COTS Award Announcement Thread

[Lampyridae]

antonioe - 22/2/2008  12:20 PM

Lampyridae - 21/2/2008 6:18 PM Then of course, you could persuade NASA to only recruit dwarfs for the ISS...

Hey!  I'm 5'6"!!! :angry:

 :frown: No offense! Ignavus puer sum, ut mea sagitta mea imperatorem vulnerat! Cum fabricando est, ut fabricaris!

[Antares]

marsavian - 21/2/2008  12:54 AM

Antares - 20/2/2008  12:00 AM

marsavian - 20/2/2008  1:09 PM
I know NASA likes acquiring new Rockets like a kid in a candy store

That's an irresponsible comment.  It is not supported by history.

Let's see, it's got 2 EELVs it barely uses, it's now building an unnecessary EELV clone in Ares I and it's got a cheaper private EELV clone in Falcon 9 coming online and is now adding another private one which doesn't promise cheaper cost upfront to the first one although granted their record is much better than anyone else on keeping to cost once given. Comment certainly is supported by current history.

EELV are not NASA's as Jim said - payload size doesn't dictate using them anyway.  Neither is Falcon.  Neither is Taurus II.

That leaves Ares I (maybe) and Shuttle.

2 rockets in 30 years.  Yeah, clearly NASA has a problem with its waste line. (p.i.)

[antonioe]

Lampyridae - 21/2/2008 10:59 PM No offense! Ignavus puer sum, ut mea sagitta mea imperatorem vulnerat! Cum fabricando est, ut fabricaris!

Nihil accepit.  Baculi cautesque ossam meam rupturis potent, sed verbi numquam mihi laedent.

[antonioe]

Comga - 21/2/2008 10:48 PM

antonioe - 21/2/2008 8:20 PM

Lampyridae - 21/2/2008 6:18 PM Then of course, you could persuade NASA to only recruit {mass efficient people :laugh: } for the ISS...

Hey! I'm 5'6"!!! :angry:

We all can guess which even-more-mass-efficient NASA scientist/administrator would get ahead of you on that basis!

Funny; Mike and I were born within 4 month of each other; he was my CFI when *I* got my CFI, but then I got my ATP and jet type rating before him.  He won over me hands down (7 to 4, I believe) on the college degree thingy.  He's a scratch golfer, and I can't play golf if my life depended on it.  I think I'm more good-looking, though :laugh:

[antonioe]

Oh, I forgot; Here I am, designing rockets and writing in this forum and having all sorts of fun, and he's stuck as NASA administrator, having to think thrice anything he says lest he's mis-quoted, being the escape goat for anything that goes wrong in space in this country (for example, my decision to base Orbital's COTS bid at Wallops... for which Sen. Nelson is rumored to have read Mike the riot act, as if it had been his decision)...

I think I win, in this case...

[A_M_Swallow]

antonioe - 23/2/2008  6:03 PM
 (for example, my decision to base Orbital's COTS bid at Wallops... for which Sen. Nelson is rumored to have read Mike the riot act, as if it had been his decision)

COTS LV just became NASA rockets - official.

[Jim]

A_M_Swallow - 23/2/2008  3:21 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008  6:03 PM
 (for example, my decision to base Orbital's COTS bid at Wallops... for which Sen. Nelson is rumored to have read Mike the riot act, as if it had been his decision)

COTS LV just became NASA rockets - official.

Incorrect. Again don't post unless you know something

 They are the contractors', just like Atlas V and Delta IV.  Evenmore, NASA will have no insight into the COTS  launch vehicle.  NASA has no contract for the Falcon and Taurus II.

[A_M_Swallow]

Jim - 23/2/2008  8:29 PM

A_M_Swallow - 23/2/2008  3:21 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008  6:03 PM
 (for example, my decision to base Orbital's COTS bid at Wallops... for which Sen. Nelson is rumored to have read Mike the riot act, as if it had been his decision)

COTS LV just became NASA rockets - official.

Incorrect. Again don't post unless you know something

Jim when ever you post that line it means you have got the politic wrong again.  Think what the Senator was saying.

[Jim]

A_M_Swallow - 23/2/2008  3:39 PM

Jim - 23/2/2008  8:29 PM

A_M_Swallow - 23/2/2008  3:21 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008  6:03 PM
 (for example, my decision to base Orbital's COTS bid at Wallops... for which Sen. Nelson is rumored to have read Mike the riot act, as if it had been his decision)

COTS LV just became NASA rockets - official.

Incorrect. Again don't post unless you know something

Jim when ever you post that line it means you have got the politic wrong again.  Think what the Senator was saying.

One clueless Senator doesn't make it so either

[antonioe]

C'mon, Jim!  Everybody knows that NASA builds ALL the satellites and ALL rockets in these good 'ol US of A!!!  Everytime somebody asks me what I do for a living, the next question is "so, you work for NASA?"

 

[Jim]

antonioe - 23/2/2008  3:53 PM

C'mon, Jim!  Everybody knows that NASA builds ALL the satellites and ALL rockets in these good 'ol US of A!!!  Everytime somebody asks me what I do for a living, the next question is "so, you work for NASA?"

And NASA was to shoot down one of its own failed satellites

[antonioe]

Jim - 23/2/2008 2:57 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008 3:53 PM

C'mon, Jim! Everybody knows that NASA builds ALL the satellites and ALL rockets in these good 'ol US of A!!! Everytime somebody asks me what I do for a living, the next question is "so, you work for NASA?"

 

And NASA was to shoot down one of its own failed satellites

I would bet a chocolate milkshake that you go out on the street and five out of ten people would answer "yes", but the thought of winning that bet is too depressing...

[Jim]

antonioe - 23/2/2008  4:45 PM

Jim - 23/2/2008 2:57 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008 3:53 PM

C'mon, Jim! Everybody knows that NASA builds ALL the satellites and ALL rockets in these good 'ol US of A!!! Everytime somebody asks me what I do for a living, the next question is "so, you work for NASA?"

And NASA was to shoot down one of its own failed satellites

I would bet a chocolate milkshake that you go out on the street and five out of ten people would answer "yes", but the thought of winning that bet is too depressing...

Can it be malted?

7.5 would be even odds

[Comga]

antonioe - 23/2/2008  10:57 AM

Comga - 21/2/2008 10:48 PM

antonioe - 21/2/2008 8:20 PM

Lampyridae - 21/2/2008 6:18 PM Then of course, you could persuade NASA to only recruit {mass efficient people :laugh: } for the ISS...

Hey! I'm 5'6"!!! :angry:

We all can guess which even-more-mass-efficient NASA scientist/administrator would get ahead of you on that basis!

Funny; Mike and I were born within 4 month of each other; he was my CFI when *I* got my CFI, but then I got my ATP and jet type rating before him.  He won over me hands down (7 to 4, I believe) on the college degree thingy.  He's a scratch golfer, and I can't play golf if my life depended on it.  I think I'm more good-looking, though :laugh:

Oops.  I overlooked that THIRD mass efficient NASA guy with advanced pilots licenses, but Griffin is more an engineer than a scientist, isn't he?  I was speaking of the AA SMD, Alan Stern.

[kevin-rf]

antonioe - 23/2/2008  4:45 PM

I would bet a chocolate milkshake that you go out on the street and five out of ten people would answer "yes", but the thought of winning that bet is too depressing...

Sadly I fear it would be somewhere north of nine out of ten....

On a more serious note, how much of a cargo mass to ISS hit would Orbital's COTS proposal take if politics dictated a cape launch?

[Jim]

kevin-rf - 23/2/2008  9:27 PM

antonioe - 23/2/2008  4:45 PM

I would bet a chocolate milkshake that you go out on the street and five out of ten people would answer "yes", but the thought of winning that bet is too depressing...

Sadly I fear it would be somewhere north of nine out of ten....

On a more serious note, how much of a cargo mass to ISS hit would Orbital's COTS proposal take if politics dictated a cape launch?

Hit?  It should increase

[A_M_Swallow]

Aircraft normally fly with the airline's symbol on their tails, not the manufactures.  NASA will be paying for the COTS II launches.

[wingod]

antonioe - 21/2/2008  1:21 PM

Bret - 21/2/2008 11:42 AM  Anyone have a handy comparison chart?

This is the best I can come up with.  I vouch for the Orbital numbers, the others are my best data and may be wrong:

 

	Mass at	Max net cargo	Combined	Payload
Vehicle	Launch, Kg	press.	unpress.	fuel	Limit	Ratio	Comments
Progress M1	7,150	1,800	0	1,950	2,230	0.31
ATV	20,750	5,500	0	4,700	7,700	0.37
HTV	16,500	6,000	0	0	6,000	0.36
SpaceX	10,000	1,400	1,700	0	3,100	0.31	S/C has two sections:press reenters, unpress burns up
Orbital
SM+PCM	5,400	2,300	0	0	2,300	0.43
SM+UCM	5,400	-	2,000	0	2,000	0.37
SM+RCM	5,400	1,300	0	0	1,300	0.24

The HTV Can carry an express pallet adaptor in its center section for an unpressurized payload.

[wingod]

wingod - 23/2/2008  10:28 PM

antonioe - 21/2/2008  1:21 PM

Bret - 21/2/2008 11:42 AM  Anyone have a handy comparison chart?

This is the best I can come up with.  I vouch for the Orbital numbers, the others are my best data and may be wrong:

 

	Mass at	Max net cargo	Combined	Payload
Vehicle	Launch, Kg	press.	unpress.	fuel	Limit	Ratio	Comments
Progress M1	7,150	1,800	0	1,950	2,230	0.31
ATV	20,750	5,500	0	4,700	7,700	0.37
HTV	16,500	6,000	0	0	6,000	0.36
SpaceX	10,000	1,400	1,700	0	3,100	0.31	S/C has two sections:press reenters, unpress burns up
Orbital
SM+PCM	5,400	2,300	0	0	2,300	0.43
SM+UCM	5,400	-	2,000	0	2,000	0.37
SM+RCM	5,400	1,300	0	0	1,300	0.24

The HTV Can carry an express pallet adaptor in its center section for an unpressurized payload.

The progress can also carry more than 1000 kg in its center section of unpressurized payload by removing the fuel tank.

One of these is going to fly in 2009 for ESA.

[antonioe]

wingod - 23/2/2008 10:29 PM The HTV Can carry an express pallet adaptor in its center section for an unpressurized payload. The progress can also carry more than 1000 kg in its center section of unpressurized payload by removing the fuel tank. One of these is going to fly in 2009 for ESA.

Could you suggest what the HTV line should read?  Should we have two lines for Progress M, one for each configuration?  How should the second Progress line read?