Commercial Crew Launch Thread

[gladiator1332]

I figured I would make a thread for any news, speculation, and discussion about Commercial Crew Launch, as it keeps popping up in other threads, and I don't want to keep leading discussions off topic.

So what we know so far is that there is a good chance that Bolden will be announcing some type of plan that will include a Shuttle Derived HLV, as well as some type of commercial launcher of LEO and ISS.

What I was wondering is how everyone thinks the contract for the commercial launcher and vehicle will be awarded. Will it be like COTS, where several teams compete, and NASA goes with two or three contractors, each with their own crewed vehicles and launchers to develop? Will it be more like OSP, where NASA specifies the vehicle (Orion?) and the competing teams put forward launch vehicle ideas, one or two are selected and they compete for one future contract. Or will NASA go right ahead and just select one team and one vehicle?

[kraisee]

I'm expecting $2.5 to $3.5bn over the next 6-8 years will go into a COTS-like program, but open to the likes of Boeing and Lockheed to also compete for, along with everyone else.

Having said that, the program's primary political requirement is really to provide seed money to ensure that the space industry does not become stagnant with only one or two major players in it, so expect the New.Space companies to get the most favourable hearing here.


With luck, a lot of different companies will be allowed to compete initially, and then they will gradually be whittled-down to just a small number, 2 or 3, who will actually get valuable contracts to proceed to completion.

I think its going to be an exciting program, and should help stimulate the marketplace.   And that is its purpose.

Ross.

[TOG]

I figured I would make a thread for any news, speculation, and discussion about Commercial Crew Launch, as it keeps popping up in other threads, and I don't want to keep leading discussions off topic.

So what we know so far is that there is a good chance that Bolden will be announcing some type of plan that will include a Shuttle Derived HLV, as well as some type of commercial launcher of LEO and ISS.

What I was wondering is how everyone thinks the contract for the commercial launcher and vehicle will be awarded. Will it be like COTS, where several teams compete, and NASA goes with two or three contractors, each with their own crewed vehicles and launchers to develop? Will it be more like OSP, where NASA specifies the vehicle (Orion?) and the competing teams put forward launch vehicle ideas, one or two are selected and they compete for one future contract. Or will NASA go right ahead and just select one team and one vehicle?

From my official position of outside observer and armchair quarterback, I would think that the day of "one team, one vehicle" is no longer with us.  I would suspect that the "official" choice would be to have several companies provide solutions, and then for NASA to select their favorites.  Trying to keep all of their eggs out of one basket.  That would be to their best advantage seeing the gaps that took place after Apollo1, Challenger, and Columbia.  With multiple vendors and separate systems, one could go "on the shelf" for a while without giving up the overall manned capabilities.

IMHO-
TOG

[robertross]

I'm expecting $2.5 to $3.5bn over the next 6-8 years will go into a COTS-like program, but open to the likes of Boeing and Lockheed to also compete for, along with everyone else.

Having said that, the program's primary political requirement is really to provide seed money to ensure that the space industry does not become stagnant with only one or two major players in it, so expect the New.Space companies to get the most favourable hearing here.


With luck, a lot of different companies will be allowed to compete initially, and then they will gradually be whittled-down to just a small number, 2 or 3, who will actually get valuable contracts to proceed to completion.

I think its going to be an exciting program, and should help stimulate the marketplace.   And that is its purpose.

Ross.

Agreed, except that for ISS, the contract will probably end up being just a little more in that kind of timeframe.

[jongoff]

What Ross said.  I think it'll probably be 2-4 main awards, as well as some seed money for some smaller, more "long-shot" options, and/or small technology demonstrators related to commercial crew capabilities (stuff like maybe some TPS demonstrators for instance).

~Jon

[trout007]

I'm not an expert in the EELV but didn't the DOD specify the payload capabilities and interface? That might be a good way to go. Let NASA define a common interface so that you could have people design just a launch vehicle or just a capsule. I would think the EELV would be a good place to start.

[trout007]

I had another thought. I guess it depends on how the contract is written but could USA buy the remaining shuttles and operate them independently?

[RocketEconomist327]

ULA - Jim knows more than I, but many of us know it is possible to get either Atlas or Delta IV Man Rated.  The track record is there. 
Major Obstacle:  DoD allowing their EELVs to be used

SpaceX - Claiming 24 months once they get funds for an LAS.  Falcon 9/Dragon yet to fly, but could potentially be the first out of the block to launch Americans back into space.
Major Obstacle:  Getting a positive track record with Falcon 9

Orbital - Awarded COTS money and is currently building infrastructure and hardware.
Major Obstacle:  They are playing catch up, could be biggest advantage IMHO.  Could design to NASA requirements RIGHT NOW.

You would think, if NASA is smart, that ULA and SpaceX would get funds.  Depending on where Orbital is in it's development, they may end up getting funds.

The goal is for as many "providers" as possible.  It would be "healthy" if you had Atlas', Falcon 9s, Delta IVs, and maybe Taurus IIs all with the capability to carry Americans into space.

You would think that ULA has to get a piece of this pie.  They can take an Orion, Block 1 to LEO while SpaceX and Orbital "could" use their respective "space craft".

VR
RS327

edit: spelling

[HIP2BSQRE]

I think that it will be a you would want at least 4 awards and this is how I see it, if I was given out $1+ billion the first year.

COTS I

ULA:                  :                             $400 m
SpaceX:             :Falcon 9 +Dragon      $200 m
Bigalow + Boeing  :Atlas + Orion Lite      $150-200 m
Orbital:                                             $100 m
One or two smaller companies:  Small pieces $50

Next year there would be another COTS program for $1 billion.  NASA would have a chance to see what you did in the first year.  You may or may not be awarded in COTS II. 

[Jorge]

I had another thought. I guess it depends on how the contract is written but could USA buy the remaining shuttles and operate them independently?

Not without blanket indemnity from the government, otherwise the liability costs will eat them alive.

[Jim]

ULA:                  :                             $400 m

ULA can't do it.  They only supply launch vehicles.  They would have to be a sub to Boeing, LM, OSC, or somebody else that is going to build a capsule.

[ugordan]

How would pad crew access mods, EDS box development, etc. then be handled if not by ULA?

[Jorge]

How would pad crew access mods, EDS box development, etc. then be handled if not by ULA?

Boeing or LM, like Jim said.

[Jim]

How would pad crew access mods, EDS box development, etc. then be handled if not by ULA?

Boeing or LM, like Jim said.

Boeing or LM would have to pay ULA to do it.  It is their requirements and not ULA's.

[ugordan]

Boeing or LM would have to pay ULA to do it.

That's exactly what I was asking, not who would NASA pay, but who would do the actual work. I interpreted that list above as which entity would get how much money to do its part in the end.

Say a Bigelow/Boeing proposal won, meaning NASA would contract out $600 m total to them, of which the former would pay $400 to ULA for LV-related work. Correct?

[William Barton]

One question I have is, if Orion on AVH and/or DIVH becomes part of the new PoR, would it also be part of CCDEV? I do agree with the general sense it's time for the US to have more than one indiginous manned LEO access capability.

[Jim]

Boeing or LM would have to pay ULA to do it.

That's exactly what I was asking, not who would NASA pay, but who would do the actual work. I interpreted that list above as which entity would get how much money to do its part in the end.

Say a Bigelow/Boeing proposal won, meaning NASA would contract out $600 m total to them, of which the former would pay $400 to ULA for LV-related work. Correct?

yes

[FinalFrontier]

Nice thread . This will certainly be a place of much activity in the coming days.
Jim: What do you think the chances are of ULA developing and flying a commercial "taxi" spacecraft to ISS?

[ugordan]

What do you think the chances are of ULA developing and flying a commercial "taxi" spacecraft to ISS?

ULA can't do that, it can only provide launch service for someone else's spacecraft.

[SpacexULA]

ULA can't do that, it can only provide launch service for someone else's spacecraft.

That's what ULA has Bigelow, and to a lesser extent SpaceDev for.