COTS D in the On-Deck Circle...

[ugordan]

Apologies if this was already posted somewhere else.
NASA Narrows Field for Commercial Crew Development Dollars

NASA contacted at least five companies Nov. 6, inviting Denver-based United Launch Alliance, Chicago-based Boeing, Hawthorne,Calif.-based Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), Sparks, Nev.-based SierraNevada Corp.  and Tucson, Ariz.-based Paragon Space Development Corp. to  discuss the Commercial Crew Development, or CCDev, proposals each submitted in September.

(emphasis mine) Can't help noticing that Orbital is missing.

Multiple industry sources said NASA’s CCDev down-select appears to have favored proposals geared toward development of crew capsules designed to launch atop ULA’s Atlas 5.

[mmeijeri]

Multiple industry sources said NASA’s CCDev down-select appears to have favored proposals geared toward development of crew capsules designed to launch atop ULA’s Atlas 5.

The easier to dismiss them based on those awful Russian engines?

[ugordan]

The easier to dismiss them based on those awful Russian engines?

I think you're letting your paranoia go too far this time. IMHO, of course.

Re. Orbital, I only just now noticed the disclaimer "at least five companies" so maybe not too much should be inferred from that list.

[William Barton]

The easier to dismiss them based on those awful Russian engines?

I think you're letting your paranoia go too far this time. IMHO, of course.

Re. Orbital, I only just now noticed the disclaimer "at least five companies" so maybe not too much should be inferred from that list.

Regarding "awful Russian engines" and Orbital: Is my understanding correct that the main issue (other than economic justification) with PWR production of the RD-180 is metallurgical, whereas there is no such issue with Aerojet production of the NK-33?

[William Barton]

Apologies if this was already posted somewhere else.
NASA Narrows Field for Commercial Crew Development Dollars

NASA contacted at least five companies Nov. 6, inviting Denver-based United Launch Alliance, Chicago-based Boeing, Hawthorne,Calif.-based Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), Sparks, Nev.-based SierraNevada Corp.  and Tucson, Ariz.-based Paragon Space Development Corp. to  discuss the Commercial Crew Development, or CCDev, proposals each submitted in September.

(emphasis mine) Can't help noticing that Orbital is missing.

Multiple industry sources said NASA’s CCDev down-select appears to have favored proposals geared toward development of crew capsules designed to launch atop ULA’s Atlas 5.

SpaceX = Falcon9 + Dragon
ULA = Atlas V
Sierra Nevada = SpaceDev Dream Chaser
Paragon = fingers in everyone else's pie (including SpaceX & LM)
Boeing = Some capsule or...

I guess the question in my mind is, does this boil down to two contenders?

SpaceX + Paragon (Falcon 9/Dragon)
ULA + Boeing + Sierra Nevada + Paragon (Atlas V/Dream Chaser)

[yg1968]

NASA had indicated that the CCDev money does not mean that you will not be allowed to obtain any future commercial crew awards.

Nevertheless, I would not be surprised if NASA were to go along with ULA and SpaceX in a future commercial crew option as well as they seem to be the furthest along.

Here is an interesting interview with SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corporation that occurred last August:

http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2009/08/the_commercial_perspective_on_human_spaceflight_1.html

Here is an article on the Dream Chaser and what could be done with the CCDev funds:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/10/20/333603/whiteknighttwo-could-air-drop-dream-chaser-prototype.html

[Downix]

The easier to dismiss them based on those awful Russian engines?

I think you're letting your paranoia go too far this time. IMHO, of course.

Re. Orbital, I only just now noticed the disclaimer "at least five companies" so maybe not too much should be inferred from that list.

Regarding "awful Russian engines" and Orbital: Is my understanding correct that the main issue (other than economic justification) with PWR production of the RD-180 is metallurgical, whereas there is no such issue with Aerojet production of the NK-33?

The NK33 so I understand is mechanically simpler and uses less difficult to work with material in its manufacture. 

[yg1968]

Here is another article that gives more detail on the breakdown of the Stimilus package funding for commercial crew:

http://www.spacenews.com/civil/091120-constellation-claims-half-nasa-stimulus-funds.html

In the meantime, NASA plans to competitively award $50 million of the total $90 million available for commercial crew and cargo to fund technology development intended to lay a foundation for commercially operated systems capable of transporting to and from the international space station.

Of the $40 million in remaining ARRA funds available for commercial crew and cargo, $24 million is set aside to speed construction of commercial test structures at Stennis and commercial launch infrastructure at Kennedy and NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. Of that $24 million, NASA awarded a $9 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract in September to the Cube Corp. of Sterling, Va., a subsidiary of Southampton, U.K.-based VT Group, for construction work at Wallops.

Another $15 million of the commercial crew and cargo money went to space station prime contractor Boeing to accelerate development of a common docking system for Orion and Europe’s proposed Advanced Re-entry Vehicle, an evolved version of the Automated Transfer Vehicle that hauled its first load of cargo to the station in 2008.

The remaining $1 million will be used to develop human-rating requirements for commercial vehicles, according to NASA’s ARRA spending plan.

[Ben the Space Brit]

SpaceX = Falcon9 + Dragon
ULA = Atlas V
Sierra Nevada = SpaceDev Dream Chaser
Paragon = fingers in everyone else's pie (including SpaceX & LM)
Boeing = Some capsule or...

Boeing = X-37-derived OSP on Delta-IVH (based on speculation over on the X-37 thread)

You're probably right that some of the bids might be multi-contractor ones, though.

[William Barton]

SpaceX = Falcon9 + Dragon
ULA = Atlas V
Sierra Nevada = SpaceDev Dream Chaser
Paragon = fingers in everyone else's pie (including SpaceX & LM)
Boeing = Some capsule or...

Boeing = X-37-derived OSP on Delta-IVH (based on speculation over on the X-37 thread)

You're probably right that some of the bids might be multi-contractor ones, though.

I'm not putting too much faith in that discussion right now. Maybe if Dream Chaser doesn't come any closer to condensing from vapor, an X-37-derived OSP revival would be next in line.

[yg1968]

A bit of an update, the schedule now says that the agreements will be signed in December.

Agreements Signed December 2009

   
 
http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/ccdev/

[yg1968]

Rob Coppinger had a rumor that CCDev winners would be anounced last Friday. But that obviously didn't happen as he later aknowledged. 

http://twitter.com/flighthyperbola/status/6541121640

http://twitter.com/flighthyperbola/status/6572204896

[Namechange User]

Rob Coppinger had a rumor that CCDev winners would be anounced last Friday. But that obviously didn't happen as he later aknowledged. 

http://twitter.com/flighthyperbola/status/6541121640

http://twitter.com/flighthyperbola/status/6572204896

In his first "tweet", he states he believes ULA is a winner.  I believe this is a fairly good assumption, in at least there will be some companies that have partnered with them to use their launch vehicles to lift the payload to orbit. 

[gladiator1332]

Wasn't one of the ideas to launch an "Orion-Lite" on an EELV? Or is that not part of CCDev?

[yg1968]

It's a safe bet that ULA would be involved. The Boeing-Bigelow capsule and SpaceDev dream chaser both can use ULA rockets. But the Dream Chaser could even be fitted to an Ares I (see image below). At least that's what SpaceDev said a few years ago when they were up for the COTS agreements.

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/c3po/partners/spacedev/index.html

[Namechange User]

Oh for goodness sake.....not Orion-Lite again.

[yg1968]

What's wrong with Orion lite?

[mmeijeri]

But the Dream Chaser could even be fitted to an Ares I (see image below).

It looks like a scepter, I'm sure a cartoonist (hypergolic or otherwise) could come up with an amusing cartoon of King Obama scratching his back with it. Or smiting his enemies with it.

[Namechange User]

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. 

[Tim S]

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.