Ok, we'll exclude the COTS numbers. SpaceX is doing it for 15% less.NASA simply contracted both companies to haul 20 mT to the station. The number of trips required to complete the task is irrelevant at best. Unless someone is trying to slant numbers towards what they want them to say.
The article says that the pad abort is the 14th and final milestone. I think that the milestones include the launch abort as well.Has anyone heard anything about the other 2 SpaceX pending milestones - the Integrated Critical Design Review and the Dragon Primary Structure Qualification?Also, anyone know the latest status on the DreamChaser and CST-100 milestones?
Quote from: BrianNH on 06/27/2014 04:37 pmThe article says that the pad abort is the 14th and final milestone. I think that the milestones include the launch abort as well.Has anyone heard anything about the other 2 SpaceX pending milestones - the Integrated Critical Design Review and the Dragon Primary Structure Qualification?Also, anyone know the latest status on the DreamChaser and CST-100 milestones?If the pad abort is the final milestone, then an abort during launch would not have been a milestone. You wouldn't launch a rocket to demonstrate an abort under max Q if you haven't already proven that the capsule can survive an abort under less strenuous initial conditions. You could forgo the pad abort and jump straight to the launch abort. But once you do that, there's not much to prove in then doing the pad abort.As for the status of the other two vehicles' milestones, the article says that DC needs more time to complete their milestones, but CST-100 will complete its milestones on time this August. I have no idea what the specific milestones are that are remaining for any of the vehicles.
If the pad abort is the final milestone, then an abort during launch would not have been a milestone. You wouldn't launch a rocket to demonstrate an abort under max Q if you haven't already proven that the capsule can survive an abort under less strenuous initial conditions. You could forgo the pad abort and jump straight to the launch abort. But once you do that, there's not much to prove in then doing the pad abort.
Do Boeing's milestones not include an abort test? I don't see one in the list linked above.
Has anyone heard anything about the other 2 SpaceX pending milestones - the Integrated Critical Design Review and the Dragon Primary Structure Qualification?
Officials at SpaceX and Sierra Nevada have both said they would press on with the development of their vehicles even if they don’t receive funding in the next round. Boeing, on the other hand, has said it will need to carefully evaluate whether it will continue building CST-100 if additional NASA funding does not come through. Boeing is reported to have committed the least amount of its own money to commercial crew compared with its competitors.
Article from Parabolic Arc. http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/30/remaining-milestones-nasas-commercial-crew-partners/#more-52735The last paragraph was interesting.QuoteOfficials at SpaceX and Sierra Nevada have both said they would press on with the development of their vehicles even if they don’t receive funding in the next round. Boeing, on the other hand, has said it will need to carefully evaluate whether it will continue building CST-100 if additional NASA funding does not come through. Boeing is reported to have committed the least amount of its own money to commercial crew compared with its competitors. Edit/Lar: Made the fact that it's a quote more obvious by using "quote" tags...
Currently, SpaceX is the only one who will complete both a pad and in-flight abort under this currently funded round of CC. Which means, IMO, that Boeing will need a much larger budget allotment then SpaceX for the next round if they were to be chosen since Boeing would need to purchase at least 2 Atlas Vs for the in-flight abort test and orbital flight test. So if NASA has $800 Million-ish for the next round and say SpaceX needs $400Million-ish to have a fully integrated and certified service ready to go in 2016ish (2017), then how much more would Boeing need if they haven't even done the abort scenarios yet?
And DreamChaser has!
Quote from: clongton on 07/02/2014 12:25 amAnd DreamChaser has!Sorry missing something... "DreamChase has!"... what?
Quote from: joek on 07/02/2014 12:33 amQuote from: clongton on 07/02/2014 12:25 amAnd DreamChaser has!Sorry missing something... "DreamChase has!"... what?Launched and tested on an Atlas.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 07/01/2014 12:50 amArticle from Parabolic Arc. http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/30/remaining-milestones-nasas-commercial-crew-partners/#more-52735The last paragraph was interesting.QuoteOfficials at SpaceX and Sierra Nevada have both said they would press on with the development of their vehicles even if they don’t receive funding in the next round. Boeing, on the other hand, has said it will need to carefully evaluate whether it will continue building CST-100 if additional NASA funding does not come through. Boeing is reported to have committed the least amount of its own money to commercial crew compared with its competitors. Edit/Lar: Made the fact that it's a quote more obvious by using "quote" tags...Boeings' position has been consistent in that they most likely would not close the business case outside of NASA and therefore would likely not continue development without them. Closing the business case and percentage of private-investment has certainly been one of the tenets of CC. What we don't know is how NASA will ultimately weigh this in the larger context of safety, costs and schedule.Currently, SpaceX is the only one who will complete both a pad and in-flight abort under this currently funded round of CC. Which means, IMO, that Boeing will need a much larger budget allotment then SpaceX for the next round if they were to be chosen since Boeing would need to purchase at least 2 Atlas Vs for the in-flight abort test and orbital flight test. So if NASA has $800 Million-ish for the next round and say SpaceX needs $400Million-ish to have a fully integrated and certified service ready to go in 2016ish (2017), then how much more would Boeing need if they haven't even done the abort scenarios yet?
Quote from: joek on 07/02/2014 12:33 amQuote from: clongton on 07/02/2014 12:25 amAnd DreamChaser has!Sorry missing something... "DreamChase has!"... what?DreamChaser has already purchased the Atlas launch vehicle and scheduled their flight test.Boeing hasn't even come close. And they can't just order up a new Atlas. Those things take time to build and there are no spares. By the time Boeing can get an Atlas in the chute and schedule their test flight Dreamchaser will already be long back on the ground, having completed theirs.
“It is a confirmed launch date. It’s a confirmed payment on the launch to start the process working,” Sirangelo told reporters at a press conference. “What happens after the [NASA] contract award happens or not happens we’ll decide then, but we are moving forward on the program for this one,” he added.
If the pad abort is the final milestone, then an abort during launch would not have been a milestone. You wouldn't launch a rocket to demonstrate an abort under max Q if you haven't already proven that the capsule can survive an abort under less strenuous initial conditions. You could forgo the pad abort and jump straight to the launch abort. But once you do that, there's not much to prove in then doing the pad abort.As for the status of the other two vehicles' milestones, the article says that DC needs more time to complete their milestones, but CST-100 will complete its milestones on time this August. I have no idea what the specific milestones are that are remaining for any of the vehicles.
