Excalibur Almaz announces lunar plans

[Blackstar]

They've decided that they cannot make money launching humans to LEO, so instead they are going to send them to the Moon.

http://www.excaliburalmaz.com/0201_Lunar.html

Images taken from their presentation at ISDC this afternoon.

[Blackstar]

More images.

[Blackstar]

Last set.

[Blackstar]

Here is their Lunar Cycler.

[QuantumG]

The only "lunar cycler" orbits I've seen are in the attached paper. If they're doing that, great, if not I'd like to know if they're just misusing the term.

[riney]

So they've bought two Salyut spaceframes and four vintage re-entry vehicles. Are these guys nuts (and overly funded!), or is there a chance these can be made flyable?

--riney

[Jim]

So they've bought two Salyut spaceframes and four vintage re-entry vehicles. Are these guys nuts (and overly funded!), or is there a chance these can be made flyable?

--riney

First off we need to set the record straight. They DID NOT purchase two Salyut spaceframes. They purchased two Almaz spaceframes. Salyuts were altered Almaz spaceframes.

A distinction without a difference

[QuantumG]

A distinction without a difference

Hey look, I agree with Jim on something..

Yeah, I seriously doubt they're gunna have a cannon on this Almaz!

[Jorge]

They've decided that they cannot make money launching humans to LEO, so instead they are going to send them to the Moon.

The sound of a second shoe dropping.

[QuantumG]

They've decided that they cannot make money launching humans to LEO, so instead they are going to send them to the Moon.

The sound of a second shoe dropping.

Maybe they figured out that they have to actually fly before anyone will pay them.. at least more than deposits.. it seems all space tourism startups have to learn this the hard way.

Unfortunately, when they do finally learn, they go looking for someone to pay them for powerpoint instead of actually flying.

[Jorge]

They've decided that they cannot make money launching humans to LEO, so instead they are going to send them to the Moon.

The sound of a second shoe dropping.

Maybe they figured out that they have to actually fly before anyone will pay them.. at least more than deposits.. it seems all space tourism startups have to learn this the hard way.

Maybe they also figured out they need to have considerable US domestic content to get considered for US funding under CCP. (Their CCDev-2 Space Act Agreement was unfunded).

[QuantumG]

Maybe they also figured out they need to have considerable US domestic content to get considered for US funding under CCP. (Their CCDev-2 Space Act Agreement was unfunded).

Yeah, I was hoping they might actually have a business plan that didn't involve government funding.

Almost three years since Guy Laliberté flew, you'd think they could find three participants to fill their spacecraft.

[Lars_J]

They've decided that they cannot make money launching humans to LEO, so instead they are going to send them to the Moon.

This announcement just exposed them as delusional. IMO. Is *anyone* taking them seriously at this point?

This is an order of magnitude more far-fetched than the "Soyuz around the moon" - and that was already extremely unlikely ever to happen.

[Blackstar]

So they've bought two Salyut spaceframes and four vintage re-entry vehicles. Are these guys nuts (and overly funded!), or is there a chance these can be made flyable?

They indicated that they hired Futron to do a study and that study indicates that there are 29 people who might pay $100 million for a trip to the Moon. That is apparently more than those willing to pay the current price point--$62 million--for a flight to LEO.

I will note that Constellation Services International proposed a mission around the Moon in 2004. And Space Adventures proposed a similar mission in 2005. It's been eight years and nobody has publicly signed up for one yet.

http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/Spotlights/2006/index2006-11-01.html

[FinalFrontier]

Maybe they also figured out they need to have considerable US domestic content to get considered for US funding under CCP. (Their CCDev-2 Space Act Agreement was unfunded).

Yeah, I was hoping they might actually have a business plan that didn't involve government funding.

Almost three years since Guy Laliberté flew, you'd think they could find three participants to fill their spacecraft.

Have to agree with yours and Jim's comments so far here.

I really don't see the value or the point in this proposal, they haven't really done anything yet except power-points, so why announce your going to the moon when you haven't even made orbit yet?

Don't see the point in this. And I rather don't think any of this stuff will ever fly if this company believes that announcing BEO missions before even flying one LEO mission is a good idea. 

Not to mention the hardware and technical challenges involved.... or the impracticality.

[Jason1701]

So they've bought two Salyut spaceframes and four vintage re-entry vehicles. Are these guys nuts (and overly funded!), or is there a chance these can be made flyable?

They indicated that they hired Futron to do a study and that study indicates that there are 29 people who might pay $100 million for a trip to the Moon. That is apparently more than those willing to pay the current price point--$62 million--for a flight to LEO.

I will note that Constellation Services International proposed a mission around the Moon in 2004. And Space Adventures proposed a similar mission in 2005. It's been eight years and nobody has publicly signed up for one yet.

http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/Spotlights/2006/index2006-11-01.html

I think people doubt Excalibur's capability much more than they doubt the market's demand.

[Danderman]

I will note that Constellation Services International proposed a mission around the Moon in 2004. And Space Adventures proposed a similar mission in 2005. It's been eight years and nobody has publicly signed up for one yet.

http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/Spotlights/2006/index2006-11-01.html

Space Adventures is hinting that they might have 2 customers Real Soon Now, which is what they require for a mission.

I should note that CSI did not suggest that we were looking for customers, we just disclosed the concept as a way for somebody to fly around the Moon affordably.

Last note is that as time passes, Soyuz is becoming more capable so some presumed "show stoppers" from 2004 have been obviated.

[QuantumG]

Space Adventures is hinting that they might have 2 customers Real Soon Now, which is what they require for a mission.

I think Blackstar's point is that the one customer Space Adventures claims they have for the translunar flight has not identified himself/herself yet.

Going from a masked one to 29 is a pretty big jump.. but one I'd believe if it was announced by someone who is actually flying.

[Blackstar]

I think people doubt Excalibur's capability much more than they doubt the market's demand.

What "people"?

[Robert Thompson]

"I also like to live dangerously..."

[Jason1701]

I think people doubt Excalibur's capability much more than they doubt the market's demand.

What "people"?

Anyone (such as myself) who don't think they can/will pull this off.

[FinalFrontier]

I doubt the demand and the capability.

Neither exist.

[Danderman]

It doesn't really matter what we think in the end, but rather whether EA can secure investors and customers. Its entirely possible that their system is workable, but unfundable, or the reverse ( ). We don't know.

Time will tell.

[Warren Platts]

I doubt the demand and the capability.

Neither exist.

Roscosmos said at the GlobEx conference that it wants to build a permanent Lunar base. Almaz could fit into those plans. They don't need to depend on space tourism.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_05_23_2012_p05-01-460939.xml

[Robotbeat]

The demand may exist. Money is just fun coupons. You can't take it with you when you die, and we already know there are billionaires who like space and are willing to spend a lot of money on it.

It's the capability (and the safety) that is in question.  Have to prove those before you have any chance about demand.

[QuantumG]

If anybody wants to have an intelligent conversation about the current state and future plans Excalibur Almaz, I'm all ears.

Okay, any idea when they going to fly something or someone?

[FinalFrontier]

I doubt the demand and the capability.

Neither exist.

Roscosmos said at the GlobEx conference that it wants to build a permanent Lunar base. Almaz could fit into those plans. They don't need to depend on space tourism.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_05_23_2012_p05-01-460939.xml

That does not mean EA would be the provider.

[Danderman]

Roscosmos said at the GlobEx conference that it wants to build a permanent Lunar base. Almaz could fit into those plans. They don't need to depend on space tourism.

To be clear, the offer was for Russia to participate in an international lunar base program which translates into Russia building and flying stuff for which it is paid by other countries. This is all very unlikely to ever happen.

[simonbp]

"I also like to live dangerously..."

Exactly.

If a believably safe company offer such a trip, I could see a market. But a company that has never launched anything and only own a bunch of Soviet military spacecraft leftovers is just not who I would trust to get me to (let alone back from) the Moon.

The Soviets never thought that the TKS VA was safe enough to put cosmonauts on. I agree.

[FinalFrontier]

Roscosmos said at the GlobEx conference that it wants to build a permanent Lunar base. Almaz could fit into those plans. They don't need to depend on space tourism.

To be clear, the offer was for Russia to participate in an international lunar base program which translates into Russia building and flying stuff for which it is paid by other countries. This is all very unlikely to ever happen.

Especially if you consider recent EuroZone economic problems and the direction the entire region appears to be heading as of late. Makes this almost a nonstarter at this point.

[Robert Thompson]

If I had the equipment Almaz has I'd quietly and promptly visit Bigelow's memoranda of understanding partners and see what deals can be made.

[Jim]

If I had the equipment Almaz has I'd quietly and promptly visit Bigelow's memoranda of understanding partners and see what deals can be made.

They wouldn't know who Bigelow's partners are.

[A_M_Swallow]

{snip}
Yeah, I seriously doubt they're gunna have a cannon on this Almaz!

A spacecraft with a cannon.  Now that points to a possible market that people have not suggested before - big game hunters.

You have hunted lion.
You have hunted elephant.
You want to hunt something new.
Be the first of your friends to hunt spy satellite.
 

[manboy]

Until they have the tooling to build more capsules, it doesn't seem like they have a business case.

[Blackstar]

Thanks for posting the photos, Dave.

You're welcome.

[Danderman]

"I also like to live dangerously..."

The Soviets never thought that the TKS VA was safe enough to put cosmonauts on. I agree.

VA capsules have flown in space with people inside them.

[simonbp]

VA capsules have flown in space with people inside them.

Well, so has Dragon now. And ATV for that matter, but I'm not going to ride it back to Earth.

The Soviets spent huge amounts of money developing the TKS VA, but never saw fit to actually put people in in anything more than an emergency capacity. If it were really as superior as people on the internet like to claim, it would have been used for its intended purpose and launched manned (either with an FGB on Proton or with a smaller service module on a R-7). But it never was, and the "inferior" Soyuz was used instead. That tells me that there was some underlying safety issue that caused them to no trust Merkur.

[malenfant]

VA capsules have flown in space with people inside them.

Well, so has Dragon now. And ATV for that matter, but I'm not going to ride it back to Earth.

The Soviets spent huge amounts of money developing the TKS VA, but never saw fit to actually put people in in anything more than an emergency capacity. If it were really as superior as people on the internet like to claim, it would have been used for its intended purpose and launched manned (either with an FGB on Proton or with a smaller service module on a R-7). But it never was, and the "inferior" Soyuz was used instead. That tells me that there was some underlying safety issue that caused them to no trust Merkur.

The civilian station program effectively belonged to energia.

It's not surprising that Mishin and Glushko each prefered to use OKB-1's in house Soyuz vehicle rather than give any more business than that of the competition at Chelomei's bureau.  It's likely a simple case of "Not invented here."

I'm not really arguing that Almaz/TKS was a good project; just that it's abandonment does not prove that it was bad.

[Blackstar]

If it were really as superior as people on the internet like to claim

Who is claiming it was "superior"?

The Soviets ended up with two manned capsules and only needed one. There could have been lots of reasons not to continue using the TKS, including budget, politics, bureaucratic infighting, and a simple lack of requirement. No need to denigrate the vehicle.

[JBF]

I wonder what condition everything is in after all these years.

[sdsds]

I wonder what condition everything is in after all these years.

I wonder what procedures and equipment could be used to determine that.

[QuantumG]

Here's the video:

http://www.nss.org/resources/library/videos/ISDC12dula.html

Seems they plan to launch the stations on Proton and the reusable reentry vehicles on Soyuz.. unless they can get better offers.

[Moe Grills]

Here's the video:

http://www.nss.org/resources/library/videos/ISDC12dula.html

Seems they plan to launch the stations on Proton and the reusable reentry vehicles on Soyuz.. unless they can get better offers.

The question then becomes: How do the Excalibur Almaz executive board
plan to raise money to purchase the Proton & Soyuz launchers?
I don't see much evidence that they have strawed away sufficient
millions to carry forward with the purchases, tests, integrations and launches they expect to achieve within the next 2-3 years.

[watermod]

Almaz was 1971-1974... 
I give %0001 chance that any part of the wiring harness will have insulation after a slight bump.... unless it's some tar based or paper/twine wrapped stuff.   
Any rubber hoses - good luck
Any plastic - well past the sell-by date let alone the use-by.
Different metals - corrosion
It might be cheaper to have a new one built using 3D scans of the existing parts and milling machines.
Does the glass they used show measurable flow after that long a time?
 

[Downix]

Almaz was 1971-1974... 
I give %0001 chance that any part of the wiring harness will have insulation after a slight bump.... unless it's some tar based or paper/twine wrapped stuff.   
Any rubber hoses - good luck
Any plastic - well past the sell-by date let alone the use-by.
Different metals - corrosion
It might be cheaper to have a new one built using 3D scans of the existing parts and milling machines.
Does the glass they used show measurable flow after that long a time?
 

So I understand, the electrical systems would be/have been replaced.  The main structural elements however seemed intact.

[QuantumG]

The question then becomes: How do the Excalibur Almaz executive board
plan to raise money to purchase the Proton & Soyuz launchers?
I don't see much evidence that they have strawed away sufficient
millions to carry forward with the purchases, tests, integrations and launches they expect to achieve within the next 2-3 years.

The better question: have they found any customers yet? Futron studies are great and all, but checks that have cleared are even better.

[pargoo]

     Aren't we all in agreement that this thing has as much likelihood of happening as one of us being aboard the first crewed Dragon flight to the ISS?  Seriously...

[Lars_J]

Indeed. Every announcement they make sound further and further removed from reality.

[QuantumG]

     Aren't we all in agreement that this thing has as much likelihood of happening as one of us being aboard the first crewed Dragon flight to the ISS?  Seriously...

What, in particular, do you think is the biggest hurdle to this actually happening?

Remember, "the giggle factor" is a constant when it comes to space activities.. people scoff right up until launch day. Afterwards, everyone says nothing of importance happened. Example: Bigelow launching their Genesis I module on Depnr.

I'm not sure what's so hard to grasp about EA's plans here.. they have refurbished heritage spacecraft with a prime contractor that has their own launch providers, plus their team has a history of selling launches themselves. The only piece of the puzzle I'm waiting to see is an actual paying customer.. all it takes is money.

http://aerosociety.com/Events/Event-List/275/3rd-European-Space-Tourism-Conference-Open-for-Business

Maybe that's what they're going to announce next.

[Danderman]

Almaz was 1971-1974... 
I give %0001 chance that any part of the wiring harness will have insulation after a slight bump.... unless it's some tar based or paper/twine wrapped stuff.   
Any rubber hoses - good luck
Any plastic - well past the sell-by date let alone the use-by.
Different metals - corrosion
It might be cheaper to have a new one built using 3D scans of the existing parts and milling machines.
Does the glass they used show measurable flow after that long a time?
 

As a trivia note, much Almaz/VA/TKS hardware was built after the current ISS Service Module was ordered during the Brezhnev regime.

[Danderman]

I'm not sure what's so hard to grasp about EA's plans here.. they have refurbished heritage spacecraft with a prime contractor that has their own launch providers, plus their team has a history of selling launches themselves. The only piece of the puzzle I'm waiting to see is an actual paying customer.. all it takes is money.

One issue is that the heritage hardware has some technical limitations that require major modifications before the hardware could be flown with tourists - even if the hardware were brand new.

For example, the capsule does not have the ability to maneuver in space; the solid rocket de-orbit motor doesn't work above 300 kilometers; the capsule itself is not designed for free flight for more than a couple of hours or so. Etc.

I am not suggesting that these modifications are impossible, or even difficult. However, I see no evidence that actual work on these modifications is in progress.

[QuantumG]

I am not suggesting that these modifications are impossible, or even difficult. However, I see no evidence that actual work on these modifications is in progress.

He claims they are in the video.. not sure what more you want than that.

If there is someone you know attending the RAS event today, perhaps you can get them to ask.

[pargoo]

     The biggest obstacle to this happening is the oldest, most-obvious one - lack of money, of course.  Where are they going to find the cash to buy a Proton launch for the Almaz, plus a Soyuz(or Proton) launch for the crew, PLUS a launch to loft whatever upper stage is required to boost all that mass around the moon on a mission that will produce little, if any scientific return?  And all this with just two airframes and four reentry vehicles WAY past their use-by date, one of which by today's safety standards - even in Russia(!) - would need to be test-flown to the moon just to prove that it would even work satisfactorily once in space without blowing up or dying without ever being heard from again?
     If it walks like a boondoggle, quacks like a boondoggle and looks like a boondoggle, it's a boondoggle.

[QuantumG]

Thanks Capt'n Obvious. Yes, you need money to do anything. As for the safety of the vehicles, you're demonstrating that you haven't even watched the video.. go do so, come back when you have something constructive to say.

[Danderman]

I am not suggesting that these modifications are impossible, or even difficult. However, I see no evidence that actual work on these modifications is in progress.

He claims they are in the video.. not sure what more you want than that.

If there is someone you know attending the RAS event today, perhaps you can get them to ask.

I would be thrilled to learn of any evidence that Excalibur Almaz was actively developing modifications to the old Russian systems, but I am not excited about a random comment in a public presentation.

I should say that I have quite a bit of information about these systems, and I have spent some time at NPO Mash, so when I say that I have no evidence of modifications being developed, its not from lack of looking.

[QuantumG]

I would be thrilled to learn of any evidence that Excalibur Almaz was actively developing modifications to the old Russian systems, but I am not excited about a random comment in a public presentation.

I should say that I have quite a bit of information about these systems, and I have spent some time at NPO Mash, so when I say that I have no evidence of modifications being developed, its not from lack of looking.

Umm.. I'll ask again, because I get the feeling you're not understanding the question: what evidence do you want?

They say they've been paying a number of different groups to do work on these vehicles.. do they need to send you copies of their books?

I think this is once again a case of you calling people liars who aren't around to defend themselves. You really need to stop. This forum does not exist for you to slander people.

[Danderman]

I would be thrilled to learn of any evidence that Excalibur Almaz was actively developing modifications to the old Russian systems, but I am not excited about a random comment in a public presentation.

I should say that I have quite a bit of information about these systems, and I have spent some time at NPO Mash, so when I say that I have no evidence of modifications being developed, its not from lack of looking.

Umm.. I'll ask again, because I get the feeling you're not understanding the question: what evidence do you want?

They say they've been paying a number of different groups to do work on these vehicles.. do they need to send you copies of their books?

I think this is once again a case of you calling people liars who aren't around to defend themselves. You really need to stop. This forum does not exist for you to slander people.

Let's try it this way:

Do we know of any of their vendors actually working on on modernization of their hardware? Usually Russian companies show development projects on their web sites, since customers are so hard to find.

Does Excalibur Almaz have DTRA registration for technical work with foreign firms?

Does Excalibur Almaz have the financial resources for significant technical development? I know the answer to this question, do you?

[Downix]

I would be thrilled to learn of any evidence that Excalibur Almaz was actively developing modifications to the old Russian systems, but I am not excited about a random comment in a public presentation.

I should say that I have quite a bit of information about these systems, and I have spent some time at NPO Mash, so when I say that I have no evidence of modifications being developed, its not from lack of looking.

Umm.. I'll ask again, because I get the feeling you're not understanding the question: what evidence do you want?

They say they've been paying a number of different groups to do work on these vehicles.. do they need to send you copies of their books?

I think this is once again a case of you calling people liars who aren't around to defend themselves. You really need to stop. This forum does not exist for you to slander people.

Let's try it this way:

Do we know of any of their vendors actually working on on modernization of their hardware? Usually Russian companies show development projects on their web sites, since customers are so hard to find.

Does Excalibur Almaz have DTRA registration for technical work with foreign firms?

Does Excalibur Almaz have the financial resources for significant technical development? I know the answer to this question, do you?

Well, I don't know, but they delivered everything requested for their CCDev2 unfunded SAA, with the last item delivered last week.

[Danderman]

Well, I don't know, but they delivered everything requested for their CCDev2 unfunded SAA, with the last item delivered last week.

This is probably true. I have attached all of the milestones here as a public service.

It looks as if the deliverables are mostly stuff that EA would require to fly their capsule and have had on hand for some time; reports on hardware are probably the original NPO Mash documents from 30 years ago, such as pressure testing results.

There is some work described in the requirements, but nothing too difficult for a small company that has access to archives from NPO Mash. The launch vehicle reports and finite element model would have been on hand for quite some time.

There is certainly no work performed that implies any significant modernization efforts of the existing subsystems.

I would look forward to anyone taking a look at these deliverables and telling me where I am wrong.

[QuantumG]

Let's try it this way:

Do we know of any of their vendors actually working on on modernization of their hardware? Usually Russian companies show development projects on their web sites, since customers are so hard to find.

WTF? Contractors don't talk about the work they're doing unless they have permission.

Does Excalibur Almaz have DTRA registration for technical work with foreign firms?

Yes, that was also in the video.

Does Excalibur Almaz have the financial resources for significant technical development? I know the answer to this question, do you?

Also in the video.

He says they are doing this work and you say they are not. Their press release is official and your skepticism is uncivil.

You have to take what they say as given, unless you can prove otherwise. Can you prove otherwise? Until you do, retract your comments and apologize.

[QuantumG]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f5af9e2a-ba21-11e1-aa8d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1yI0yHZm5

[Downix]

Well, I don't know, but they delivered everything requested for their CCDev2 unfunded SAA, with the last item delivered last week.

This is probably true. I have attached all of the milestones here as a public service.

It looks as if the deliverables are mostly stuff that EA would require to fly their capsule and have had on hand for some time; reports on hardware are probably the original NPO Mash documents from 30 years ago, such as pressure testing results.

There is some work described in the requirements, but nothing too difficult for a small company that has access to archives from NPO Mash. The launch vehicle reports and finite element model would have been on hand for quite some time.

There is certainly no work performed that implies any significant modernization efforts of the existing subsystems.

I would look forward to anyone taking a look at these deliverables and telling me where I am wrong.

How much work was it to launch the modified Vostok as part of the Resurs program in the 1990's?

[daveklingler]

If I had the equipment Almaz has I'd quietly and promptly visit Bigelow's memoranda of understanding partners and see what deals can be made.

They wouldn't know who Bigelow's partners are.

That is an unfounded statement.

There are a few people who might be reasonably expected to know every detail of Bigelow's operations, and Art Dula is one of them.  In fact, there are a few people who might reasonably be expected to be currently engaged as counsel for Bigelow, and Art Dula is one of them.

[Danderman]

How much work was it to launch the modified Vostok as part of the Resurs program in the 1990's?

The Vostok modifications for Resurs were an order of magnitude less than required modifications for Resurs.

To begin with, the industrial base for Vostok was never shut down for a month, let alone 25 years. In the case of the Almaz VA, the companies that made the solid rocket motors may not exist anymore, and those solid rocket motors are no longer in production.

The flight computer for Almaz VA was apparently some model of Bizer that is no longer in production, and changing out flight computers is non-trivial.

Almaz VA must be modified to maneuver in orbit, as well as dock, which Vostok derivatives were never required to do.

Somewhere out there, there exists a report listing all the required modifications to Almaz VA. I have read it, and it is not a pleasant read.

[daveklingler]

He who bets against Art Dula is uninformed.  Like a previous poster said, Dula is one of the few people in the world who could pull off EA. 

If it doesn't succeed, it's not because EA hasn't covered every single technical detail.  These are serious people.

[Danderman]

He says they are doing this work and you say they are not. Their press release is official and your skepticism is uncivil.

You have to take what they say as given, unless you can prove otherwise. Can you prove otherwise? Until you do, retract your comments and apologize.

The modifications required for Almaz VA to serve as an effective crew vehicle for ISS are extensive, and would cost in the high tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars. I do not believe that Excalibur has close to that amount of cash on hand to perform the necessary modifications. I have no evidence that any Russian firm other than NPO Mash is working on the project, although NPO Mash is a systems integrator.

I do not deny that Excalibur Almaz can perform some design work in Houston sufficient to meet the NASA deliverables, and that such design work would be consistent with Mr. Dula's statements.

Having said that, it is true that developments in the Soyuz and Kobalt-M spacecraft do lend themselves for Almaz-VA modernization, such as the latest iteration of the Neptune control panel. I just don't see any evidence that those modifications are being adapted for Almaz-VA.

[QuantumG]

I have no evidence that any Russian firm other than NPO Mash is working on the project, although NPO Mash is a systems integrator.
[..]
I just don't see any evidence that those modifications are being adapted for Almaz-VA.

What's wrong with you?  They don't owe you any evidence.  The burden is on you to identify any statements they have made that you can prove are false and present your evidence to us.

I'm waiting for that apology.

[Lars_J]

Geez, calm down, QuantumG.

Welcome to the internet. People do disagree. People don't take PR statements as facts. Some skepticism is warranted.

Are you personally involved with EA?

[QuantumG]

Geez, calm down, QuantumG.

Welcome to the internet. People do disagree. People don't take PR statements as facts. Some skepticism is warranted.

Are you personally involved with EA?

No. He's calling them liars.. and they're not around to defend themselves. It's offensive.

[Danderman]

I don't see anything that Excalibur Almaz has announced that is not true. The issue is the level of work that is being performed. My impression is that there some design work being done in an office in Houston, as opposed to manufacture of newly designed subassemblies or critical design review of the entire system.

At the current level of work being done, flight of a capsule is many years away, as far as I can tell.

If there were a major infusion of investor cash, things would change.

Of all the Commercial Crew providers, I can't think of one except for Excalibur Almaz that doesn't have some sort of integration facility, but I am unaware of EA having such a facility. Of course, the Reutov plant could be considered their facility, but I don't think it is.

[QuantumG]

I don't see anything that Excalibur Almaz has announced that is not true. The issue is the level of work that is being performed.

Is this your attempt at an apology? You said you didn't believe their announcement.. you said you hadn't seen any evidence that what they were saying was true. Now you're backpedaling. Did I get through to you?

You pulled the exact same routine on the SpaceX threads..

[Jason1701]

I don't see anything that Excalibur Almaz has announced that is not true. The issue is the level of work that is being performed.

Is this your attempt at an apology? You said you didn't believe their announcement.. you said you hadn't seen any evidence that what they were saying was true. Now you're backpedaling. Did I get through to you?

You pulled the exact same routine on the SpaceX threads..

I don't see how Quantum can be so sure that they're steadily progressing toward a near-term capability. In lieu of proof (not just vague announcements) of their concrete plans and funding, I think it's logical to be somewhat skeptical that EA can deliver - like NASA probably is, which is why their SAA is unfunded. Anyone can make announcements (see Interorbital).

[QuantumG]

I don't see how Quantum can be so sure that they're steadily progressing toward a near-term capability. In lieu of proof (not just vague announcements) of their concrete plans and funding, I think it's logical to be somewhat skeptical that EA can deliver - like NASA probably is, which is why their SAA is unfunded. Anyone can make announcements (see Interorbital).

Be as skeptical as you like.. I encourage it. Just don't go calling people liars without proof. Interorbital is a great example. All you need to do is go find any of the dozen times they've said they were going to do X by Y date and they didn't. EA isn't doing that, they're kindly telling us what they've been up to the last 7 years and what they hope to do in the future with their current funding and as they get more funding. They're showing us the real hardware they have, even putting it on public display, and telling us the contractors and partners that they're working with.

[daveklingler]

I don't see anything that Excalibur Almaz has announced that is not true.

How would you know?

The issue is the level of work that is being performed. My impression is that there some design work being done in an office in Houston, as opposed to manufacture of newly designed subassemblies or critical design review of the entire system.

Art Dula has a law office in Houston.  Aldrin goes to Houston sometimes.  EA is on Isle of Man.  Other work is done by ULA, Paragon, Astrium, EADS, the various Russian and Ukrainian companies...what's being done in Houston?

At the current level of work being done, flight of a capsule is many years away, as far as I can tell.

Again, how would you know?

If there were a major infusion of investor cash, things would change.

Not to be too rude, but how would you know that either?  How do you know the current company finances?  How do you know how much money Art Dula made selling Protons, or what he did with the money?

Of all the Commercial Crew providers, I can't think of one except for Excalibur Almaz that doesn't have some sort of integration facility, but I am unaware of EA having such a facility. Of course, the Reutov plant could be considered their facility, but I don't think it is.

I would think they'd have to finalize a launch provider before they build or rent a facility, and they can just rent if they stay with Russian services.  But regardless, I believe that you and several other people on this forum have made some pretty rude statements based on precious little knowledge, and it would have been better for the thread had you just admitted that a while back.

Now, to get back to discussing the fact that EA has made a very cool announcement about the two 90-cubic-foot space stations they own and what they plan to do with them, I've been trying to figure out whether the passenger module they showed is the top half of an ATV.  And that's a topic ripe for speculation. 

They definitely have a few billion dollars worth of assets, if they can do a demo launch.  About eight years ago Dula told me he was putting together a company to use the Almaz assets, and I didn't really take it seriously.  Old Russian space hardware?  That wasn't exciting!  But old Russian space hardware has been doing a nice job of holding up the American and Russian space programs these many years, and I have to admit that if I had a chance to buy two 90-cubic-meter spacecraft I'd jump on it.  Parking a modernized Almaz out at EML2 is even cheaper and faster than the Boeing/Hatfield cheap exploration gateway. 

So I'm now enthused.

[daveklingler]

I don't see anything that Excalibur Almaz has announced that is not true. The issue is the level of work that is being performed.

Is this your attempt at an apology? You said you didn't believe their announcement.. you said you hadn't seen any evidence that what they were saying was true. Now you're backpedaling. Did I get through to you?

You pulled the exact same routine on the SpaceX threads..

I don't see how Quantum can be so sure that they're steadily progressing toward a near-term capability. In lieu of proof (not just vague announcements) of their concrete plans and funding, I think it's logical to be somewhat skeptical that EA can deliver - like NASA probably is, which is why their SAA is unfunded. Anyone can make announcements (see Interorbital).

You should probably do a little bit of research on EA and Art Dula.  Then go and watch the NSS video, because it wasn't all that vague.  EA didn't seriously think they were going to be competitive for CCDev and they didn't see ISS deliveries as part of their business plan, but they took the opportunity to use the unfunded SAA to beat their assets into meeting NASA requirements.  That's what's known as a smart business decision, and I would like to think I would have done the same thing.  Unfunded SAAs are very valuable because they still entitle a company to a lot of NASA personnel time.

[Danderman]

EA didn't seriously think they were going to be competitive for CCDev and they didn't see ISS deliveries as part of their business plan, but they took the opportunity to use the unfunded SAA to beat their assets into meeting NASA requirements.  That's what's known as a smart business decision

Why was that a smart business decision? I am not saying it wasn't a smart business decision, I am just asking what the benefits to EA were.

[Danderman]

This is what the EA web site says about their current work:

Design definition work is in progress on the RRV capsule and its service module. Critical path items such as the emergency escape motor, retro rocket, pyrotechnic and parachute systems have already been re-issued. Analytical models have been prepared for structural analysis, thermal analysis and assessment of the spacecraft with multiple launch vehicles. The development, processing and integration plans have also been developed for the Excalibur Almaz’s RRVs.

There is nothing wrong or misleading about the above statement.

However, this is far from production of subassemblies or actual work by Russian/Ukrainian firms on modernization of Almaz-VA components.

[Danderman]

They definitely have a few billion dollars worth of assets, if they can do a demo launch. 

Is that the same as saying that they need a few billion dollars in assets to do a demo launch?

Seriously, there is nothing wrong about being enthused about this company.

[QuantumG]

There is nothing wrong or misleading about the above statement.

However, this is far from production of subassemblies or actual work by Russian/Ukrainian firms on modernization of Almaz-VA components.

Seriously, there is nothing wrong about being enthused about this company.

We're still waiting for you to tell us something we don't know.

[Danderman]

Excalibur Almaz is awesome! ©

[JBF]

Any news from the Space Tourism conference in London?

[daveklingler]

Excalibur Almaz is awesome! ©

Sniff.  That's good, but words mean little.  You must DEMONSTRATE your love for Excalibur Almaz.  Only then will they truly know.

[daveklingler]

Any news from the Space Tourism conference in London?

There was a quick link on Hobbyspace, but I haven't seen anything detailed.

[Downix]

Any news from the Space Tourism conference in London?

Xcor and EA announcement:

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=nrhoezcab&v=001cijNGvIyoo6Dk2jJCnBV1oUaSnyAd8dX3WjqvwehTuduCzu2S9smocV8BVCEeeJMcgBUb7W1OiOsTG_yWMWg1EV-QZb2SCbe1AmRLUn-4xIs2465HraNFxN5ABJPwGC9Hox0W1y5J5-F50Uub2SCyg%3D%3D

[QuantumG]

It's an interesting example of how orbital "space tourism" doesn't compete with suborbital (although not the opposite).

[daveklingler]

EA didn't seriously think they were going to be competitive for CCDev and they didn't see ISS deliveries as part of their business plan, but they took the opportunity to use the unfunded SAA to beat their assets into meeting NASA requirements.  That's what's known as a smart business decision

Why was that a smart business decision? I am not saying it wasn't a smart business decision, I am just asking what the benefits to EA were.

Think of CCDev as a one-time offer of free consulting.  IIRC their SAA brought them through a Systems Requirements Review.

Now, I'm sure that some of what they did is old hat, considering that SpaceHab launched 19 missions, and assuming that there are any common personnel.  I would very much expect that there are some personnel in common between the two companies.

[Danderman]

Think of CCDev as a one-time offer of free consulting.  IIRC their SAA brought them through a Systems Requirements Review.

Completing an SRR is great, but its a long ways from bending metal on the long desired modifications to the capsule.

BTW, Excalibur Almaz is awesome! ©

[Danderman]

James Oberg Interview: How Feasible Is The £100m Ticket To The Moon?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/22/james-oberg-how-feasible-moon-excalibur-almaz_n_1618318.html

Recently HuffPost - and most of the world's media - reported that Excalibur Almaz (EA), a company based on the Isle of Man, will attempt to send tourists to the Moon for £100m a ticket.

And even though EA said they were not attempting to land, but rather using recycled Russian space stations to visit, orbit and return from the satellite, we admit we were sceptical.

But how feasible is the plan really? And can the Russian tech do what EA say it can?

To find out we asked James Oberg, who after a distinguished career is now recognised as one of the world's leading enthusiasts and promoters of space exploration.

[QuantumG]

[A_M_Swallow]

They need a kick stage to take the spacecraft from LEO to lunar orbit in under a week and a second to bring it back.  Six months travel time is too long.

[QuantumG]

They need a kick stage to take the spacecraft from LEO to lunar orbit in under a week and a second to bring it back.  Six months travel time is too long.

Their plans are to send capsules to lunar orbit (or Lagrangian orbit) space stations. The majority of the mission duration will be in the space station, not the capsule.

[Chris Bergin]

We really need to do something on this company. I'll work on that.

[qprmeteor]

BBC piece on Excalibur Almaz: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18853105