CCDev to CCiCAP to CCtCAP Discussion Thread

[tesla]

Is it perhaps time for a poll on the outcome of the downselect?

Oh yes please!

[Proponent]

Just thinking out loud about a poll.  The outcome of the downselect is quite uncertain.  We know neither the number of winners nor, as far as I know, which companies are eligible.  I also wonder whether there might be some ambiguity about what constitutes a "win".  I was thinking that poll entries might consist of one or more likelihood-weighted scenarios.

[SWGlassPit]

My (cynical) thought:  a poll here is just a meaningless popularity contest.  The CCtCap proposals are judged on vast amounts of information, only a tiny fraction of which is available here.  I've heard stories about proposal paperwork completely filling the back of a Chevy Suburban -- for just one company!

[erioladastra]

You are correct they are not equal.  But when you are delaying some because they are not complete/ready...well it means you encountered issues, were not as far as you thought/hoped you would be or have to stretch out the money.  All three mean your schedule is likely at risk.

Uhm, don't forget that some got less money than others. So it is not because of the company being incompetent, but because of the government (congress) not providing adequate funding.

Never implied otherwise.   Just anothe reason for being behind.

[baldusi]

My (cynical) thought:  a poll here is just a meaningless popularity contest.  The CCtCap proposals are judged on vast amounts of information, only a tiny fraction of which is available here.  I've heard stories about proposal paperwork completely filling the back of a Chevy Suburban -- for just one company!

And yet, besides all the fan boys here, the consensus is rarely far from the end result. There is a lot of very knowledgeable people here, and most have access to as much information as there is publicly available. You should take it with a pinch of salt, but is a very valid datapoint.
Besides, it is fun.

[erioladastra]

What last minute changes?

Yes, what major requirements have changed recently that would effect costs and timing in a meaningful way?

Constant change.  Its NASA.  As soon as the award is announced the winner will be asked to cost the latest changes.

[Elmar Moelzer]

the latest changes.

What were the previous changes?

[Proponent]

My (cynical) thought:  a poll here is just a meaningless popularity contest.

I don't think that's cynical at all.  It's just plain true: polls here are completely pointless.  But they're fun.

[yg1968]

My (cynical) thought:  a poll here is just a meaningless popularity contest.

I don't think that's cynical at all.  It's just plain true: polls here are completely pointless.  But they're fun.

When we had a poll for CCiCap, forum members selected the same companies that were eventually given awards: SpaceX, SNC and Boeing.

[yg1968]

Phil McAlister provided an update on commercial crew at a July 28 2014 NAC meeting:
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/CSD-Status-NAC-July-2014.pdf

Awards for CCtCap are still planned for August-September.

[BrianNH]

Page 10 of the presentation says "CCtCAP contract mechanism may lead to safety/cost risk."  SpaceX has already warned that the contract mechanism could lead to cost increases due to the extensive reporting requirements, but how would the contracting mechanism lead to safety risks?

[yg1968]

Page 10 of the presentation says "CCtCAP contract mechanism may lead to safety/cost risk."  SpaceX has already warned that the contract mechanism could lead to cost increases due to the extensive reporting requirements, but how would the contracting mechanism lead to safety risks?

CCtCap is a fixed price contract mechanism. The argument is that a cost plus contract would be safer given that NASA can still change the safety requirements by paying the company more money. But their box says that the likelyhood and consequences of using a fixed price contract mechanism (such as the one used for CCtCap) are moderate. That is the way that I understand it.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Page 10 of the presentation says "CCtCAP contract mechanism may lead to safety/cost risk."  SpaceX has already warned that the contract mechanism could lead to cost increases due to the extensive reporting requirements, but how would the contracting mechanism lead to safety risks?

CCtCap is a fixed price contract mechanism. The argument is that a cost plus contract would be safer given that NASA can still change the safety requirements by paying the company more money. But their box says that the likelyhood and consequences of using a fixed price contract mechanism (such as the one used for CCtCap) are moderate. That is the way that I understand it.

The statement alludes to the belief that NASA has to be in complete control for the vehicle to be safe.

This is a false belief.  Just because NASA engineering is in control does not mean that the contractors method is safety inferior.  Just look at Commercial Crew abort systems vs Orions's.  Abort all the way to orbit vs abort only for part of launch.

Level of NASA control:
SAA – very little engineering control. (lowest costs)
FFP – moderate engineering control due to the requirements at the contract signing that are part of the contract. (Modest costs increase)
Cost Plus – complete control because every design decision requires NASA approval. (High costs increase)

[docmordrid]

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
NASA Comm. Crew CCtCap award likely on 22 or 29 Aug.: allows finalization of contracts before likely Contin. Res. (CR) for next FY at 1 Oct.

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
Also: CCtCap probably two "full" awards, no "half;" depending on $ avail., options to extend now/new active phases under consideration.

[woods170]

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
NASA Comm. Crew CCtCap award likely on 22 or 29 Aug.: allows finalization of contracts before likely Contin. Res. (CR) for next FY at 1 Oct.

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
Also: CCtCap probably two "full" awards, no "half;" depending on $ avail., options to extend now/new active phases under consideration.

More news about this available in L2.

[sciencebro]

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
NASA Comm. Crew CCtCap award likely on 22 or 29 Aug.: allows finalization of contracts before likely Contin. Res. (CR) for next FY at 1 Oct.

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
Also: CCtCap probably two "full" awards, no "half;" depending on $ avail., options to extend now/new active phases under consideration.

This is what I've been waiting to hear. Regardless of the choices, I think partially funding two options is far and away the best choice NASA can make. Excellent news.

[guckyfan]

This is what I've been waiting to hear. Regardless of the choices, I think partially funding two options is far and away the best choice NASA can make. Excellent news.

Considering that there is a certain urgency to getting Crew to the ISS partial funding two options would be a poor choice IMO. Full funding of the fastest competitor seems in order.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

By this time the winners already know they have won because they are doing a quick review of the draft FFP contracts that would be signed on the day or few days before of the public anouncement.  They just can't say anything about it.  Also they know they won but don't know who else if any also won. They have about 2 weeks to acomplish all of this word-smith ironing of the contracts with NASA.  Plus until the contracts have actually been signed they have not technically won yet.

[yg1968]

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
NASA Comm. Crew CCtCap award likely on 22 or 29 Aug.: allows finalization of contracts before likely Contin. Res. (CR) for next FY at 1 Oct.

Charles A. Lurio @TheLurioReport
Also: CCtCap probably two "full" awards, no "half;" depending on $ avail., options to extend now/new active phases under consideration.

What does "depending on $ avail., options to extend now/new active phases under consideration" mean?

[docmordrid]

Milestone extensions? IIRC Dream Chaser and SpaceX have extensions in place for CCiCap.