Commercial Crew Booster Strategy

[manboy]

The only the reason why I think you would want to fly more then four USOS members in the post-assembly phase would be because you're flying tourists

Or, ya know, payload specialists.. especially those that pay their own way. National laboratory, full utilization, that sort of thing.

Why would a company pay the + 20 million just to set up an experiment?

We should probably take this to a different topic.

[Prober]

Assuming NASA is able to sustain two commercial crew providers

Which is the better for NASA?

My opinion is that NASA should down-select to one commercial crew provider.  It should be whichever proves to be safest.

 - Ed Kyle

How about 1 Billion dollars tax free competition to close the gap.  NASA can set the guidelines.  Goal 3-4 seats to the ISS operational by 20xx.

If Bolden is right, and the US has to buy more seats @ 460 million (each year) to cover 2016 & 2017, then lets open up a NASA prize and get this done.

[Will]

Assuming NASA is able to sustain two commercial crew providers

Which is the better for NASA?

My opinion is that NASA should down-select to one commercial crew provider.  It should be whichever proves to be safest.

 - Ed Kyle

Yes. There's something to be said for funding two to the flight test stage. That will give some of the benefits of competition: the selected provider knows that if they don't give satisfactory value, they can be replaced by the runner up as soon as it can be put into production.