http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/11/uk-steps-up-esa-commit-atv-service-module-orion/Based on today, sorry about the UK angle, but that was a big deal today and......well I'm English
I was really staggered by this news as I am so used to the UK taking no part in manned spaceflight that such a turn around rather took me aback, especially when we keep hearing at the moment about cost cutting under austerity.
Nice piece Chris
However, with ESA’s firm involvement, Orion finds itself in a similar position of the ISS in terms of funding considerations, with the international arrangements adding a level of protection.
Both Agencies agreed to extend the assessment phase of the potential MPCV cooperation in order to achieve technical and programmatic maturity as would be necessary for the decision to be taken to the ESA Council at Ministerial level to be held in November 2012. Should ESA and NASA decide to pursue the collaboration past Phase A/B-1, a dedicated arrangement, pursuant to the IGA and NASA-ESA MOU, would be concluded after approval by the United States Government (through the C175 process and, as necessary, other mechanisms) and by the November 2012 ESA Ministerial Council meeting. In November 2011, ESA and NASA commenced with the MPCV-SM phase A / B1 activities including conducting the System Requirements Review SRR and System Definition Review SDR milestones in 2012.
Quote from: Chris Bergin on 11/21/2012 07:21 pmhttp://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/11/uk-steps-up-esa-commit-atv-service-module-orion/Based on today, sorry about the UK angle, but that was a big deal today and......well I'm English Chris, sorry to say, but you are a bit too enthusiastic in your article. In particular I point to this part of your article:QuoteHowever, with ESA’s firm involvement, Orion finds itself in a similar position of the ISS in terms of funding considerations, with the international arrangements adding a level of protection.The fact that ESA today gave a "GO" for this, does not mean that it is now cast in iron. Here's why:Quote from: NTRS - Building Transatlantic Partnerships in Space Exploration The MPCV-SM StudyBoth Agencies agreed to extend the assessment phase of the potential MPCV cooperation in order to achieve technical and programmatic maturity as would be necessary for the decision to be taken to the ESA Council at Ministerial level to be held in November 2012. Should ESA and NASA decide to pursue the collaboration past Phase A/B-1, a dedicated arrangement, pursuant to the IGA and NASA-ESA MOU, would be concluded after approval by the United States Government (through the C175 process and, as necessary, other mechanisms) and by the November 2012 ESA Ministerial Council meeting. In November 2011, ESA and NASA commenced with the MPCV-SM phase A / B1 activities including conducting the System Requirements Review SRR and System Definition Review SDR milestones in 2012.You can find the NTRS document here: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20120012885As you can see now the idea needs to be approved by the United States government. Todays decision by ESA was just step 1 in a 2-step process. You might want to add that little detail to your article.Other than that I must say you managed to write another one of your award-winning articles. Well done.
Interesting terminology you used for Margaret Thatcher.... i.e. "butcher". The U.S.'s space budget has been whacked or downsized but I don't believed "butchered" was ever used but it sure fits.
Actually there is a problem with this offer. ESA's committment to support ISS is for supporting ISS.Orion is not supposed to service ISS, it is a BEO vehicle.The offer to support Orion via this hardware is great for NASA, but it has nothing to do with ISS. The ISS partners are not just NASA and ESA, there is also Roskosmos, and they get nothing from this deal. What they lose is re-supply via ATV after the last ATV is gone.This is borrowing from ISS to support BEO missions. Perhaps NASA can claim that the EML-2 mission is also part of its contribution to ISS.