CCDev to CCiCAP to CCtCAP Discussion Thread

[DaveH62]

We have a chance for two private companies to build a more cost effective option. At some point, perhaps we'll see some sanity and we'll apply this model to all of our exploration budget and have money for lower cost BFR, long duration habitats, landing and extraterrestrial exploration systems.

I see this as a big step. It is not an end state, but it is a huge step for commercial space.  There were certainly worse potential outcomes, and I'm certainly happy the WSJ lead was wrong. Without competition, however weak and imperfect, there is no real commercial space. If Boeing writes it in, as many think, then SpaceX will leave them in the dust. If NASA and Congress see value in competition, and learn that monopolies are not the low cost market solution, then Boeing can be replaced by SNC or Bezos or someone down the road. If Congress learned nothing other than monopolies are never the lowest cost solution, then this would be a victory for taxpayers and tax slayers everywhere.

Optimal, I have no idea. But we have a race, or at the very least a rally, and it's between the USA and the USA. No offense China or Russia, but I think this is great.

[QuantumG]

Huh? They just finished all the milestones of a contract in which they produced nothing but stacks of paper and they got paid the most to do it. They don't actually have to fly anything to get more money in this contract. As soon as it stops being profitable, and it will, they'll walk away.. as they've been doing on NASA contracts for years.

QuantumG you know quite well that they have produced more than paper, please stop with the FUD.

I don't know that "quite well". All they've done is produce paperwork for components built by others. Can you demonstrate otherwise?

[spacetraveler]

QuantumG, do you have the milestone list or text of the contract? I assume so if you were able to make that statement.

[laika_fr]

firm cost is a joke by now, Bg will have the money it wants and Spx the money it needs.

We're talking no less than the come back of America in space, right ? And everybody wants good news, you see.

So forget about those pity party crasha like lori and let's the circus begin.

[QuantumG]

QuantumG, do you have the milestone list or text of the contract? I assume so if you were able to make that statement.

What statement?

I presume you mean

They don't actually have to fly anything to get more money in this contract.

That's a given. It's development and certification, not operations.

[spacetraveler]

QuantumG, do you have the milestone list or text of the contract? I assume so if you were able to make that statement.

What statement?

I presume you mean

They don't actually have to fly anything to get more money in this contract.

That's a given. It's development and certification, not operations.

Of course, and no it is not a given. Your statement was completely uninformed. It is very likely that a test flight will be one of the requirements for certification. A test flight was required in COTS prior to cargo operations.

[QuantumG]

Of course, and no it is not a given. Your statement was completely uninformed. It is very likely that a test flight will be one of the requirements for certification. A test flight was required in COTS prior to cargo operations.

Excuse me? What part of "milestone" don't you understand? Who says they actually have to achieve certification before they walk away?

[JBF]

Huh? They just finished all the milestones of a contract in which they produced nothing but stacks of paper and they got paid the most to do it. They don't actually have to fly anything to get more money in this contract. As soon as it stops being profitable, and it will, they'll walk away.. as they've been doing on NASA contracts for years.

QuantumG you know quite well that they have produced more than paper, please stop with the FUD.

I don't know that "quite well". All they've done is produce paperwork for components built by others. Can you demonstrate otherwise?

One thruster test and one pressure vessel as examples. It doesn't matter if they paid a subcontractor to manufacture them. It was done at their order and to their design.

[vt_hokie]

Even with no space planes, we may end up with some kind of hybrid future design between capsules and spaceplanes. Just look at what ESA is doing with their test reentry vehicle. That could point the way to a future we have not even thought of.

Lots of maybe somedays out there, but DC was the only real chance of seeing NASA build on the shuttle legacy with a reusable spaceplane during my lifetime, or at least before I'm drawing social security.  So close, and yet so far...it will be interesting to see if SNC stands by its previous statement that the OTV test flight is happening regardless of future NASA decisions. 

[spacetraveler]

Of course, and no it is not a given. Your statement was completely uninformed. It is very likely that a test flight will be one of the requirements for certification. A test flight was required in COTS prior to cargo operations.

Excuse me? What part of "milestone" don't you understand? Who says they actually have to achieve certification before they walk away?

I'm saying we don't know the specifics at all yet. We don't know what milestones are in the contract, we don't know what involves paperwork, what involves building flight hardware, or what involves actually flying. So how much money they can actually make by essentially doing no real work and then walking away in your hypothetical scenario is a total unknown.

[CommercialSpaceFan]

Stop the whining, this is a huge step.  NASA has spent $3B a year for nearly a decade developing a crew launch system that won't fly for another 4 years.  Here is an opportunity to develop 2 crew systems for a fraction of this cost including multiple actual flights!

[Darkseraph]

Even with no space planes, we may end up with some kind of hybrid future design between capsules and spaceplanes. Just look at what ESA is doing with their test reentry vehicle. That could point the way to a future we have not even thought of.

Lots of maybe somedays out there, but DC was the only real chance of seeing NASA build on the shuttle legacy with a reusable spaceplane during my lifetime, or at least before I'm drawing social security.  So close, and yet so far...it will be interesting to see if SNC stands by its previous statement that the OTV test flight is happening regardless of future NASA decisions.

I wouldn't be so morbid and dejected about it. There is a chance of a reusable space-plane during your life time and its orbiting overhead at the moment, has flown 3 times and its mostly automated. The tech in X-37B does build of the shuttle legacy, improve upon it and offer a path to a possible manned version in the future.

[vt_hokie]

Stop the whining, this is a huge step.  NASA has spent $3B a year for nearly a decade developing a crew launch system that won't fly for another 4 years.  Here is an opportunity to develop 2 crew systems for a fraction of this cost including multiple actual flights!

It's worth noting however that the unique vehicle with so much potential that lost out today could have been funded with just a fraction of what's going to said launch system.  And I have to wonder how much it would have required vs Boeing's $4 billion+ award.

[rcoppola]

Congratulations SpaceX!! Unbelievable what you have achieved in such a short time.

Congratulations Boeing! Always good to have you're heritage in the mix.

Condolences to SNC. The little shuttle that could. I'm sure we'll be seeing you again in the not too distant future. Don't give up on the dream!

Times...they sure are a changing.

[todd5ski]

Congrats to Both Boeing and SpaceX. I am looking forward to the next few years to see the progress they make.

[QuantumG]

Stop the whining, this is a huge step.

How is more of the same a huge step? How is changing the i to a t in what is essentially a continuation of an overblown paperwork exercise anything worth celebrating?

[Jim]

It's worth noting however that the unique vehicle with so much potent......

The "potential" is grossly over stated.  Parachute or wings are means and not an end.  The recovery system on a spacecraft is in use a small fraction of its mission.  What matters is what it does on orbit and not how "gracefully" returns to earth.  So this passion for winged spacecraft is misplaced. 

[wannamoonbase]

Stop the whining, this is a huge step.

How is more of the same a huge step? How is changing the i to a t in what is essentially a continuation of an overblown paperwork exercise anything worth celebrating?

Someone woke up grumpy.

This is more than paperwork.  Between these two and Orion there is going to be exciting history being made over the next 3 years.  After they are flying lots of options open up, not the least of which is a swing out to the moon 😃

Enjoy the development and ride.  Who knows when the next ones will get built. 

[WindyCity]

I am delighted that SpaceX's Dragon V2 got NASA's nod. DV2 is designed to do more than ferry astronauts to the ISS. Its heat shield can withstand the heat of reentry from cislunar and interplanetary space. Orion isn't the only vehicle that might one day carry people beyond LEO. While I believe that SpaceX would have "soldiered on" if the company hadn't won the competition, this will grease the wheels and allow R&D to proceed at optimal speed. I wouldn't be surprised to see a crewed flight before 2017.

[vt_hokie]

The "potential" is grossly over stated.  Parachute or wings are means and not an end.  The recovery system on a spacecraft is in use a small fraction of its mission.  What matters is what it does on orbit and not how "gracefully" returns to earth.  So this passion for winged spacecraft is misplaced. 

At the very least, DC seemed to have more interest from other potential partners/users than the other s/c.  Whether that evaporates without the core NASA funding remains to be seen I guess.