New Glenn Launch Manifest

[Conexion Espacial]

Could this be a ride share? Seems like the payload is a featherweight.

It could be, it will depend on the launch trajectory as the two spacecraft will be boosted by Rocket Lab's Photon spacecraft to Mars, so the New Glenn rocket may leave them in a high orbit with other payloads.

[su27k]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

[su27k]

I mean to ask what NASA is paying BO for the launch. Cost was a poor choice of words.

Unfortunately NASA refuses to disclose the price:

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1623824331502415872

NASA did not include the value of Blue Origin’s ESCAPADE launch contract in the press release, only saying that it falls under the $300 million VADR launch services program.

I’ve asked the agency for the award’s value.


Update from NASA:

“Pricing provided in response to launch service task orders under VADR are competed in a closed environment and as such are considered proprietary to the indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract.”

[trimeta]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Doing a sum of the "Escape and Plasma Accel and Dynamics Exp" row gets me $68.9 million. Are you taking off $14 million for the launch vehicle?

[su27k]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Doing a sum of the "Escape and Plasma Accel and Dynamics Exp" row gets me $68.9 million. Are you taking off $14 million for the launch vehicle?

Well since they just awarded the launch contract, any spending before today can't be for launch, so the total $48.7M from FY21 and FY22 would be for spacecraft for sure, that's already pretty close to the $55M cap.

[trimeta]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Doing a sum of the "Escape and Plasma Accel and Dynamics Exp" row gets me $68.9 million. Are you taking off $14 million for the launch vehicle?

Well since they just awarded the launch contract, any spending before today can't be for launch, so the total $48.7M from FY21 and FY22 would be for spacecraft for sure, that's already pretty close to the $55M cap.

This is all the amount of money NASA is paying to Rocket Lab, though: price, not cost. So we still don't know what the internal cost is (which, as you noted earlier, is different from price). And if we take Eric's comment to specifically be about cost, then we're back to square one with no info.

[Comga]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Launch costs wouldn’t be included in these mission allocations and budget requests and projections.
It doesn’t appear possible to derive the budget for ESCAPADE from these numbers, partly because it doesn’t say if any spending preceded it (which someone here knows) but if the budget cap of $55M is assumed for design and construction, the money is almost all spent already.  After this the budget goes into operations  or storage costs early in FY ‘23, which is soon if not now.
But by their own statements, NG won’t even debut in FY ‘24.
How does this award work with this schedule?

[Tywin]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Launch costs wouldn’t be included in these mission allocations and budget requests and projections.
It doesn’t appear possible to derive the budget for ESCAPADE from these numbers, partly because it doesn’t say if any spending preceded it (which someone here knows) but if the budget cap of $55M is assumed for design and construction, the money is almost all spent already.  After this the budget goes into operations  or storage costs early in FY ‘23, which is soon if not now.
But by their own statements, NG won’t even debut in FY ‘24.
How does this award work with this schedule?

So you know the future? 

[AU1.52]

Seems rather risky that NASA would award this to a rocket that has not launched yet by a company have has been to even LEO, like alone BEO. Does NASA have a backup if NG is not ready and has launched twice by later 2024? If they miss 2024 will they not have to wait until 2026? I am assuming they have to approve to NASA they can at least reach LEO twice before they are allowed to launch a NASA mission.

[Tomness]

Seems rather risky that NASA would award this to a rocket that has not launched yet by a company have has been to even LEO, like alone BEO. Does NASA have a backup if NG is not ready and has launched twice by later 2024? If they miss 2024 will they not have to wait until 2026? I am assuming they have to approve to NASA they can at least reach LEO twice before they are allowed to launch a NASA mission.

if its a category III mission this is perfectly acceptable for this rocket, of course they have back ups. You do want give a new guys a chance. they have been in the game along time and know how do paper work well and can sign off on risk.

[niwax]

Seems rather risky that NASA would award this to a rocket that has not launched yet by a company have has been to even LEO, like alone BEO. Does NASA have a backup if NG is not ready and has launched twice by later 2024? If they miss 2024 will they not have to wait until 2026? I am assuming they have to approve to NASA they can at least reach LEO twice before they are allowed to launch a NASA mission.

They awarded a SIMPLEx contract to Phantom, Cantrells new scam with the stolen stock images. This program isn't exactly the cream of the crop, it's a few million dollars on the off chance that someone actually manages to launch something. Every single SIMPLEx mission so far has been severely delayed or cancelled. It's like calling yourself a top-grade ISP because you made it onto the FCC subsidy list.

[trimeta]

Seems rather risky that NASA would award this to a rocket that has not launched yet by a company have has been to even LEO, like alone BEO. Does NASA have a backup if NG is not ready and has launched twice by later 2024? If they miss 2024 will they not have to wait until 2026? I am assuming they have to approve to NASA they can at least reach LEO twice before they are allowed to launch a NASA mission.

They awarded a SIMPLEx contract to Phantom, Cantrells new scam with the stolen stock images. This program isn't exactly the cream of the crop, it's a few million dollars on the off chance that someone actually manages to launch something. Every single SIMPLEx mission so far has been severely delayed or cancelled. It's like calling yourself a top-grade ISP because you made it onto the FCC subsidy list.

By SIMPLEx do you mean VADR? Since that's the contract mentioned in this press release from Phantom Space. And it seems like although the contract to Rocket Lab to build ESCAPADE was under SIMPLEx, the contract to Blue Origin to fly it is under VADR.

(Although note that, for example, the contract to Rocket Lab to fly TROPICS was VADR too, so the program is more about small/rideshare launch in general, not necessarily promoting up-and-coming companies.)

[whitelancer64]

Seems rather risky that NASA would award this to a rocket that has not launched yet by a company have has been to even LEO, like alone BEO. Does NASA have a backup if NG is not ready and has launched twice by later 2024? If they miss 2024 will they not have to wait until 2026? I am assuming they have to approve to NASA they can at least reach LEO twice before they are allowed to launch a NASA mission.

You know NASA did the same thing with SpaceX, right?  The Falcon 9 was very much a paper rocket on the drawing table when NASA gave a CRS award to SpaceX.

Also, Falcon 1's third launch had a NASA payload on it, the first three launches were all failures.

[TrevorMonty]

Also, another datapoint is NASA paying Rocket Lab $10 million for CAPSTONE, which included one interplanetary Photon and one Electron launch; ESCAPADE will include two interplanetary Photons and zero Electron launches. Of course, that's price, not cost (and it's pretty clear that Rocket Lab lost money on that contract), but it does make it seem like $55 million for two interplanetary Photons is a little high.

University of California, Berkeley is lead on this project with RL being contracted for design, build and most likely mission control.
Most $55M goes Berkeley who pay RL out of it.
$55M is for complete mission except launch. Design, build and mission control for spacecraft for set period. These missions typically last lot longer than expected which means NASA will pay more for  mission control in long run.

For interplanetary mission with 2 spacecraft $55M is cheap compared to typical NASA missions. If successful NASA will have access to proven low cost interplanetary space craft they can use on other missions.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1624128654119735302

Updated story with the value of the award ($20 million), which NASA does not disclose yet is listed in a federal government database.

https://spacenews.com/blue-origin-wins-first-nasa-business-for-new-glenn/

[Vahe231991]

Blue Origin winning a contract to launch a Mars spacecraft atop the New Glenn is yet another boost to Blue Origin's fortunes in marketing the New Glenn for various civilian purposes because Amazon in 2022 contracted 15 flights of New Glenn, with an option for 18 more, for deployment of the Kuiper satellite constellation, notwithstanding the fact that the first New Glenn launch (now scheduled for Q4 of this year) is only intended as a technology demonstration mission. A late 2024 launch window for the ESCAPADE mission is very realistic considering that despite silence from Blue Origin, satellite images indicate that progress is being made in fabricating components for the first New Glenn.

[DrHeywoodFloyd]

Blue Origin winning a contract to launch a Mars spacecraft atop the New Glenn is yet another boost to Blue Origin's fortunes in marketing the New Glenn for various civilian purposes because Amazon in 2022 contracted 15 flights of New Glenn, with an option for 18 more, for deployment of the Kuiper satellite constellation, notwithstanding the fact that the first New Glenn launch (now scheduled for Q4 of this year) is only intended as a technology demonstration mission. A late 2024 launch window for the ESCAPADE mission is very realistic considering that despite silence from Blue Origin, satellite images indicate that progress is being made in fabricating components for the first New Glenn.

This is good, but two issues for me:
1. Delivery of of the ocean landing platform:

When?

2. All up testing sub system component of the seven BE-4 engines:

Will this be done? If No, why not? If yes, when? What is happening with Test Stand 4670?

[matthewkantar]

If initial lunches are done with light payloads and plenty of margin, maybe they can RTLS until a floating pad is ready. SpaceX had a bit of an uphill climb getting permission to RTLS, it may be a little less of a hill now that returns to land seem routine.

[Comga]

Do you have a source for the spacecraft cost being $55 million, other than that being the price cap for SIMPLEx missions?

It's in NASA budget request.

Launch costs wouldn’t be included in these mission allocations and budget requests and projections.
It doesn’t appear possible to derive the budget for ESCAPADE from these numbers, partly because it doesn’t say if any spending preceded it (which someone here knows) but if the budget cap of $55M is assumed for design and construction, the money is almost all spent already.  After this the budget goes into operations  or storage costs early in FY ‘23, which is soon if not now.
But by their own statements, NG won’t even debut in FY ‘24.
How does this award work with this schedule?

So you know the future? 

Stop being nasty
Highlight ALL the relevant quote, like I have done.
That’s what Blue says, not me
And no, I am not going to find it for you.
It was in one of the Blue Origin threads a few days ago
But again, it’s an ad hominem attack, picking at me, rather than my message.  You didn’t even take the time to discuss the relevant issue.

It’s like the fools screaming that a 2X estimate of Blue’s US government revenue constitutes heinous libel.  The error doesn’t impact the main point.
How NASA can award a launch contract for a probe that is nearing completion to a a company whose rocket is not only not qualified with successful launches, not only hasn’t started integrated testing, but hasn’t even had any completed stage moved out of the factory, one not likely to launch for a year or two?
What is NASA’s process and criteria for the award?

[Zed_Noir]

<snip>
How NASA can award a launch contract for a probe that is nearing completion to a a company whose rocket is not only not qualified with successful launches, not only hasn’t started integrated testing, but hasn’t even had any completed stage moved out of the factory, one not likely to launch for a year or two?
What is NASA’s process and criteria for the award?

If I don't know any better. It appears to be an attempt by NASA to quiet the WA congressional  delegation by awarding a low value mission launch contract to Below Orbit.

Of course if Below Orbit don't make the launch schedule, there is always the usual suspect to provide backup launch service.