Poll on CCiCAP Selection Announcement

[jongoff]

Someone suggested this on another thread, but this poll is who you think will be selected by NASA for full or partial CCiCAP awards, not who you think should be selected by NASA. If you want to vote for an option not listed, please provide a post explaining what you think will happen.

I'm curious to see what everyone thinks on this.

Edit: And please, post a comment explaining your vote. I'd like to hear people's logic on this one.

~Jon

[jongoff]

I'll go nearly first (someone beat me to the punch). I'm a pessimist here. I think the "SpaceX already has cargo missions" and "we need credible solid names to maintain funding" and "Liberty has synergies with SLS" type arguments will win out over that whole "who's recently flown a new capsule and launch vehicle" arguments.

If I were to pick who I hope wins, it would likely be: Full - Dragon, CST-100, Half - DC.

~Jon

[kirghizstan]

i'm going to be an optimist here.

Full - Dragon, CST, Half - DC

Only half for DC because they will allow them to decouple the ship from the rocket giving it to rockets to launch on.  I know not allowed but rules can be broken

[FinalFrontier]

Went Full DC, Dragon, Half CST.


Reasoning was that IF liberty were not selected, I believe that Boeing would be considered to have enough capital on their own to do most of the work as compared to the other two, add to that they are often viewed as "old space". So I don't think they would get full funding nor do they need it honestly.


But ofc that would only occur if Liberty were not getting anything, and it probably will.

[Norm Hartnett]

I am following kirghizstan's lead in the optimist field.

Full - Dragon, CST, Half - DC

I would rather see Full - Dragon, DC, Half - CTS or BO but I know that's not likely.

I think they pretty much have to give CTS a full as recognition of past performance and to bow to political pressure for "dependable" competitors. I can't see them not giving Dragon a full because anything else would be wide open to strident criticism.
If they give Liberty anything it would also leave them open to strident criticism for buckling under political pressure although I can't rule it out.
Which pretty much leaves DC with the partial.

[marsavian]

Full - Dragon, because of the obvious. Basic capsule and rocket already working. Also pleases NewSpace crowd which includes the President's advisers.

Full - Liberty, because Ares I clone pleases ASAP due to theoretical safety and synergies of both rocket and capsule to SLS/MPCV appeal to NASA. Also pleases Congressional supporters and OldSpace crowd.

Partial - Dream Chaser as it has the most commercial potential after development, i.e. Space Tourism.

Out of Luck - CST-100 loses out to an Orion derivative again but Boeing don't mind, they have SLS .

[savuporo]

Full - CST, Liberty; Half - DC

why ? cynicism, or realism

[Rocket Science]

Went with a less obvious combo…

Full - CST, DC; Half – Dragon

Two vehicles on a reliable Atlas V and Dragon I/2 ways developed as cargo vehicle on proven (so far Falcon 9)

Sorry ATK you’ve got SLS… (be ready for a fight)

[strangequark]

Full CST, Liberty. Half to DC.

SpaceX has cargo missions, and rumors has been floating around that they were ready to drop out entirely.

ATK has put together a case that NASA finds compelling. Ares I was "their" launch vehicle, the failure modes and LOC numbers look really good on paper (or electron), there is at least the appearance of flight heritage, and Promontory is dying.

Boeing has a detailed, conservative proposal, and NASA has a very comfortable relationship with them from Shuttle and SLS.

Sierra Nevada has shown some really nice progress, and having a full-up flight test article doesn't hurt them. However, they are young, and the design has a lot of novelties (hybrid propulsion, all composite lifting body, no-heritage RCS).

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

One of the primary evaluation criterias was business case and the operational costs (remember this includes the LV costs as well). In this Dragon is number one where DC and BO is next and CST-100 and ATK somewhere vying for last place. I believe ATK would actually be the last place guy in this list.

Then there is technical merit and safety. Here it is the technical safety margins not the historical flight record that is being evaluated for both LV and spacecraft. In safety margins F9 actually beats Atlas V but does not have a long history for which Atlas V's lower margins become acceptable due to its history. Liberty is at the bottom again here and has no history.

Then there is the spacecraft of which only Dragon has any sembelence of flight history put most of it's systems as flight proven but still not all, that makes Dragon the lowest risk for technical, schedule, cost and for safety. Boeing's solid engineering work of the past also puts then a leg up in this category while the remaining would be in order  SNC, ATK and BO. SNC is in its place because of all the successful risk reduction work they have accomplished on the DC. ATK is using the technical of LM's Orion work as well as their own work on the advance composite frame. BO is still an unknown for me to actually rate it as to where it stands relative to the others.

Edit OOPS Full Dragon DC, then Half CST-100

[Lars_J]

I expect/voted the following:

Full award: CST, Dragon
Half award: DC

I think the lack of ATK/Liberty will be the big shock (to many). Why?
 - The Liberty spacecraft is more recent than the others. They have a lot of catch-up to do, since their sub-contractor LM has to "rebuild" Orion around a new pressure vessel of a different material and shape.
 - And this leaves the Liberty LV without any customers, since none of the competitors want to use it.

[strangequark]

One of the primary evaluation criterias was business case and the operational costs (remember this includes the LV costs as well)...I believe ATK would actually be the last place guy in this list.

Then there is technical merit and safety...Liberty is at the bottom again here and has no history.

But...

Liberty is the safest, most reliable, most economical commercial space transportation service ever developed.

It says so right on the website.

[Norm Hartnett]

Hum, fully half of the 30 voters at this time expect ATK/Liberty to get something. That is scary.

[kirghizstan]

One of the primary evaluation criterias was business case and the operational costs (remember this includes the LV costs as well)...I believe ATK would actually be the last place guy in this list.

Then there is technical merit and safety...Liberty is at the bottom again here and has no history.

But...

Liberty is the safest, most reliable, most economical commercial space transportation service ever developed.

It says so right on the website.

i love how the picture on this site just shows the siting in a room.  makes it seem like they have yet to bend any metal yet even though the title on the page is "ATK Completes Final Milestone for Liberty under NASA's Commercial Crew Program"
http://www.libertyspace.us/news.html

[oiorionsbelt]

I voted other, tired of the way things are, so hoping for change.
I'd love to see, DC and Dragon full and Blue Origin 1/2

[edkyle99]

I don't know what to expect.  I think we'll all be surprised.

But I voted Liberty full, because it alone uses KSC and that's bigger than most realize.

NewSpace is going to win something, but I'm not expecting the something to be what everyone thinks it will be. 

When you look at which two companies, or consortiums, appear to have poured the most real effort and money into this, which two have made the most real progress, it seems clear that there are two standouts.

But I never guess right on these things.

 - Ed Kyle

[ugordan]

Full: CST, Liberty
Half: DC

Normally, I'd say full for CST and DC and a half for SpaceX, but the cynic in me says ATK pushes SpaceX out completely and DC to half and award.

Oh, and I also rarely guess right...

[peter-b]

I voted full CST, ATK, half DC, because cynicism.

[mmeijeri]

Normally, I'd say full for CST and DC and a half for SpaceX

Why only half for SpaceX?

[ugordan]

Normally, I'd say full for CST and DC and a half for SpaceX

Why only half for SpaceX?

Mainly because I think it'll be similar to CCDev 2 i.e. they think they can do a comparative amount of work as others for less money. Not that their proposal is inferior with respect to others.

[LegendCJS]

My vote was not for what I think will happen, but what I want to happen.  (Full Dragon, CST, half DC).

[Eer]

With absolutely no basis for my position:

Full:  CST-100, Liberty
Half:  Dragon

Dragon gets 1/2, both because SpX may want to limit Govt' claims on their IP and interference with their plans, but also have shown that NASA investment in time and direction pays off with them.  The half would provide joint funding of crew effort, with NASA imprimatur on the result.  Their cargo award would also be viewed as them already having a bite of the apple.

Boeing and ATK are 'safe' bets, politically, and both arguably are 'more used to' Govt funded development efforts.

If there are only 3 winners, DC loses as the "odd man out".

But - purely a guess from a long, long way away from the action.

[Orbiter]

Went with Full - DC, Liberty; Half - CST.

Orbiter

[A_M_Swallow]

I went with:

Full - CST100 + man-rate Atlas 5, Dragon + man-rate Falcon 9

Half - DreamChaser (as no launch vehicle)

[Silmfeanor]

Full - CST, Dragon; Half - Liberty

it pains me not to see DC in this list, but someone's gotta lose out. From the chatter around here, I guess ATK has to get something. Not getting SpaceX would upset newspace lobby / the great press SpaceX has getting, so it might be a political necessity.
Then, CST because it's no-nonsense from a big aerospace company. I'd love DC in its place, but I think the diffirence in experience and company connections might make the diffirence.

What I want:
Full - CST, Dragon, DC; half - liberty, blue origin.
1.5 award too much, but hey, I can dream...

[QuantumG]

I think Gerst will see the same logic the rest of us do: CST and DC are using the same launch vehicle, so they only need 1.5 funding. The Congress wants to close the gap as fast as possible, so that means SpaceX needs full funding.

Full CST, Dragon; Half - DC is the logical choice.

Liberty will be invited to continue unfunded.

[SimonFD]

I've gone with Full for Liberty and Dream Chaser plus half a SpaceX.
I think Liberty because ATK and Ares I just won't go away seemingly, Dream Chaser because I think a lot of peeps miss the space plane thing and half for SpaceX because of how much they've achieved so far tempered by NASA not wanting to be upstaged by a smartass 

Not very logical or well thought out I know but then I've been reading this site for a few years...............

[yg1968]

I think Gerst will see the same logic the rest of us do: CST and DC are using the same launch vehicle, so they only need 1.5 funding. The Congress wants to close the gap as fast as possible, so that means SpaceX needs full funding.

Full CST, Dragon; Half - DC is the logical choice.

Liberty will be invited to continue unfunded.

That's exactly how I voted. But I admit that I am assuming that logical choices will be made by NASA (and not political ones). That's a big assumption...

[bubbagret]

With no L2 access to base my assumptions on...

NASA want's the 5 seg...
Liberty has said little about their capsule... but..
CST seems to have a lot a familiar components, adaptability to different LV...
DC has the pretty (NASA Marketable) face...
Dragon seems to have a full head of steam.... sooooo...

DC & Dragon mostly full funding.
Liberty Partial funding
CST get's thrown some kind of small bone and BO maybe an unfunded SAA?

Wild speculation being what it is and all....

[mr. mark]

I think Chris spilled the beans when he said he hoped Dreamchaser gets funding. Of course, we all know he knows who's getting funding already so, he is throwing us a bone. So DC will get some kind of funding. The question has to be is SpaceX in or out, will it be the big two who get the majority of the funding ATK and Boeing? My guess is that SpaceX is already out but, will most likely play a role in BEO exploration some time in the future. Of course, I hope I'm wrong.     

[Downix]

I went with CST, Liberty with DC as partial.  This is why:

Boeing has a solid track record, to eliminate CST would be foolish.

ATK has made a solid case for Liberty, and won me over (which is saying something due to my history).

DC due to sharing a launch vehicle with Boeing, saving costs.

SpaceX will be offered an unfunded SAA to prevent loss of access but no longer will be quite as locked into NASA specs. This would  fit well with their model.

Excalibur Almaz will also be offered an unfunded SAA.

Work on Atlas V will happen under Boeing's contract.

[QuantumG]

I think Chris spilled the beans when he said he hoped Dreamchaser gets funding. Of course, we all know he knows who's getting funding already so, he is throwing us a bone. So DC will get some kind of funding.     

Did you go to the Fox Mulder school of deduction?

[mr. mark]

You can laugh but, I think that's exactly what Chris did. We shall see on Friday. I hope I'm wrong about SpaceX.

[FinalFrontier]

Hum, fully half of the 30 voters at this time expect ATK/Liberty to get something. That is scary.

Because they probably will.

[FinalFrontier]

You can laugh but, I think that's exactly what Chris did. We shall see on Friday. I hope I'm wrong about SpaceX.

That is not at all what he did and he himself would not know that yet either, and if he did he would not say so not even on L2 as its proprietary information at this time.

DC may not get anything it remains to be seen. Deducing that because someone said they hope does means it will is fallacy.

[QuantumG]

That is not at all what he did and he himself would not know that yet either, and if he did he would not say so not even on L2 as its proprietary information at this time.

DC may not get anything it remains to be seen. Deducing that because someone said they hope does means it will is fallacy.

That's what Chris wants you to believe! 

[FinalFrontier]

That is not at all what he did and he himself would not know that yet either, and if he did he would not say so not even on L2 as its proprietary information at this time.

DC may not get anything it remains to be seen. Deducing that because someone said they hope does means it will is fallacy.

That's what Chris wants you to believe! 

Excuse me while I get my tinfoil hat.

[neilh]

Would there be interest in doing another poll with exactly the same options on who the voter thinks SHOULD get the awards, or would that be overdoing it?

[spectre9]

Full funding

CST-100

KBH seems to like Boeing but that's as political as I want to get. Makes heavy use of simple, safe, legacy technology and represents private investments made by Bigelow.

Dragon

Makes use of new parts but has been tested on orbit. How, where and when SpaceX will launch the crew with their busy manifest is the unknown for me. Represents the biggest private investment by Musk. Has solar panels too which makes it much safer as a free flyer.

Partial funding

ATK/Astrium

Riskiest but getting a launcher at KSC is worth throwing some dough at. Liberty has already been spending money just making sure they had an integrated system going unfunded through the last round.

Found CCM as part of this video, doesn't seem that bad.



Missing out

Dreamchaser.

New flashy technology abound and I don't see the private investments being made. Also CO is already building a much more expensive spacecraft.

[mr. mark]

Better still if we only had one of these.

[anonymous1138]

With no L2 access to base my assumptions on...

NASA want's the 5 seg...
Liberty has said little about their capsule... but..
CST seems to have a lot a familiar components, adaptability to different LV...
DC has the pretty (NASA Marketable) face...
Dragon seems to have a full head of steam.... sooooo...

DC & Dragon mostly full funding.
Liberty Partial funding
CST get's thrown some kind of small bone and BO maybe an unfunded SAA?

Wild speculation being what it is and all....

Blue Origin is not in the running at this stage.

[SpacexULA]

Full funding for Dragon and CTS-100, because spacecraft need wings for reentry about as much as they need gills for splashdown.

ATK gets 1/2 funding, because they are ATK, and anything is better than a bird shaped spacecraft.

[SpacemanInSPACE]

I voted full CST, ATK, half DC, because cynicism.

right there with you,

- From a major SpaceX fan

[Galactic Penguin SST]

Full rewards:

CST-100 - well duh, a solid business and technology case, from one of the biggest aerospace companies. I don't see any reason not to issue a full funding.

Dreamchaser - I know that this is risky, but somehow I think the "divergency" factor will chime in, and recent progress on the DC shows that it has a strong case to make, not to mention the cost of running the DC is supposingly lower than the CST-100 (saw that somewhere else...).

Partial reward:

ATK Liberty - They have been trying very hard to squeeze in, and the use of KSC facilities may be a big factor. That said, their late start and development of a new launch vehicle makes me think that they will only got half of a pie.

Unfunded SAA:

SpaceX Dragon - They will continue to play a vital role, but that does not mean that it has to be a funded award. Given that SpaceX already got the CRS award and prefers to fund their own program if possible, may be they will got an unfunded award?

GPS

[Prober]

I went with CST, Liberty with DC as partial.  This is why:

close to my pick,
out of 87 users I was one of 3 that voted for: Full - DC, Liberty; Half - CST

[Lars_J]

SpaceX Dragon - They will continue to play a vital role, but that does not mean that it has to be a funded award. Given that SpaceX already got the CRS award and prefers to fund their own program if possible, may be they will got an unfunded award?

What gives you the idea that they "prefer to fund their own program"? This notion has no basis in fact. If that was the case, they would have bowed out of CCiCAP (and CCDEV-2) a long time ago. Instead they have been selling the idea of Crew Dragon to NASA (publicly and privately) for as long as the concept of a crewed Dragon has existed.

[neilh]

Would there be interest in doing another poll with exactly the same options on who the voter thinks SHOULD get the awards, or would that be overdoing it?

Any objections to creating such a poll? The more I think about it, the more curious I am about how the WOULD and SHOULD responses will differ.

[Lars_J]

Would there be interest in doing another poll with exactly the same options on who the voter thinks SHOULD get the awards, or would that be overdoing it?

Any objections to creating such a poll? The more I think about it, the more curious I am about how the WOULD and SHOULD responses will differ.

It is meaningless at this point. This poll has already been contaminated with with "should" or "hope" votes - so separating them out properly would require restarting this poll as well.

[Ronsmytheiii]

The two main choices seem clear, ATK and Boeing. The latter is the " safest" option that reassures Congress, and the former as hearing lots of praise for them in places ( of course not here ) between SpaceX and SNC for partial, picked SNC as they would expand commercial supply base ( ie crew and cargo) SpaceX can always come back and bid on commercial crew contract as have a flying spacecraft.

Trying to think like a NASA manager in the above.

[bubbagret]

With no L2 access to base my assumptions on...

NASA want's the 5 seg...
Liberty has said little about their capsule... but..
CST seems to have a lot a familiar components, adaptability to different LV...
DC has the pretty (NASA Marketable) face...
Dragon seems to have a full head of steam.... sooooo...

DC & Dragon mostly full funding.
Liberty Partial funding
CST get's thrown some kind of small bone and BO maybe an unfunded SAA?

Wild speculation being what it is and all....

Blue Origin is not in the running at this stage.

Hmmm... I wasn't aware of that. How and when were they disqualified?

[Lars_J]

Blue Origin is not in the running at this stage.

Hmmm... I wasn't aware of that. How and when were they disqualified?

They are not disqualified. The "not in the running" is probably meant as "very unlikely to win".

Of course, this is all based on public information from Blue origin - which there is little of.

[bubbagret]

Blue Origin is not in the running at this stage.

Hmmm... I wasn't aware of that. How and when were they disqualified?

They are not disqualified. The "not in the running" is probably meant as "very unlikely to win".

Of course, this is all based on public information from Blue origin - which there is little of.

That's what I thought.

[joek]

Short form (long form see this post):
1. Boeing (full)
2. SpaceX (full)
3. SNC (partial)

[jongoff]

Just some interesting notes so far.

About 1/6th think SpaceX won't get any award.
About 1/6th think SpaceX will only get a partial.
While about 2/3 think SpaceX will get a full.

About 1/8th think that Boeing won't get any award.
About 1/8th think that Boeing will only get a partial.
While about 3/4 think Boeing will get a full.

About 2/5ths think that ATK won't get any award.
About 1/5th think they'll only get a partial.
Which leaves about 2/5ths that think they'll get a full award.

About 1/4 think SNC won't get any award.
About 1/2 think SNC will only get a partial.
Which leaves about 1/4 think they'll get a full award.

Fun poll so far.

~Jon

[Proponent]

The deal about down-selecting to two and a half providers more or less coincided with the flight of Dragon C2/3, which muted commercial crew's loudest critics.  I suspect a deal was struck at that time essentially between Rep. Wolf and Sen. Hutchison on the one hand and the administration on the other.  The success of C2/3 makes it hard not to choose Dragon, and Wolf and Hutchison will back the craft produced by SLS's major players, namely Liberty and CST-100.  As for Dream Chaser, well, "Sierra who?"

That leaves the question of who gets just half an award.  I'm going to guess that's CST-100, with full awards to Dragon and Liberty.  My second guess would be Liberty getting the half award.

[Dappa]

I voted Full - CST, DC; Half - Dragon.

I think this is about creating options, not about who has the longest track record, not about who's currently ahead. So I thought: which provider could gain the most from this award?

Not Liberty, because funding a launch vehicle is not what NASA asked for. It may be part of an integrated capability, but the fact remains that two vehicles have to be developed here. As a result ATK gets only 'half' the amount of development done on their capsule, for the same amount of funding.

Dragon appears to be ahead of DC and CST because it has some flight experience, therefore it needs only half an award.

This leaves CST-100 and DC, they would get the full awards. As a result, NASA gets three systems that are equally ready to launch when CCiCap is over. There's no 'backup provider' lagging behind, leaving options open for the next round of CCP awards.

[anonymous1138]

The success of C2/3 makes it hard not to choose Dragon, and Wolf and Hutchison will back the craft produced by SLS's major players, namely Liberty and CST-100.  As for Dream Chaser, well, "Sierra who?"

Sierra Nevada Corporation was previously selected over ATK - and other more well-known companies - for funded work in CCDEV2, as well as in CCDEV1. Your perception of name recognition doesn't come into play.

[DaveH62]

The basic issue is getting crew to space as soon as possible, while managing risk. SpaceX appears to be in the lead, with a working and flight tested capsule. They have work to do on LAS and more, but they have orbital flight testing. SpaceX should get full funding.
NASA also has to convince congress it is managing risk by selecting a provider that has a long history of success in space flight, and complex flight systems. Boeing and ATK both would satisfy Congress in that regard, but Boeing is in front of ATK in development cycle and would likely be 12-18 months in front of any expedited ATK deliverable, so Boeing gets full funding.
For partial, a case for DC is compelling, since they only need to work on the crew ship, while Boeing man rates Atlas. NASA loses some platform diversity with DC, since you will have 3 systems and 2 rockets, however, NASA proves validity of EELV concept with DC, with two platforms on the same rocket. I think the choice between DC and ATK will come down to political cover and ATK will win. I would like DC on the ticket, but ATK is likely needed for various reasons. ATK will be pushing very hard, since this program can help spread their overhead out and make them more competitive for SLS.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

With 146 votes:
Vehicle getting some type of award is:
86% for CST
82% Dragon
71% DC
55% Liberty
BO is definitly out as far as what their chances are believed to be.

[Jim]

For partial, a case for DC is compelling, since they only need to work on the crew ship, while Boeing man rates Atlas.

That is not a given.  DC may have to provide funds for Atlas

[Proponent]

The success of C2/3 makes it hard not to choose Dragon, and Wolf and Hutchison will back the craft produced by SLS's major players, namely Liberty and CST-100.  As for Dream Chaser, well, "Sierra who?"

Sierra Nevada Corporation was previously selected over ATK - and other more well-known companies - for funded work in CCDEV2, as well as in CCDEV1. Your perception of name recognition doesn't come into play.

What I meant to suggest with "Sierra who?" was that SNC lacks obvious support among the relevant politicians.  Before Dragon C2/3, I hypothesize, politicos took less interest in CCDev, and NASA was able to make an award to DC over Liberty on technical grounds.  Since Dragon C2/3, however, the politicos have woken up, and their preferences have become more relevant.

I'm hoping to be wrong.

[Prober]

The success of C2/3 makes it hard not to choose Dragon, and Wolf and Hutchison will back the craft produced by SLS's major players, namely Liberty and CST-100.  As for Dream Chaser, well, "Sierra who?"

Sierra Nevada Corporation was previously selected over ATK - and other more well-known companies - for funded work in CCDEV2, as well as in CCDEV1. Your perception of name recognition doesn't come into play.

What I meant to suggest with "Sierra who?" was that SNC lacks obvious support among the relevant politicians.  Before Dragon C2/3, I hypothesize, politicos took less interest in CCDev, and NASA was able to make an award to DC over Liberty on technical grounds.  Since Dragon C2/3, however, the politicos have woken up, and their preferences have become more relevant.

I'm hoping to be wrong.

I'm hoping your wrong as well ......hoping the politicians couldn't get their hands into the process.

[yg1968]

For what it's worth, I think that Colorado (the home of SNC) is considered to be a key swing state for the upcoming Presidential election.

[Comga]

Just some interesting notes so far.

About 1/6th think SpaceX won't get any award.
About 1/6th think SpaceX will only get a partial.
While about 2/3 think SpaceX will get a full.

About 1/8th think that Boeing won't get any award.
About 1/8th think that Boeing will only get a partial.
While about 3/4 think Boeing will get a full.

About 2/5ths think that ATK won't get any award.
About 1/5th think they'll only get a partial.
Which leaves about 2/5ths that think they'll get a full award.

About 1/4 think SNC won't get any award.
About 1/2 think SNC will only get a partial.
Which leaves about 1/4 think they'll get a full award.

Fun poll so far.

~Jon

Alternative way to look at it
Full Funding   
CST        75% (of the respondents feel that CST-100 will get full funding)
Dragon   59%
DC         27%
Liberty    23%
Partial Funding   
CST        12%
Dragon    23%
DC          46%
Liberty    19%
No Funding   
CST         12%
Dragon    16%
DC          27%
Liberty     45% (of the respondents think that Liberty wil get no funding)

This ignores (other)
Tomorrow we see about "the wisdom of crowds".

[savuporo]

......hoping the politicians couldn't get their hands into the process.

That would be novel.

[Comga]

I think Gerst will see the same logic the rest of us do: CST and DC are using the same launch vehicle, so they only need 1.5 funding. The Congress wants to close the gap as fast as possible, so that means SpaceX needs full funding.

Full CST, Dragon; Half - DC is the logical choice.

Liberty will be invited to continue unfunded.

That's exactly how I voted. But I admit that I am assuming that logical choices will be made by NASA (and not political ones). That's a big assumption...

How about that?  I agree with BOTH QuantumG and YG1968!

However, I see the abhorent logic in the CST-DC-Liberty choice.  I don't fully understand the government purchase rights aspect.

[mr. mark]

We will know in less than 24 hours. Some of us here have been waiting for this down select for some time now....

[Robotbeat]

Hopefully the N.I.H. Syndrome doesn't kill the solution that's by far furthest along. If this poll is anything to go by (it isn't, not by a long shot), that shouldn't be a problem.

[Robert Thompson]

Liberty gets full via invisible hand and PR blitz.

[Robotbeat]

Liberty gets full via invisible hand and PR blitz.

"Invisible hand"? Adam Smith is crying.

[greengoreironcore]

is excalibur-almaz in the running for an award in this round?

[Jim]

is excalibur-almaz in the running for an award in this round?

no

[Lars_J]

is excalibur-almaz in the running for an award in this round?

Technically perhaps, but their recent announcement that they were concentrating on lunar flights seems to imply that they either withdrew their proposal, or realize that they have no chance. Just my interpretation.

(I'm still baffled that they were part of CCDEV-2, although unfounded, since it is a UK based group with only old soviet hardware)

[jongoff]

Interesting note, but Alan Boyle of NBC is reporting on twitter that:

"SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada selected to receive money from NASA for future spaceships, NBC reports."

I'm personally not going to trust anything until I hear it tomorrow morning, but if true, that would definitely point to me having been too cynical.

~Jon

[FinalFrontier]

Interesting note, but Alan Boyle of NBC is reporting on twitter that:

"SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada selected to receive money from NASA for future spaceships, NBC reports."

I'm personally not going to trust anything until I hear it tomorrow morning, but if true, that would definitely point to me having been too cynical.

~Jon

Wait wait wait they said what?

Where did you see that they cannot possibly know that yet unless they are reading it on our site or L2 and thinking its fact. First of all.

Second of all its not true because we don't even know what the selection was on L2 yet. Its not being released to ANYONE until tomorrow not even people at NASA know.

Would like to see that link.

[Thorny]

Wall Street Journal reporting it is Boeing and SpaceX. I don't subscribe and therefore can't read the entire article to see who got the 1/2 award.

[marsavian]

https://twitter.com/b0yle/status/231162713106182145
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443545504577565532898170476.html


Chicago-based Boeing and closely-held Space Exploration Technologies, based in Hawthorne, Calif., appear poised to split most of the money tentatively earmarked by NASA and lawmakers for such systems, the industry officials said. The total amount available is likely to be between $800 and $1 billion through the middle of 2014.

Closely-held Sierra Nevada Corp., a manufacturer of satellite components and other aerospace hardware that is based in Sparks, Nev., seems likely to emerge with a substantially smaller award, according to the officials. After lengthy battles with congressional leaders, NASA chief Charles Bolden agreed there would be two primary winners, plus a third choice that would receive less funding, they said.

[Rocket Science]

Interesting note, but Alan Boyle of NBC is reporting on twitter that:

"SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada selected to receive money from NASA for future spaceships, NBC reports."

I'm personally not going to trust anything until I hear it tomorrow morning, but if true, that would definitely point to me having been too cynical.

~Jon

Wait wait wait they said what?

Where did you see that they cannot possibly know that yet unless they are reading it on our site or L2 and thinking its fact. First of all.

Second of all its not true because we don't even know what the selection was on L2 yet. Its not being released to ANYONE until tomorrow not even people at NASA know.

Would like to see that link.

https://twitter.com/b0yle

[Comga]

3/4th of the responses expected Boeing to get full funding and were correct
3/5th of the responses expected SpaceX to get full funding and were correct
only 1/4th of the responses expected Liberty or DreamChaser to get full funding, which didn't happen.

Almost half of the responses ecpected DC to get partial funding, over twice any of the others, and that was the choice.

Almost half of the responses ecpected Liberty to get no funding, over twice any of the others, and that was the choice.

What a smart group we are!  (Or expect to be when the official announcement is made tomorrow.)

[QuantumG]

What a smart group we are!  (Or expect to be when the official announcement is made tomorrow.)

Premature chicken counter.

[neilh]

as mentioned previously, nothing's certain until tomorrow morning

[jongoff]

Interesting note, but Alan Boyle of NBC is reporting on twitter that:

"SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada selected to receive money from NASA for future spaceships, NBC reports."

I'm personally not going to trust anything until I hear it tomorrow morning, but if true, that would definitely point to me having been too cynical.

~Jon

Wait wait wait they said what?

Where did you see that they cannot possibly know that yet unless they are reading it on our site or L2 and thinking its fact. First of all.

Second of all its not true because we don't even know what the selection was on L2 yet. Its not being released to ANYONE until tomorrow not even people at NASA know.

Would like to see that link.

https://twitter.com/b0yle

Yeah, if this was just coming from a random space blogger, I'd completely blow it off. Coming from Alan Boyle (the lead space writer for what was until recently MSNBC) carries more weight. I'm still not counting it as a sure thing until I see the press release tomorrow, but while things are supposed to not be leaked beforehand, and while some rumors even with credible reporters end up being false, it wouldn't be the first time a reporter found something out that wasn't supposed to be public knowledge yet (much to the chagrin of the government agency that was hoping not to have its thunder stolen).

~Jon

[Norm Hartnett]

Premature chicken counter.

From the WSJ article

Boeing Co. and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. on Friday are expected to win the bulk of as much as $1 billion in federal awards to spur development of next-generation manned spacecraft, according to industry officials.

Emphasis mine. Not a sure thing yet IMO.

Edit: Maybe they are getting their information from here :hehe:

[Robotbeat]

Maybe they just decided to base the result on whoever got a plurality of votes in this NSF poll?

J/K. Of course, we won't know until tomorrow. But anonymous leaks do happen, so it's not impossible that this report is right. But the purported result would make the most sense, really, and would fit in pretty well with what NASA has released so far for CCDev2 (preferring both SpaceX and Boeing for being the closest to fielding a working system, with DC making significant progress as well).

Tomorrow, or it's just speculation. But if these reports are true, it'll be a great day for the future of US spaceflight.

[Rocket Science]

Well, I’m happy with it if it’s true and a safe choice… Stay tuned and get ready for some fireworks…

[Norm Hartnett]

From the WSJ article;

according to industry officials

the industry officials said

according to the officials

NASA, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX, as the Southern California company is called, declined to comment.

Hum, what is an industry official?

[FinalFrontier]

https://twitter.com/b0yle/status/231162713106182145
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443545504577565532898170476.html


Chicago-based Boeing and closely-held Space Exploration Technologies, based in Hawthorne, Calif., appear poised to split most of the money tentatively earmarked by NASA and lawmakers for such systems, the industry officials said. The total amount available is likely to be between $800 and $1 billion through the middle of 2014.

Closely-held Sierra Nevada Corp., a manufacturer of satellite components and other aerospace hardware that is based in Sparks, Nev., seems likely to emerge with a substantially smaller award, according to the officials. After lengthy battles with congressional leaders, NASA chief Charles Bolden agreed there would be two primary winners, plus a third choice that would receive less funding, they said.

Still just speculation, but at least these had the grace to say "appear to have" or "are likely to"

As for Alan Boyle I think that's premature.

[QuantumG]

Hum, what is an industry official?

It's sloppy journalist talk for "the guy I heard it from".

[FinalFrontier]

From the WSJ article;

according to industry officials

the industry officials said

according to the officials

NASA, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX, as the Southern California company is called, declined to comment.

Hum, what is an industry official?

Probably someone claiming to know something who in actuality knows nothing. Anyone of us on this site could probably claim that and have our comments taken at face value.

This is why I no longer pay attention to the mainstream media because they don't bother to check anything.

[yg1968]

Interesting note, but Alan Boyle of NBC is reporting on twitter that:

"SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada selected to receive money from NASA for future spaceships, NBC reports."

I'm personally not going to trust anything until I hear it tomorrow morning, but if true, that would definitely point to me having been too cynical.

~Jon

The fact that they are reporting this as a fact makes it seem like he knows for sure.

I have been way too cynical myself. The rumors of ATK being the leading candidate threw me off. I should have known better. It should have known that a common sense guy like Gerst would make some common sense picks. 

[marsavian]

http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/02/13091777-boeing-spacex-and-sierra-nevada-to-win-nasa-backing-for-spaceships

Teams headed by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp. will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA over the next 21 months for further development of spaceships capable of transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station, knowledgeable sources told NBC News today.

NASA is to make the official announcement of the winning commercial teams on Friday morning — but NBC News' Cape Canaveral correspondent, Jay Barbree, received word from two sources who were informed of the decision in advance, on condition of anonymity. The sources did not discuss how much money any of the companies would be receiving.

[savuporo]

http://xkcd.com/978/

[majormajor42]

Saw Boyle on the Twitter feed a few moments ago. Wow. I was less optimistic in the poll.

Would be nice to have a clear picture of the winners tonight. I'm on a night watch and will be asleep tomorrow during the official announcement.

Good for ULA/Atlas too. Looking forward to seeing how they will add crew capability to their pad (or use 39?).

So it was Jay who got the scoop? I wonder what his commentary will be regarding Liberty now.

[marsavian]

http://xkcd.com/978/

Indeed, for all we know the sources could be NSF . Still think ATK will at least get a partial.

[robertross]

http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/02/13091777-boeing-spacex-and-sierra-nevada-to-win-nasa-backing-for-spaceships

Teams headed by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp. will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA over the next 21 months for further development of spaceships capable of transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station, knowledgeable sources told NBC News today.

NASA is to make the official announcement of the winning commercial teams on Friday morning — but NBC News' Cape Canaveral correspondent, Jay Barbree, received word from two sources who were informed of the decision in advance, on condition of anonymity. The sources did not discuss how much money any of the companies would be receiving.

I'll still wait for the official announcement.

My picks were: Boeing CST-100 & DC fully funded, with ATK partially funded (due to the politics of it all).

Not that I have anything wrong with SpaceX. I just feel they can do it on their own (and will, regardless). Boeing to me being the most mature company, and DreamChaser being a great secondary 'objective'. But if SpaceX gets the nod, I congratulate them and hope they can expedite this NEED for the ISS.

[Chris Bergin]

Let's use this thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29583.0 - for the reaction to the NBC article.

[beancounter]

http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/02/13091777-boeing-spacex-and-sierra-nevada-to-win-nasa-backing-for-spaceships

Teams headed by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp. will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA over the next 21 months for further development of spaceships capable of transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station, knowledgeable sources told NBC News today.

NASA is to make the official announcement of the winning commercial teams on Friday morning — but NBC News' Cape Canaveral correspondent, Jay Barbree, received word from two sources who were informed of the decision in advance, on condition of anonymity. The sources did not discuss how much money any of the companies would be receiving.

I'll still wait for the official announcement.

My picks were: Boeing CST-100 & DC fully funded, with ATK partially funded (due to the politics of it all).

Not that I have anything wrong with SpaceX. I just feel they can do it on their own (and will, regardless). Boeing to me being the most mature company, and DreamChaser being a great secondary 'objective'. But if SpaceX gets the nod, I congratulate them and hope they can expedite this NEED for the ISS.

No sure I understand your reasoning.  The fact that SpaceX can do it on their own is not a reason for not fully funding them if they are equally or more capable that another contender.  Funding on the basis of capability and capacity should be the requirement, not simply capacity to go it alone.  If that's the case, the Boeing should also not be funded since they have demonstrably greater capacity than SpaceX to continue alone.

[robertross]

http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/02/13091777-boeing-spacex-and-sierra-nevada-to-win-nasa-backing-for-spaceships

Teams headed by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp. will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA over the next 21 months for further development of spaceships capable of transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station, knowledgeable sources told NBC News today.

NASA is to make the official announcement of the winning commercial teams on Friday morning — but NBC News' Cape Canaveral correspondent, Jay Barbree, received word from two sources who were informed of the decision in advance, on condition of anonymity. The sources did not discuss how much money any of the companies would be receiving.

I'll still wait for the official announcement.

My picks were: Boeing CST-100 & DC fully funded, with ATK partially funded (due to the politics of it all).

Not that I have anything wrong with SpaceX. I just feel they can do it on their own (and will, regardless). Boeing to me being the most mature company, and DreamChaser being a great secondary 'objective'. But if SpaceX gets the nod, I congratulate them and hope they can expedite this NEED for the ISS.

No sure I understand your reasoning.  The fact that SpaceX can do it on their own is not a reason for not fully funding them if they are equally or more capable that another contender.  Funding on the basis of capability and capacity should be the requirement, not simply capacity to go it alone.  If that's the case, the Boeing should also not be funded since they have demonstrably greater capacity than SpaceX to continue alone.

Boeing has a shareholder base that wants to see a ROI. You need a market for a service, for which only NASA can currently provide. Now they do have a unique capability of landing on solid ground compared to a landing strip or water, but they offer a level of maturity that NASA will be willing to pay for, and they recognize Boeing's position in all this.

SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

SNC definitely needs the funding, so a full award is in their (and NASA's) best interest for a unique capability.

[A_M_Swallow]

{snip}SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

If SpaceX went allow they would need the ability to dock with their Mars transfer vehicle, the ability to dock with the ISS is a luxury.  So SpaceX could simply buy one of the Russian docking systems and get on with going to Mars.  This would not help NASA.

[Jim]

{snip}SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

If SpaceX went allow they would need the ability to dock with their Mars transfer vehicle, the ability to dock with the ISS is a luxury.  So SpaceX could simply buy one of the Russian docking systems and get on with going to Mars.  This would not help NASA.

Huh?  Spacex is not going to Mars within the next ten years, so your point is meaningless. 

[manboy]

{snip}SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

If SpaceX went allow they would need the ability to dock with their Mars transfer vehicle, the ability to dock with the ISS is a luxury.  So SpaceX could simply buy one of the Russian docking systems and get on with going to Mars.  This would not help NASA.

What Mars transfer vehicle? And why would they want to use a ITAR controlled docking mechanism?

[A_M_Swallow]

{snip}SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

If SpaceX went allow they would need the ability to dock with their Mars transfer vehicle, the ability to dock with the ISS is a luxury.  So SpaceX could simply buy one of the Russian docking systems and get on with going to Mars.  This would not help NASA.

What Mars transfer vehicle? And why would they want to use a ITAR controlled docking mechanism?

A Dragon by itself would be very cramped all the way to Mars so SpaceX is very likely to produce some sort of transport vehicle.
As for the docking mechanism - if NASA is not paying then spending money building something to NASA specification when they can buy off the shelf could be a waste.

Mars is OT for CCiCap selection announcement.

[Lars_J]

{snip}SpaceX has repeatedly said they will go it alone to Mars (which requires a manned vehicle), so to me they don't need a fully funded case. A partial award would no doubt be great.

If SpaceX went allow they would need the ability to dock with their Mars transfer vehicle, the ability to dock with the ISS is a luxury.  So SpaceX could simply buy one of the Russian docking systems and get on with going to Mars.  This would not help NASA.

What Mars transfer vehicle? And why would they want to use a ITAR controlled docking mechanism?

A Dragon by itself would be very cramped all the way to Mars so SpaceX is very likely to produce some sort of transport vehicle.
As for the docking mechanism - if NASA is not paying then spending money building something to NASA specification when they can buy off the shelf could be a waste.

Mars is OT for CCiCap selection announcement.

Huh? Dragon will share the same docking system as Orion, and could in theory be adapted to serve in the same 'tag along command module' role as Orion would with a transit habitat. SpaceX is not rolling their own docking system in any near future. Why would they?

I agree on it being OT, though.

[Silmfeanor]

Best decision imho. I am glad I voted wrong - had SpaceX and Boeing going for full, but I thought ATK would get the half award over Dream Chaser.
This makes me happy. I hope we see manned flights from all 3 in 2 years!

RP-1 launchers - hurrah!

[jongoff]

Looks like the wisdom of crowds beat out cynicism on this one! Thanks guys for participating in this poll!  Chris, how do we lock this thing, now that the announcement has been made?

[Chris Bergin]

Locked it

[Robotbeat]

Yeah, 33% put down the correct answer... Though when I first checked it was more like 30%, so some may have voted after the leak...

It was the result most consistent with CCDev2 and the progress each company has made since then.

[jongoff]

Hmm...apparently the thread got unlocked again.

But I agree with you Robotbeat--this was the result that made the most sense based on where the various parties were at this point in time, and the potential of their systems. Had ATK put on this strong of a show back for the CCDev-2 selection though, I think they would've got something, but it's kind of hard to catch up with the lead that Boeing, SpaceX, and SNC had by this point.

I do have to admit that I'm pleasantly surprised when I find that I've been way too cynical. :-)

~Jon

[Silmfeanor]

Hmm...apparently the thread got unlocked again.

I think only the poll was closed 

[Downix]

I don't feel the final selection is the most flexible, but I can understand NASA's logic.

Plus, hey, my favorite choice won the half award! Love that baby Shuttle!

[Robert Thompson]

I'm pleasantly surprised when I find that I've been way too cynical. :-)

I like to think that ATK can yet shine with a Liberty Cargo, no LAS. No 7.pi cheers to get a man home, but one cheer to get a bf element to LEO. Not sure how that would impact SLS.

[Lars_J]

I'm pleasantly surprised when I find that I've been way too cynical. :-)

I like to think that ATK can yet shine with a Liberty Cargo, no LAS. No 7.pi cheers to get a man home, but one cheer to get a bf element to LEO. Not sure how that would impact SLS.

I'd love to see them try... But I think 'Liberty' is dead now. At least in its current form. I don't expect ATK to proceed any further, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.