Spacecraft development

[Bernie Roehl]

It's my person opinion that Dreamchaser is a money pit and will never fly.

Well, that's your personal opinion.  Mine is quite different.

The vehicle is too heavy for most of the commercial launchers

What commercial launchers are you talking about?  It's initially targeting the Atlas V, and could certainly be lifted by a Delta IV or for that matter a Falcon 9 (similar payload capability to the Atlas V).

If you're just looking at payload mass (which it appears you are, from your claim that it's "too heavy"), it could also be launched by Ariane V,  H-IIB... in fact the only commecial launcher that couldn't put a Dream Chaser in orbit is the Taurus II.  So I dispute your claim of it being "too heavy for most of the commercial launchers".

it must have very advanced flight systems compared to a capsule design

True enough, but they're contracting a lot of that out to some very experienced companies.

and must use a push type LAS which will not be off the shelf similar to Orbital's LAS system.

It has it's own propulsion system which doubles as both LAS and the main orbital propulsion system.  That's one of its (many) advantages over a capsule design.

Blue Orgin is a CIA front [...]

If I'd read that statement first, I probably wouldn't have bothered replying to the rest of your message.

[mr. mark]

Something going on with Blue Origin and yes I know this is a little outside the norm.... http://n5lp.net/Saltflatmystery.html

[Jim]

Something going on with Blue Origin and yes I know this is a little outside the norm.... http://n5lp.net/Saltflatmystery.html

So what?  It doesn't show that the two operations are related. 

You said "everybody in the industry knows about" .  You have yet provide info that one person knows it, except you.   I am in the industry, I haven't heard this bunk.

[Nate_Trost]

Blue Origin is the private company of a tech billionaire space enthusiast who has the money to adequately fund it, the patience to develop things properly, and doesn't require ego boosts from constantly showing things off behind the scenes. Are you suggesting perhaps that Amazon is a CIA front company? Perhaps they are inserting mind control strips in copies of Catcher in the Rye.

If nothing happens to Bezos or his finances, I'm not sure I'd bet against Blue Origin having an orbital TSTO RLV by the end of the decade.

[spacenut]

Which spacecraft do you guys think will be developed first, Dragon or Dreamchaser?  When do you think they will have their maiden flight with humans?

[Bernie Roehl]

Which spacecraft do you guys think will be developed first, Dragon or Dreamchaser?  When do you think they will have their maiden flight with humans?

Dragon, then Dream Chaser.

My guesses would be...

Dragon: 2011 (cargo), 2013 (crew)
Dream Chaster: 2014

[ChuckC]

Which spacecraft do you guys think will be developed first, Dragon or Dreamchaser?  When do you think they will have their maiden flight with humans?

I would say Space X, but mainly because with them I see actual hardware. In particular, I see their Falcon 9 currently on the pad with a Dragon test article on top.

I have yet to see any pictures of even a bolt of Dream chaser hardware.

[Comga]

I have yet to see any pictures of even a bolt of Dream chaser headwear.

You want a Dream chaser cap? 
Can we assume you meant "hardware"?

[Bernie Roehl]

I have yet to see any pictures of even a bolt of Dream chaser headwear.

You want a Dream chaser cap? 

Hey, if they're making Dream Chaser merchandise, sign me up!  :-)

I'll take a cap, a t-shirt and a bumper sticker that says "my other car is a Dream Chaser".

Whether it flies or not, it's one cool-looking spacecraft.

[spacenut]

I like Dream Chaser better than a capsule.  I think we need a transfer vehicle between earth orbit and L1 or L2 using air breaking coming back from the moon and then dock at a refueling station for new crew transfer and return to the moon.  Dream Chaser to and from orbit at a refueling station.  Then transfer to a moon bus.  Then from L1 or L2 transfer to a reuseable lunar lander.  Have several in place for constant transfer of equipment and personel.  Transfer hydrogen or some other fuel from earth and lox from the moon.  We could probably keep a moon base going like for about the same operating costs as the space station.   

[yg1968]

Blue Origin is the private company of a tech billionaire space enthusiast who has the money to adequately fund it, the patience to develop things properly, and doesn't require ego boosts from constantly showing things off behind the scenes. Are you suggesting perhaps that Amazon is a CIA front company? Perhaps they are inserting mind control strips in copies of Catcher in the Rye.

If nothing happens to Bezos or his finances, I'm not sure I'd bet against Blue Origin having an orbital TSTO RLV by the end of the decade.

Yes but everybody in the book industry knows that Amazon is actually owned by Specter! And Bezos has been seen traveling in his private jet with his white cat.

[yg1968]

One of the details that came up in the 2011 NASA Budget yesterday is that the commercial crew initiative would be limited to a maximum of 4 companies and would be a mix of old and newer companies. So it's possible that either Boeing or the Dream Chaser would not make the cut in the next round.

If I had ot guess, I would say that the following companies could be selected for commercial crew development:

1- SpaceX
2- Boeing or LM's capsule
3- Dream Chaser
4- ULA (in order to manrate its rockets).

[Jim]

It would be more like this

1- SpaceX
2- Boeing or LM's capsule solution
3- LM or Boeing's capsule solution
4- Dream Chaser


Manrating ULA's rockets would be done via the contracts with 2, 3 &4. 

NASA contracting for a service, they won't be dictating a solution, they will just provide requirements.

[yg1968]

That makes more sense.

For CCDev, ULA had a separate agreement. But as you say, it could be different for the new commercial crew initiative as this will be a more of an integrated program that will exist for a number of years (as opposed to CCDev which is a one year program that will end on September 30th 2010).

[Ronsmytheiii]

It would be more like this

1- SpaceX
2- Boeing or LM's capsule solution
3- LM or Boeing's capsule solution
4- Dream Chaser


Manrating ULA's rockets would be done via the contracts with 2, 3 &4. 

NASA contracting for a service, they won't be dictating a solution, they will just provide requirements.

So, Orbital completely left out?  I would imagine a manned Cygnus on a HESS would be more likely than Dream Chaser.

[William Barton]

Blue Origin is the private company of a tech billionaire space enthusiast who has the money to adequately fund it, the patience to develop things properly, and doesn't require ego boosts from constantly showing things off behind the scenes. Are you suggesting perhaps that Amazon is a CIA front company? Perhaps they are inserting mind control strips in copies of Catcher in the Rye.

If nothing happens to Bezos or his finances, I'm not sure I'd bet against Blue Origin having an orbital TSTO RLV by the end of the decade.

Yes but everybody in the book industry knows that Amazon is actually owned by Specter! And Bezos has been seen traveling in his private jet with his white cat.

Actually, SPECTRE went bankrupt and, being too big to fail, took bailout money. Amazon is owned by KAOS, whereas Google is own by SMERSH.  Yes, I am in the book industry.

[William Barton]

It would be more like this

1- SpaceX
2- Boeing or LM's capsule solution
3- LM or Boeing's capsule solution
4- Dream Chaser


Manrating ULA's rockets would be done via the contracts with 2, 3 &4. 

NASA contracting for a service, they won't be dictating a solution, they will just provide requirements.

Just out of idle curiosity, why are you listing "Boeing or LM" and "LM or Boeing," and in that particular order? Why not just:

2 - Boeing's Capsule Solution
3 - LM's Capsule Solution

[William Barton]

It would be more like this

1- SpaceX
2- Boeing or LM's capsule solution
3- LM or Boeing's capsule solution
4- Dream Chaser


Manrating ULA's rockets would be done via the contracts with 2, 3 &4. 

NASA contracting for a service, they won't be dictating a solution, they will just provide requirements.

So, Orbital completely left out?  I would imagine a manned Cygnus on a HESS would be more likely than Dream Chaser.

Too small? The last I heard, it was max 3 crew, while the others named are 6-7 crew. Is there anyone else with the slightest chance of making the list?

[mmeijeri]

It could still be useful as a backup solution.

[William Barton]

I like Dream Chaser better than a capsule.  I think we need a transfer vehicle between earth orbit and L1 or L2 using air breaking coming back from the moon and then dock at a refueling station for new crew transfer and return to the moon.  Dream Chaser to and from orbit at a refueling station.  Then transfer to a moon bus.  Then from L1 or L2 transfer to a reuseable lunar lander.  Have several in place for constant transfer of equipment and personel.  Transfer hydrogen or some other fuel from earth and lox from the moon.  We could probably keep a moon base going like for about the same operating costs as the space station.   

The t\Space CXV/CEV solution went in that direction, winged coolness factor aside. Then again, airlaunch seemed pretty cool too, in its own way.