-
#100
by
Jim
on 24 May, 2011 16:16
-
This last exchange really bother me. Let me make something perfectly clear: THERE ARE NO BIT ROLES IN SPACE TECHNOLOGY.
Dr Elias,
The term "bit role" was used to describe small companies who are suppliers of components or subsystems vs companies who are system integrators.
-
#101
by
tobi453
on 24 May, 2011 18:37
-
2. There won't be operators until there are RLV's. Operations of ELV's require to much work of the designer.
Arianespace is an operator and has ~300 employees. However, there is still a lot of engineering support by other companies like Astrium, Snecma etc.
-
#102
by
Jim
on 24 May, 2011 18:44
-
2. There won't be operators until there are RLV's. Operations of ELV's require to much work of the designer.
Arianespace is an operator and has ~300 employees. However, there is still a lot of engineering support by other companies like Astrium, Snecma etc.
Arianespace is just a contracting figurehead much like ILS. The engineering support provided by other contractors is indicative of a nonoperator paradigm.
This is applicable to Sealaunch and USA. The hardware contractors still perform a large role in the day to day ops.
-
#103
by
Freddie
on 31 May, 2011 13:45
-
"Turin, May 30, 2011 – Thales Alenia Space announced that it has delivered to Orbital Sciences Corporation (NYSE: ORB) its first Pressurized Cargo Module (PCM) developed to transport cargo to the International Space Station. This first PCM will be used for the CygnusTM demonstration mission, under NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) research and development initiative with Orbital."
"The module was shipped from the Thales Alenia Space plant in Turin, Italy to NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, where Orbital will integrate it with the Cygnus service module to produce the complete Cygnus spacecraft. The first mission is currently scheduled for December 2011, using Orbital’s Taurus® II launcher."
Read more of the Thales Alenia Space news release at
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Press_Releases/Markets/Space/2011/Thales_Alenia_Space_delivers_first_Cygnus_PCM_to_Orbital_Sciences_Corporation/.
-
#104
by
Space Pete
on 04 Jun, 2011 18:10
-
Here's a great, newly-released animation of a Cygnus cargo mission to the ISS - available in 1020p HD!
-
#105
by
Robotbeat
on 04 Jun, 2011 18:29
-
It burned up! Is it supposed to do that?
-
#106
by
Space Pete
on 04 Jun, 2011 18:32
-
It burned up! Is it supposed to do that?
OMG, what a waste! We should leave them all in LEO and assemble a Mars transit vehicle out of them!
(BTW, that was a joke, before the "Cygnus as MTV?" thread shows up!)
-
#107
by
robertross
on 04 Jun, 2011 20:24
-
It burned up! Is it supposed to do that?
OMG, what a waste! We should leave them all in LEO and assemble a Mars transit vehicle out of them!
(BTW, that was a joke, before the "Cygnus as MTV?" thread shows up!)
Well, some might just see that part and start to question: "is that normal?"
Pretty neat video, thanks for the post. Like how they meld the people in the Cupola into it.
Let's hope it all goes that smoothly. Now what we really need is for it to happen, and soon!
-
#108
by
Jason1701
on 04 Jun, 2011 21:09
-
Good to see Orbital releasing some flashy promos of their own.
-
#109
by
sdsds
on 04 Jun, 2011 23:15
-
Like how they meld the people in the Cupola into it.
I was particularly struck by the scene just after that, that shows the Cygnus berthing. It somehow makes the comparative sizes of the modules more clear: Cygnus isn't much smaller than Columbus, but it sure looks smaller than Kibo!
-
#110
by
perian
on 05 Jun, 2011 15:50
-
It somehow makes the comparative sizes of the modules more clear: Cygnus isn't much smaller than Columbus, but it sure looks smaller than Kibo!
Cygnus is smaller, much smaller. Look at diameter: 3.07 m vs. 4.5 m.
-
#111
by
majormajor42
on 05 Jun, 2011 19:41
-
It burned up! Is it supposed to do that?
I'm looking back at the COTS awards and CRS awards. I was wondering if SpaceX was getting more money because they have downmass capability. If NASA was intending on using that downmass capability and if so, compensate SpaceX for it. In looking back, I came across this:
The Cygnus spacecraft to be launched aboard the Taurus II rocket will be capable of delivering up to 2,300 kg of cargo to the ISS and will be able to return 1,200 kg of cargo from the ISS to Earth.
“We are very appreciative of the trust NASA has placed with us to provide commercial cargo transportation services to and from the International Space Station, beginning with our demonstration flight scheduled in late 2010,” said Mr. David W. Thompson, Orbital’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2008/12/spacex-and-orbital-win-huge-crs-contract-from-nasa/did the return capability of Cygnus get dropped at some point?
have the award values changes to reflect the difference in return capability?
sorry if I missed the point at which this was discussed in the forum. Skimmed through some COTS and CRS threads trying to find info.
I enjoyed the video and look forward to driving down from NY one day. Good luck to them!
-
#112
by
ugordan
on 05 Jun, 2011 19:48
-
I'm looking back at the COTS awards and CRS awards. I was wondering if SpaceX was getting more money because they have downmass capability.
They got more money because they were one of the two original COTS winners. Once Kistler was dropped, the remaining money was awarded to Orbital.
-
#113
by
majormajor42
on 05 Jun, 2011 20:01
-
from that same article:
The award from NASA orders eight flights valued at about $1.9 billion from Orbital and 12 flights valued at about $1.6 billion from SpaceX.
quote from me correctedI'm looking back at the COTS awards and CRS awards. I was wondering if SpaceX should now be getting more money because they have downmass capability
.
@ugordan your response would seem to indicate that SpaceX will in fact be paid more than Orbital? I'm hoping to clear this up, otherwise I might have to move these questions to a COTS/CRS thread. not sure which one though.
for some reason my ability to reply with quote is being blocked. sorry.
-
#114
by
ugordan
on 05 Jun, 2011 20:14
-
@ugordan your response would seem to indicate that SpaceX will in fact be paid more than Orbital?
I was talking about COTS money, not CRS money. Both SpaceX and Orbital entered their prices in their CRS bids and NASA accepted.
I'll defer to someone more knowledgeable on whether SpaceX will get paid extra for any downmass. My understanding is the CRS contracts didn't factor in any downmass capability, but I didn't study the topic closely.
-
#115
by
Robotbeat
on 06 Jun, 2011 00:11
-
@ugordan your response would seem to indicate that SpaceX will in fact be paid more than Orbital?
I was talking about COTS money, not CRS money. Both SpaceX and Orbital entered their prices in their CRS bids and NASA accepted.
I'll defer to someone more knowledgeable on whether SpaceX will get paid extra for any downmass. My understanding is the CRS contracts didn't factor in any downmass capability, but I didn't study the topic closely.
I think SpaceX is feeling like they left a lot of money on the table for CRS. I remember SpaceX getting upset that Orbital got the same money for fewer flights.
-
#116
by
ugordan
on 06 Jun, 2011 09:09
-
I think SpaceX is feeling like they left a lot of money on the table for CRS. I remember SpaceX getting upset that Orbital got the same money for fewer flights.
That's nobody's fault but their own. Whether because they felt they had to go on the cheap side for NASA to select their bid or something else, it's irrelevant now.
I will point out, though, that looking at the CRS selection letter, OSC came pretty close to losing out to PlanetSpace. You can't set the price either too high or too low. So how do you a priori know what the sweet spot
is?
-
#117
by
majormajor42
on 06 Jun, 2011 16:32
-
Thanks for the responses. I might look into the SpaceX side of things more in other threads or ask there. Back to Cygnus, in my post above, I have some quotes from the CRS award where it appears that Cygnus will have downmass capability. When did that change and does it effect the CRS contract if that was part of the original deal?
The Cygnus spacecraft to be launched aboard the Taurus II rocket will be capable of delivering up to 2,300 kg of cargo to the ISS and will be able to return 1,200 kg of cargo from the ISS to Earth.
“We are very appreciative of the trust NASA has placed with us to provide commercial cargo transportation services to and from the International Space Station, beginning with our demonstration flight scheduled in late 2010,” said Mr. David W. Thompson, Orbital’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
edit: thanks for those links two posts below notherspacexfan. beginning to understand now.
-
#118
by
ugordan
on 06 Jun, 2011 16:45
-
I have some quotes from the CRS award where it appears that Cygnus will have downmass capability.
I think "downmass" means garbage disposal, not actual safe return of cargo to earth.
-
#119
by
notherspacexfan
on 06 Jun, 2011 17:00
-
