The CCiCAP Award (PRE- and Post-AWARD DISCUSSION) Thread

[FinalFrontier]

NBC's broken it ahead of the announcement:

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

SpaceX, Boeing = full award. SNC Dream Chaser - partial award.

 

I could not be happier! Ideal scenario!

Well done on the coverage Chris I have been busy all day was not able to follow it. Really happy right now.

[Robotbeat]

It may be half an award, but it's still over $200 million. That's a very, very sizable sum and a lot of progress can be made. After all, Dreamchaser is already taking shape and that was with a lot less money.

[robertross]

It may be half an award, but it's still over $200 million. That's a very, very sizable sum and a lot of progress can be made. After all, Dreamchaser is already taking shape and that was with a lot less money.

Oh no question, but I can easily see tens of millions going into the avionics design, and all those test flights & wind tunnel tests can add up fast!

[Lars_J]

So, the purpose of giving SNC half an award is to have a back up in case the other two fail... Correct?

I am not sure that's the right way of seing it. SNC has as much chances of winning a commercial crew services contract in 2014 (or later) as Boeing and SpaceX at this point. They will receive half of the funding but they should not be seen either as a backup or a junior partner.

Not really. Their only realistic chance for SNC after the current CCiCAP is if Boeing and/or SpaceX pull out or are significantly delayed. Because if both of them complete their milestones, they will be quite a bit ahead of Dreamchaser - and the pick for final commercial crew contract will be between Boeing and SpaceX. Or both, if NASA can keep two providers - but I see no scenario where three providers get contracts.

So in practice SNC's Dreamchaser is a risk-reduction backup, unless some significant advantage DC has over the capsules comes to light. That's the way it looks to me, at least. I suppose it also depends on how strong the "Shuttle-hugger" force is at NASA too.

[Go4TLI]

So, the purpose of giving SNC half an award is to have a back up in case the other two fail... Correct?

I am not sure that's the right way of seing it. SNC has as much chances of winning a commercial crew services contract in 2014 (or later) as Boeing and SpaceX at this point. They will receive half of the funding but they should not be seen either as a backup or a junior partner.

Not really. Their only realistic chance for SNC after the current CCiCAP is if Boeing and/or SpaceX pull out or are significantly delayed. Because if both of them complete their milestones, they will be quite a bit ahead of Dreamchaser - and the pick for final commercial crew contract will be between Boeing and SpaceX. (or both)

So in practice SNC's Dreamchaser is a risk-reduction backup, unless some significant advantage DC has over the capsules comes to light. That's the way it looks to me, at least. I suppose it also depends on how strong the "Shuttle-hugger" force is at NASA too.

Quite simply, no, to all of that. 

You, and no one really does, have any insight to the optional milestiones each has negotiated with NASA as they are all proprietary.

[Robotbeat]

It also is not impossible that DreamChaser finds uses outside of NASA commercial crew services.

[Chris Bergin]

Thanks Robert and FF. And yes, Mr Sirangelo noted commercial customers outside of NASA on a very open telecon this evening. Got a lot to write up.

[FinalFrontier]

It may be half an award, but it's still over $200 million. That's a very, very sizable sum and a lot of progress can be made. After all, Dreamchaser is already taking shape and that was with a lot less money.

Precisely. And it should be enough to finish it and get it flying.

[Lars_J]

Quite simply, no, to all of that.

 

You, and no one really does, have any insight to the optional milestiones each has negotiated with NASA as they are all proprietary.

Of course. But the public milestones are significant information. You can pretend if you want that SNC has optional milestones that will put them at parity with SpaceX or Boeing (assuming all complete their milestones on schedule) - but then *you* are the one making assumptions about information "no one really" has.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

When looking at the milestones of Boeing and SpaceX the following is apparent:

1) Boeing has a lot of software development milestones (SpaceX has an existing software and software labs to be upgraded which is why I think they did not include any milestones for software independent of the complete vehicle integration milestones)

2) Boeing has 3 milestones for Human rating the Atlas V where SpaceX has only 1 for the F9 (Boeing list hardware tests and reviews where SpaceX just lists a review)

[Rocket Science]

Nicely pulled together Chris on a busy news day… Been waiting a long time for this one… Those fingers are on fire!

[PeterAlt]

Have the "non-awarded entries" said what they're going to do?

[PeterAlt]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

The item that most interested me for Atlas V was the dual engine Centaur test. I looked up the flight history and Atlas V has never flown a dual engined Centaur. It seems to be something that LM/ULA skipped on spending because of low likelyhood of being used in the original Atlas V development.

[Go4TLI]

Quite simply, no, to all of that.

 

You, and no one really does, have any insight to the optional milestiones each has negotiated with NASA as they are all proprietary.

Of course. But the public milestones are significant information. You can pretend if you want that SNC has optional milestones that will put them at parity with SpaceX or Boeing (assuming all complete their milestones on schedule) - but then *you* are the one making assumptions about information "no one really" has.

I never implied any of that. Go back and look at your post. You are suggesting Boeing and SpaceX have it in the bag. The reasons you state are not valid and a lot can happen leading to multiple conclusions

[Rocket Science]

If it hasn’t been said yet… Give Gerst an attaboy…

[Go4TLI]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

No, SNC does not get a free ride out of this. There is integration, analysis, certification, interfaces, etc that are unique to each vehicle

[PeterAlt]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

No, SNC does not get a free ride out of this. There is integration, analysis, certification, interfaces, etc that are unique to each vehicle

Well, as Old Atlas said, at least the new Centaur configuration test would be beneficial, since both systems will require this same test. I'm sure there are other overlapping tests, certifications, etc. that will be of mutual benefit.

[Go4TLI]

So why would one expect Boeing to pay the full burden for another user?

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

So why would one expect Boeing to pay the full burden for another user?

If ULA won't do the development without full funding then Boeing has no choice. Remember LM has to agree on any speculative (ULA's own money) spending.