working with American aerospace companies. NASA recently awarded a contract to Maxar Technologies to design, develop, launch and demonstrate the power and propulsion element by 2022. Negotiations are ongoing for development of the habitation and logistics outpost (HALO) module. The agency is also working on another draft solicitation for the integrated human landing system. A final solicitation will be released in the future.
No, starship is nothing like dragon XL.Dragon XL is designed to be a functioning habitat for minimum of a year while a ton of science through out it. Most of starship is fuel tanks, and not designed to function for a year in space.
Well, it was mentionned yesterday that Starship is designed to loiter in NRHO at least 100 days, waiting for Orion to arrive.
Can anyone think of a good reason not to replace this with a Cargo version of Starship?
A Starship cargo mission to NRHO is likely to cost SpaceX less than a Dragon XL mission. SpaceX can offer that to NASA at the same price.The 100-day boiloff endurance is going to constrain the whole Artemis architecture, so there's very little value in having a logistics vehicle that can stick around longer. Lunar Starship will be limited to less than 100 days on the surface, and the initial design will be more limited than that. It may also require multiple refuelings to keep it alive between annual SLS/Orion missions.Let's say each Artemis mission begins with launching and loading two accumulator tankers in LEO, then a Cargo Starship. One of the accumulator tankers refuels the Cargo Starship, then reenters and lands. The Cargo Starship and the other accumulator tanker depart for NRHO. The accumulator tanker refuels the Lunar Starship that been waiting patiently in NRHO and trying not to die. With refueling complete, the crew launches on SLS, and Orion heads to NRHO. If Gateway is in the mix, Lunar Starship and Cargo Starship are both now docked to Gateway, and there's a third port open for Orion. Otherwise, Orion docks to Lunar Starship, crew transfers, Orion undocks (uncrewed), and the two Starships dock together. After the crew is done transferring cargo in the Lunar Starship, they undock and land on the Moon.Here's where the Cargo Starship could be much more than a Dragon XXXXXL:At the end of the surface mission, Lunar Starship returns to NRHO, and the crew can transfer return cargo into Cargo Starship, which then returns to Earth. Lunar Starship has much more upmass potential than NASA expected from HLS, and using Cargo Starship instead of Dragon XL would allow NASA to deliver all that fascinating lunar upmass to laboratories here on Earth. That's the killer app. Dragon XL can't return any mass to Earth. Lunar Starship can't return any mass to Earth. Orion can't return very much mass to Earth. Cargo Starship can deliver and return an order of magnitude more cargo than Dragon XL. NASA would be silly not to take advantage of such a capability.
Quote from: yg1968 on 04/18/2021 01:06 amWell, it was mentionned yesterday that Starship is designed to loiter in NRHO at least 100 days, waiting for Orion to arrive. Really? Where? I really want to see that. If it's true it would absolutely mean an Artemis without Gateway could be a real possibility. >
[...] SpaceX’s approach to achieving them in a manner that will not comprise its ability to meet NASA’s other requirements to be a particularly noteworthy attribute of SpaceX’s design with abundant potential benefit for NASA. In particular, SpaceX’s quiescent lunar orbit operations capability will allow it to loiter for 100 days prior to rendezvous with the crew vehicle. This capability exceeds NASA’s stated goal period of 90 days, which allows for additional flexibility for crew launch in the event unexpected circumstances arise that could delay the commencement of Artemis missions. Additionally, the scale of SpaceX’s lander architecture presents numerous benefits to NASA.>
Quote from: DreamyPickle on 04/19/2021 05:48 amCan anyone think of a good reason not to replace this with a Cargo version of Starship?Mass and stress on the docking ports.
