COTS D in the On-Deck Circle...

[yg1968]

So you think that the Boeing-Bigelow capsule will not be chosen? Fagola had mentionned at the House hearing that the Bigelow capsule would have to dock with the ISS in the first orbit or would have to deorbit. In other words, it cannot stay in orbit for a long time. 

[Namechange User]

So you think that the Orion-Bigelow will not be chosen? Fagola had mentionned at the House hearing that the Bigelow capsule would have to dock with the ISS in the first orbit or would have to deorbit. In other words, it cannot stay in orbit for a long time. 

First why would Bigelow want to go to the ISS?  They need transportation to their own station modules which is the single greatest show stopper to them proceeding further. 

Next Bigelow has nothing to do with Orion and therefore cannot say they want a "lite" version of it.

Thirdly, Bigelow has teamed with Boeing on a CCDev proposal. 

[dad2059]

What's wrong with Orion lite?

It can't exist like the way you are thinking of, the way that space.com reported it and the way Bigelow floated it. 

Other than Orion-Lite, how would a good 'commercial' capsule be designed?

[yg1968]

YG, this is why you are sometimes badly misinformed. You can't rely on blog sites and tweets from writers with bad track records is one thing, but your insistence on posting them all over this forum is unhelpful.

ULA was just a guess on his part. As far as the date is concerned, I mentionned that it was obviously not correct. Chris Birgin's sources predicted that CCDev would be announced today. Today is not over. But this prediction is also likely not acurate unless something else has delayed it.   

[yg1968]

So you think that the Orion-Bigelow will not be chosen? Fagola had mentionned at the House hearing that the Bigelow capsule would have to dock with the ISS in the first orbit or would have to deorbit. In other words, it cannot stay in orbit for a long time. 

First why would Bigelow want to go to the ISS?  They need transportation to their own station modules which is the single greatest show stopper to them proceeding further. 

Next Bigelow has nothing to do with Orion and therefore cannot say they want a "lite" version of it.

Thirdly, Bigelow has teamed with Boeing on a CCDev proposal. 

My guess is that the Boeing-Bigelow design is the "Orion Lite". Bigelow never said that LM was his partner and neither did the Space.com article.  The Orion-lite name was never used by Bigelow. People just decided to call it that.

[Namechange User]

Other than Orion-Lite, how would a good 'commercial' capsule be designed?

With the extremely limited info available, there is nothing wrong with the design.  It is the concept, where as stated in the space.com article trumped about here, that is flawed.  Bigelow cannot take a design owned and paid for by the government, chop out a few systems here and there to make it "Lite" and then fly it for it's own commercial purposes.  Bigelow has no right to do that, even Lockheed cannot "sell" them because they are the prime contractor but do not own the design, the government controls all configuration decisions. 

[Namechange User]

So you think that the Orion-Bigelow will not be chosen? Fagola had mentionned at the House hearing that the Bigelow capsule would have to dock with the ISS in the first orbit or would have to deorbit. In other words, it cannot stay in orbit for a long time. 

First why would Bigelow want to go to the ISS?  They need transportation to their own station modules which is the single greatest show stopper to them proceeding further. 

Next Bigelow has nothing to do with Orion and therefore cannot say they want a "lite" version of it.

Thirdly, Bigelow has teamed with Boeing on a CCDev proposal. 

My guess is that the Orion-Bigelow design is the "Orion Lite". Bigelow never said that LM was his partner and neither did the Space.com article.  The Orion-lite name was never used  by Bigelow. People just decided to call it that.

Aaaaaarrrrggghhhhh.  Never mind. 

[yg1968]

Just to clear things up, I made a typo in the post that you quoted, I actually meant that my guess is that the "Boeing-Bigelow" capsule design is the "Orion lite".

I thought that the Boeing-Bigelow capsule design was essentially the same as the Orion lite. But if I am wrong I will defer to what you know. Because I admit that I don't know! I don't work at NASA. A lot of people are confused about this. So I certainly don't mind being corrected on this. But I remember that the Space.com article never said anything about LM being involved or the design being called Orion lite.

[Smoothie]

What's wrong with Orion lite?

It can't exist like the way you are thinking of, the way that space.com reported it and the way Bigelow floated it. 

Other than Orion-Lite, how would a good 'commercial' capsule be designed?

With wings.....  But then I guess it's a resuable OSP and not a ballistic capsule anymore. 

[bad_astra]

It will be interesting of the Lockheed offering looks anything like the LM/NG OSP design.

[kch]

What's wrong with Orion lite?

It can't exist like the way you are thinking of, the way that space.com reported it and the way Bigelow floated it. 

Other than Orion-Lite, how would a good 'commercial' capsule be designed?

With wings.....  But then I guess it's a resuable OSP and not a ballistic capsule anymore. 

Good guess ...

[kkattula]

It will be interesting of the Lockheed offering looks anything like the LM/NG OSP design.

I expect that just about everyone who had an OSP design has dug it up for CCDev.

Do Boeing, LM, NG etc have small permanent teams designing stuff like this? Just waiting for NASA, DOD or a starry-eyed billionaire to come along and fund it?

[gladiator1332]

Wouldn't it be more likely that Lockheed will propose a simplified version of Orion? I think there is more of a chance of that occurring than the winged OSP design.

[A_M_Swallow]

CCDev is not a NASA funded project.  The companies may get a token payment and access to some NASA facilities but will have to pay for the development themselves.

[bad_astra]

Wouldn't it be more likely that Lockheed will propose a simplified version of Orion? I think there is more of a chance of that occurring than the winged OSP design.

There isn't much from Orion that would/could be replicated apart from the basic shell.

Lockheed has been testing a winged rlv of some kind at Spaceport America. Can't imagine that was done for no reason.

[Smoothie]

Do Boeing, LM, NG etc have small permanent teams designing stuff like this? Just waiting for NASA, DOD or a starry-eyed billionaire to come along and fund it?

I don't think so.  It's not like the old day's when these companies were spending money to churn out fantastic designs day after day.  Now they wait for a customer request and design to meet their needs/specifications only.

[Robotbeat]

...
Lockheed has been testing a winged rlv of some kind at Spaceport America. Can't imagine that was done for no reason.

Really? Do you have any details on this?

[Smoothie]

...
Lockheed has been testing a winged rlv of some kind at Spaceport America. Can't imagine that was done for no reason.

Really? Do you have any details on this?

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/080424-lockheed-spaceplane-test.html

[Bernie Roehl]

...
Lockheed has been testing a winged rlv of some kind at Spaceport America. Can't imagine that was done for no reason.

Really? Do you have any details on this?

I'd be interested in hearing more about that too.

So in terms of commercial manned spaceflight to LEO, here are some possibilities...

SpaceX Dragon on Falcon 9
Boeing/Bigelow "orion lite" on Atlas V
Spacedev Dreamchaser on Atlas V
Lockmart winged RLV on something, possibly Atlas V?

That's in addition to Orion (on Ares V/Jupiter, DIVH), plus of course Soyuz and Shenzhou.

Am I leaving out anything?

[bad_astra]

Am I leaving out anything?

AIO50