CCDev-2 Finalists

[mr. mark]

This is looking more and more like a two pony show, Lockheed Martin and Spacex (Orion and Dragon). Spacex doesn't need the money, long term, to complete Dragon and Orion is government funded. Everyone else looks out in the cold at this point except for maybe Boeing's CST-100 who may be banking on the Bigelow station.

[Jason1701]

This is looking more and more like a two pony show, Lockheed Martin and Spacex (Orion and Dragon). Spacex doesn't need the money, long term, to complete Dragon and Orion is government funded. Everyone else looks out in the cold at this point except for maybe Boeing's CST-100 who may be banking on the Bigelow station.

I don't agree at all. Orion cannot be in CCDev. SpaceX got no funds for Dragon Crew last year, while Boeing and SpaceDev shared the bulk of the awards. With a total award amount many times greater than 2010's, we could easily give large awards to all three companies. (And smaller awards to ULA and other non-spacecraft projects.)

[mr. mark]

First off, I said that Orion was a government only vehicle. Second, Spacex has publicly stated that they will complete Dragon no matter whether they get CCDEV funds or not only, that it would take longer to complete. That leaves Boeing's CST-100 that may not be reliant on CCDEV funding but, even they may not want to go it alone. Every other spacecraft currently being funded by CCDEV funds is largely dependent on those funds for completing their spacecraft, Dreamchaser and the Orbital lift body.

[yg1968]

Word is that the CCDev-2 announcement has been delayed indefinitely due to the ongoing CR/2011 budget/government shutdown situation.

Well the good news is that there is a CR with intent of dotting the I's and crossing the T's on the final fy 2011 bill.   The bad news is that is sounds like stimulus money has been eliminated (or so I understand)  how will this effect CCDev?

What stimulus money? CCDev-1 was stimulus money but not CCDev-2.

[Jorge]

First off, I said that Orion was a government only vehicle.

Yes, you did say that. What you failed to say was that Lockheed-Martin is not a finalist in CCDev-2 and therefore Orion is not eligible. Since the subject of this thread is CCDev-2, Orion is off-topic.

[Lurker Steve]

First off, I said that Orion was a government only vehicle. Second, Spacex has publicly stated that they will complete Dragon no matter whether they get CCDEV funds or not only, that it would take longer to complete. That leaves Boeing's CST-100 that may not be reliant on CCDEV funding but, even they may not want to go it alone. Every other spacecraft currently being funded by CCDEV funds is totally dependent on those funds for completing their spacecraft, Dreamchaser and the Orbital lift body.

I would assume the object of CC-Dev2 is to get the first flight tests by 2014, and finished commerical products by 2015. I wouldn't want to distract Orbital or SpaceX from their CRS contracts, so I would exclude them from any award. If they want in this business, there is enough profit in the CRS contracts to more than cover any development of a crewed vehicle anyway.

Orion development continues. It just doesn't have a human-rated launch vehicle. They have a test flight scheduled on a D4H, but that's not getting human-rated anytime soon, if ever. I assume it will eventually launch on the LM-designed rocket, Atlas 5 Heavy.

I assume the CST-100 will receive CC-Dev2 funding, even though Boeing corporate doesn't need the money. They have a fairly simple design, and should be able to execute on time. It doesn't appear to have any major technical challenges.

I really want Dreamchaser to succeed. Unfortunately, they are probably the one company that needs the funding the most.

No one outside of Utah wants to fund a 5-segment SRB from ATK with a European US as part of the CC-Dev project, no matter what they call that rocket.

[mr. mark]

The point is that only 2 or 3 vehicles can be completed without CCDEV money. One is Dragon and the other is possibly CST-100. That makes 3 vehicles I never said that Orion was part of CCDEV. I said at the end of the day there might be 3 vehicles total.

[mr. mark]

What's this about legislation eliminating CCDEV funding in the just agreed upon bill. Any truth to it?

[RocketEconomist327]

What's this about legislation eliminating CCDEV funding in the just agreed upon bill. Any truth to it?

Link, where did you here this?

VR
TEA
RS327

[mr. mark]

"Well the good news is that there is a CR with intent of dotting the I's and crossing the T's on the final fy 2011 bill.   The bad news is that is sounds like stimulus money has been eliminated (or so I understand)  how will this effect CCDev?" - Ronsmytheiii

I found the comment alarming to say the least.

[Jeff Bingham]

"Well the good news is that there is a CR with intent of dotting the I's and crossing the T's on the final fy 2011 bill.   The bad news is that is sounds like stimulus money has been eliminated (or so I understand)  how will this effect CCDev?" - Ronsmytheiii

I found the comment alarming to say the least.

No truth to the rumor of elimination of Commercial Crew funding in the FY 2011 remainder-of-the-year Continuing Resolution, as far as I can determine. That funding was authorized by the 2010 NASA Authorization Act (P.L. 111-267). Only funding for CCDev-1 was from stimulus money, which had been made available for FY 2009-2010 only; the FY 2011 funding for CCDev-2 was always intended to come through the normal budget request/appropriations process, starting with the authorization bill. That, of course, has been "complicated" by the failure of enactment of a separate, free-standing Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill, so the funding level available for FY 2011 will be determined by the eventual outcome of that government-wide appropriations currently under consideration by the Congress. The actual account within which such funding will be made available may be altered, but funds would still be available--at some level. Obviously, if the over-all top-line funding level for NASA is significantly reduced, it is possible--likely--that sub-accounts will be reduced accordingly, but all that remains to be seen.

[Patchouli]

First off, I said that Orion was a government only vehicle. Second, Spacex has publicly stated that they will complete Dragon no matter whether they get CCDEV funds or not only, that it would take longer to complete. That leaves Boeing's CST-100 that may not be reliant on CCDEV funding but, even they may not want to go it alone. Every other spacecraft currently being funded by CCDEV funds is totally dependent on those funds for completing their spacecraft, Dreamchaser and the Orbital lift body.

I would assume the object of CC-Dev2 is to get the first flight tests by 2014, and finished commerical products by 2015. I wouldn't want to distract Orbital or SpaceX from their CRS contracts, so I would exclude them from any award. If they want in this business, there is enough profit in the CRS contracts to more than cover any development of a crewed vehicle anyway.

Orion development continues. It just doesn't have a human-rated launch vehicle. They have a test flight scheduled on a D4H, but that's not getting human-rated anytime soon, if ever. I assume it will eventually launch on the LM-designed rocket, Atlas 5 Heavy.

I assume the CST-100 will receive CC-Dev2 funding, even though Boeing corporate doesn't need the money. They have a fairly simple design, and should be able to execute on time. It doesn't appear to have any major technical challenges.

I really want Dreamchaser to succeed. Unfortunately, they are probably the one company that needs the funding the most.

No one outside of Utah wants to fund a 5-segment SRB from ATK with a European US as part of the CC-Dev project, no matter what they call that rocket.

Dream Chaser's landing method seems generally safer then that used by capsule vehicles esp if the engines can be used for assistance.

[Ronsmytheiii]

"Well the good news is that there is a CR with intent of dotting the I's and crossing the T's on the final fy 2011 bill.   The bad news is that is sounds like stimulus money has been eliminated (or so I understand)  how will this effect CCDev?" - Ronsmytheiii

I found the comment alarming to say the least.

Why alarming?  At the time I thought CCDev-2 funding was tied in with the stimulus as CCDev-1 was, but I was incorrect.  Anyhow, am i right in assuming that we wont hear anything about CCDev until the FY 2011 is passed in earnest, or could General Bolden announce it on the 12th? (probably the former)

[Halidon]

Unless they're terrified of the CCDev money crapping up the deal, I think it gets awarded early in the week. They won't have a big presser about it immediately, though.

[OpsAnalyst]

I would assume the object of CC-Dev2 is to get the first flight tests by 2014, and finished commerical products by 2015. I wouldn't want to distract Orbital or SpaceX from their CRS contracts, so I would exclude them from any award. If they want in this business, there is enough profit in the CRS contracts to more than cover any development of a crewed vehicle anyway.

How do you know this?

I assume the CST-100 will receive CC-Dev2 funding, even though Boeing corporate doesn't need the money.

CCDEV funding isn't dependent upon "need". As is true for most large companies Boeing internal funding for development projects is allocated according to business rules.  Is your comment about Boeing corporate a general statement about Boeing's financials or are you making a statement about CST-100's development costs vs. Boeing's business assumptions?  - In other words, why are you saying this?

I really want Dreamchaser to succeed. Unfortunately, they are probably the one company that needs the funding the most.

While this may be true, why is it "unfortunate" in the context of CCDEV funding?

I may be missing something but I'm not really getting the point of these comments.

[majormajor42]

I would assume the object of CC-Dev2 is to get the first flight tests by 2014, and finished commerical products by 2015. I wouldn't want to distract Orbital or SpaceX from their CRS contracts, so I would exclude them from any award. If they want in this business, there is enough profit in the CRS contracts to more than cover any development of a crewed vehicle anyway.

How do you know this?

I assume the CST-100 will receive CC-Dev2 funding, even though Boeing corporate doesn't need the money.

CCDEV funding isn't dependent upon "need". As is true for most large companies Boeing internal funding for development projects is allocated according to business rules.  Is your comment about Boeing corporate a general statement about Boeing's financials or are you making a statement about CST-100's development costs vs. Boeing's business assumptions?  - In other words, why are you saying this?

I really want Dreamchaser to succeed. Unfortunately, they are probably the one company that needs the funding the most.

While this may be true, why is it "unfortunate" in the context of CCDEV funding?

I may be missing something but I'm not really getting the point of these comments.

Yes, part of the point of NewSpace and encouraging free enterprise and all that is to reward good performance, reward success.  give contracts to those that look most able to deliver, not those that need the money to survive.

[yg1968]

"Well the good news is that there is a CR with intent of dotting the I's and crossing the T's on the final fy 2011 bill.   The bad news is that is sounds like stimulus money has been eliminated (or so I understand)  how will this effect CCDev?" - Ronsmytheiii

I found the comment alarming to say the least.

Why alarming?  At the time I thought CCDev-2 funding was tied in with the stimulus as CCDev-1 was, but I was incorrect.  Anyhow, am i right in assuming that we wont hear anything about CCDev until the FY 2011 is passed in earnest, or could General Bolden announce it on the 12th? (probably the former)

I don't know when CCDev-2 will be announced but I doubt that it will be at the same time as the April 12 announcement of the destinations of the retired Shuttle. Announcing CCDev-2 at the same time would be the wrong thing to do in my opinion.

[simonbp]

I don't know when CCDev-2 will be announced but I doubt that it will be at the same time as the April 12 announcement of the destinations of the retired Shuttle. Announcing CCDev-2 at the same time would be the wrong thing to do in my opinion.

It wasn't, but why would it have been a bad thing? It shows continuity and that US manned spaceflight will continue beyond Shuttle...

[yg1968]

I don't know when CCDev-2 will be announced but I doubt that it will be at the same time as the April 12 announcement of the destinations of the retired Shuttle. Announcing CCDev-2 at the same time would be the wrong thing to do in my opinion.

It wasn't, but why would it have been a bad thing? It shows continuity and that US manned spaceflight will continue beyond Shuttle...

It would be raining on the Shuttle's parade.

In any event, I doubt that CCDev-2 will be announced until the full-year CR is passed by Congress.

[Robotbeat]

I don't know when CCDev-2 will be announced but I doubt that it will be at the same time as the April 12 announcement of the destinations of the retired Shuttle. Announcing CCDev-2 at the same time would be the wrong thing to do in my opinion.

It wasn't, but why would it have been a bad thing? It shows continuity and that US manned spaceflight will continue beyond Shuttle...

Agreed.