CCDev to CCiCAP to CCtCAP Discussion Thread

[Jim]

At what point in the process does development cease and 'competition' kick in? If the final cost of one option is significantly less expensive than another, as everyone suspects, at what point does this provide NASA leverage in negotiations?

The competition has already happened, this is the result.

[saliva_sweet]

I, personally, am disgusted by what I heard during the announcement and the teleconference. Not because SpaceX got less (I'm biased for SpaceX, I'm aware of that), they did fine. But how SNC got massively screwed over by corruption. Massive award to Boeing without justification given or about to be given in the near future. Probably some kind of rationale will be made public in the future, focusing on safety and the ETA crash no doubt), but that will likely be a sad joke.

Just as I predicted, according to the crowd here, if Boeing wins, it can't possibly be on the merits of their proposal -- it could only be corruption (based on... what exactly?).  The amazing peopleism and sour grapes are truly disgusting.

Sure, you can go ahead and call me the amazing people crowd and my thought process disgusting or resort to other ad homs as you like. But what I'm not liking is what I heard on the teleconference. The reasons for the awards are not about to be released, the delay between when the decision was made and the announcement and the huge award going to Boeing all of a sudden. And this quote from another apparently disgusting amazing people:

At least Boeing will be able to afford the bonuses for their roaming hoards of lobbyists that worked their magic over the last few weeks.

I feel like resigning today. Money buys you money.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35654.msg1256457#msg1256457

[oiorionsbelt]

At what point in the process does development cease and 'competition' kick in? If the final cost of one option is significantly less expensive than another, as everyone suspects, at what point does this provide NASA leverage in negotiations?

The competition has already happened, this is the result.

now the "real" competition begins.
 I for one can not wait to see who launches first and what the achieve with the big money they are being given.

[Jim]

Yep. Paper milestones are expensive. Hardware milestones are even more so.

What paper milestones?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35485.msg1248462#msg1248462

[Coastal Ron]

Just as I predicted, according to the crowd here, if Boeing wins, it can't possibly be on the merits of their proposal -- it could only be corruption (based on... what exactly?).  The amazing peopleism and sour grapes are truly disgusting.

One person is not a crowd, so don't make sweeping condemnations.

As for myself, I have great faith that the selection committee was not influenced by politics, but followed their non-biased selection criteria.

But it's pretty obvious that Boeing is not even close to a competitor to SpaceX from a price standpoint, even though they had the more conservative capsule design.  And the logic all along has been that if NASA had the choice (i.e. enough money), that it would go with SpaceX for a capsule, and then Sierra Nevada because it was a better alternative to a capsule (i.e. lower g-forces, better cross-range capabilities, etc.).  But I think money was a limiting factor, and so we got Boeing as the second choice.

[punder]

Going beyond sour grapes about how much bigger Boeing's award was than SpaceX's...

SpaceX submitted a bid based on what they think they require to finish a manned space launch system.  And today, they got what they asked for.  I imagine they are cheering and pressing ahead, not griping about the relative size of the award.

That must be pretty exciting.  "We just nailed a $2.6B contract to fly people in space.  We don't have to slow down.  We're on our way."

[mlindner]

At what point in the process does development cease and 'competition' kick in? If the final cost of one option is significantly less expensive than another, as everyone suspects, at what point does this provide NASA leverage in negotiations?

The competition has already happened, this is the result.

NASA is a government entity. It takes them a long time (decades) to learn to do things differently. They've only half figured out what "commercial" is so far. Give them a few more decades.

If it was true commercial I'd have all the companies make a full prototype product on their own dime and demonstrate it to me independently. I'd then discard all the companies except the best two. I'd proclaim a single company winner based on meeting the requirements and what they charge me to do it. I might keep a backup company to switch to if I had hard time deadlines for the case that there was an issue with the winner. I wouldn't pay both at full rate and I'd nominally only have one supplier. If there was issues with either they have to pay out of their own pocket to fix whatever the issue is or lose the contract.

[robertross]

At what point in the process does development cease and 'competition' kick in? If the final cost of one option is significantly less expensive than another, as everyone suspects, at what point does this provide NASA leverage in negotiations?

The competition has already happened, this is the result.

now the "real" competition begins.
 I for one can not wait to see who launches first and what the achieve with the big money they are being given.

They'll both launch their vehicles, I have no doubt of that.

Who launches first is meaningless really. It's who successfull reaches the ISS and lands safely afterwards - that's the true measure of success.

Another success is the small shot in the arm for the US economy & industry.

[Jim]

The contract includes $$ for "special studies".
Ha!

Every contract does

[Jim]

Why does Boeing get more?  Her answer further supported the confusing nature of the reward.  I sure wish SpaceX had an extra billion to throw at the BFR / MCT.

NASA has no need for a BFR / MCT.

[oiorionsbelt]

Was never a DC fan but one can't help but wonder what SNC could've done with $4.2 Billion

[SWGlassPit]

One person is not a crowd, so don't make sweeping condemnations.

The quoted post is by no means the only one.  Plenty of accusations and innuendo exist in this and several other threads, some from rather surprising people.

[CriX]

In the end, there will be three vehicles (including Orion) that can deliver crew to the ISS. 

I think the question that dglow is asking is how the individual prices of these competitors will factor into which one NASA uses, post 2017.  Would we expect them to use each equally to spread things out?  Or would NASA be required to use the lowest cost provider that meets their needs?

[Coastal Ron]

Is Boeing funding ULA out of pocket for the modifications needed for Atlas V to launch their vehicle?

Who else is going to do it?

Taxpayers? 

Yes taxpayers, but through what funding mechanism?  CCtCap is the funding mechanism to do that, so Boeing would have included the modifications and certifications in their proposal.  Sierra Nevada would have also.

[Jim]

Well, I think this whole decision stinks. Hopefully one day a commission will expose all the backroom dealing that went on, and those responsible will be held to account.

I look forward to reading the selection documentation once it's been re-written to fit today's selection.

What data are you basing  that accusation on?  You are actually saying that a crime was done.

[Jim]

While SpaceX develops their engines and rockets from basic metal,
Boeing is at the whim of the Russians to buy engines. 

What if Russia raises the price they charge on those engines significantly?
Does Boeing have to eat the increased costs?

Yes, but they aren't going to increase.

[Poole Amateur]

I am one of your greatest fans Jim, but on this occasion the cynic in me tends to think of Winston Churchill. "There's lies, damned lies and statistics"

I hope, really hope, that I am indeed wrong and you are right..

Please forgive lack of quote from update thread, am using an iPod and don't know how to do it!

[DGH]

SpaceX has a head start that accounts for the $1.6 billion difference, IMO.  That ISS cargo head start was provided by previous NASA funding to the tune of, what, a couple billion dollars?

Er, no.  $400 million for SpaceX (and roughly the same for Orbital).

Let's please not try and handwave this away.  Boeing is simply more expensive than SpaceX.

SpaceX won $278 million for COTS and $1.6 billion for CRS.  They used that money in part to develop the basic Dragon spacecraft and Falcon 9 v1.1, the factory and test facilities.  That groundwork is directly applied now to Commercial Crew.  It is a well funded head start not given Boeing's CST-100, which is why Boeing needs more money now.

 - Ed Kyle

NASA also gets a new unmanned cargo delivery system on top of the manned system for that money.
So they are actually getting two systems from Boeing for the money.

[nadreck]

Going beyond sour grapes about how much bigger Boeing's award was than SpaceX's...

SpaceX submitted a bid based on what they think they require to finish a manned space launch system.  And today, they got what they asked for.  I imagine they are cheering and pressing ahead, not griping about the relative size of the award.

That must be pretty exciting.  "We just nailed a $2.6B contract to fly people in space.  We don't have to slow down.  We're on our way."

They bid what they wanted to bid guessing how much more than they expected it would actually cost the client would pay. As did Boeing. Given that SpaceX has grown tremendously, that the task is more complex due to both the higher standards that NASA gives manned operations reliability and meeting the different requirements of this RFP over the various stages getting to the COTS final product, yes it will cost more. But implicit in this process is the fact that they have to include profit margin in the bid, not provide estimates, impeccable cost accounting and then are paid a percentage above and beyond that. They take risk, but hand in hand with risk goes reward and I would be willing to make a small wager that SpaceX ends up with more margin at the end of the day than Boeing, however Boeing will have greased more palms, fed more families, and elected more municipal, state and federal officials with their money.

[Jim]

3) No one is on the Conference is directly involved with the selection process.  So, you have no idea why SpaceX & Boeing was selected over SNC.

They never do, and I don't know what you expected to hear.  They just announce the winners and the cost, that is all in these press conferences.