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

[HIP2BSQRE]

Elon's money

The $100M or so he actually invested in SpaceX?

There is nothing that stops Sierra from getting someone/some group to invest $100m.  Elon is making a bet that he can win a NASA contract and make a profit.  Even if SpaceX does not win a contract---SpaceX is a lot further along in their own plans to go space than without NASA money.  SpaceX has a business case so does Sierra and Boeing---please remember are doing this at the end of the day to make a profit or most business go out of business.  Sierra may/may not have less money than Elon, but that is not Elon's fault. If Sierra wants more money for their plan--then find more/raise money....I am trying to find your argument with SpaceX--but it seems to be Sierra cannot complete fairly since  Elon invested money in his own company and won a CRS contract, therefore Sierra should get more money.  We will have to see what NASA thought of technical risk and other factors and that may be why Sierra got less money. Even so, if you are competing against ATT, don't blame ATT because you have no money to compete.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

ULA [has] 0 experience in building [dual-engine Centaur] (although there may be some personnel who have possibly built such a stage over 10 years ago there will likely not be many). There will be many new parts (the old ones are not available anymore) and testing will have to be done with design iterations to get to a reliable design.

For clarification, is this speculation, or do you have sources for (or direct knowledge of) this? ULA has been offering DEC all along, and the funded Boeing milestones seem to imply there is current knowledge within ULA of what issues need to be worked.

Also, would someone please clarify where the DEC work would/will take place. Is Centaur production now entirely at Decatur? If a ground test were to be conducted, on what test stand would that occur?

As far as parts for Centaur, see Gen Shelton (Commander Space Command)statements to Congress. This is primarilly talking about the RL10 manufacture but it applies to all parts that have not been in production.

Unknown if ULA has shifted the Centaur tooling (circa 1960's) from San Diego. As far as I know the 1960's tank tooling has never been replaced with anything newer. The last time I saw this tooling in 1980's it was at San Diego and it was bolted into the concrete. I don't think they would have moved it unless there was a really good reason.

As far as knowing what needs to be reingineered it is fairly straight forward as a DEC Centaur has flown in the past but the venders for some of the parts no longer exist and ULA is either having to build them itself or find and qualify a new vender. Just think of the new DEC as similar in tasks that SpaceX is going through in order to put the M1D onto the F9. There are changes and changes require testing.

[PeterAlt]

I'm still wondering why Boeing (Old Space) is the overall winner.  To my eyes CST-100 is less capable than the other alternatives.  - Ed Kyle

I think NASA is getting the most for the money with the CST-100.
Besides manned capability NASA gets:
1)   CST-100 for cargo delivery
2)   Atlas V man rated.
3)   Duel engine centaur goes into production.
4)   Duel engine centaur gets man rated.
5)   The service module which is nearly a perfect fit for a Multi-Purpose Logistics Module.
6)   The service module can be adapted for Orion.
7)   The service module can be adapted for delivering new station modules.

When just cargo delivery aka COTS is included SpaceX received more then Boeing.

IMO people underestimate the potential of the service module on CST-100
The service module especially Number 6 above could save NASA a lot of money.

For its money, NASA gets all of these CST-100 related things that you mention, which means that the money is wasted unless NASA intends to award the final contract to Boeing.  The same is true of the money awarded SpaceX, unless Dragon wins, and so on.  There is only going to be one final winner.

 - Ed Kyle

I never thought about the SM potential... Jim, if you're listening out there, what do you think of its potential use for Orion? Better than the ESA proposal?

[PeterAlt]

"If Boeing and SpaceX meet all of their self-imposed, NASA-approved milestones in the 21-month CCiCap base period, their designs for astronaut taxi systems will undergo a critical design review, the final hurdle to clear before construction can begin. Sierra Nevada’s crew transportation system would not undergo a critical design review at the end of its Space Act Agreement".

I did not realize that Dreamchaser will not under go design review. In other words, if both SpaceX and Boeing succeed they will get the go ahead.

http://www.spacenews.com/civil/120803-boeing-spacex-sierra-ccicap.html

One of the reasons I would have preferred reversing the SpaceX & SN awards.

I'd like to see DC get to production too, but if the primary goal is to get US crew capabilities up ASAP SpaceX is probably the best bet. In congressional eyes, Boeing is probably the safest bet to deliver on plan.
SNC has put skin in the game and has worked for comm'l from the start, but they are not likely ready to deliver in 2015/2016 even with a full contract.
Just an opinion, but I think this was the best and most practical decision that could have been made. Should be an exciting time.

Is it possible all three may be in service one day?

[PeterAlt]

Elon's money

The $100M or so he actually invested in SpaceX?

There is nothing that stops Sierra from getting someone/some group to invest $100m.  Elon is making a bet that he can win a NASA contract and make a profit.  Even if SpaceX does not win a contract---SpaceX is a lot further along in their own plans to go space than without NASA money.  SpaceX has a business case so does Sierra and Boeing---please remember are doing this at the end of the day to make a profit or most business go out of business.  Sierra may/may not have less money than Elon, but that is not Elon's fault. If Sierra wants more money for their plan--then find more/raise money....I am trying to find your argument with SpaceX--but it seems to be Sierra cannot complete fairly since  Elon invested money in his own company and won a CRS contract, therefore Sierra should get more money.  We will have to see what NASA thought of technical risk and other factors and that may be why Sierra got less money. Even so, if you are competing against ATT, don't blame ATT because you have no money to compete.

SpaceX could buy SNC and incorporate DC into the product line...

EDIT: DC would have to be redesigned to launch on a F9.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

Elon's money

The $100M or so he actually invested in SpaceX?

There is nothing that stops Sierra from getting someone/some group to invest $100m.  Elon is making a bet that he can win a NASA contract and make a profit.  Even if SpaceX does not win a contract---SpaceX is a lot further along in their own plans to go space than without NASA money.  SpaceX has a business case so does Sierra and Boeing---please remember are doing this at the end of the day to make a profit or most business go out of business.  Sierra may/may not have less money than Elon, but that is not Elon's fault. If Sierra wants more money for their plan--then find more/raise money....I am trying to find your argument with SpaceX--but it seems to be Sierra cannot complete fairly since  Elon invested money in his own company and won a CRS contract, therefore Sierra should get more money.  We will have to see what NASA thought of technical risk and other factors and that may be why Sierra got less money. Even so, if you are competing against ATT, don't blame ATT because you have no money to compete.

SpaceX could buy SNC and incorporate DC into the product line...

EDIT: DC would have to be redesigned to launch on a F9.

DC would just need a long specialized adapter. The DC needs a short one for Atlas V between the Centaur and DC. The real challange is the wind tunnel tests and aerodynamic designs for the adapter.

[Ronsmytheiii]

As far as knowing what needs to be reingineered it is fairly straight forward as a DEC Centaur has flown in the past but the venders for some of the parts no longer exist and ULA is either having to build them itself or find and qualify a new vender.

Its not going to be that easy (although more so than F9 1.1) The last time dual DEC flew was more than a decade ago on an Atlas IIAS.  Centaur IIIA uses electro-mechanical TVC actuators,software has been modified for a new LV (Atlas V), not to mention personnel who have left and/or been shuffled around when Atlas fell to ULA.  There is a reason it is on Boeing's milestone payments and not something that is left for the contractor/subcontractor to handle.

[PeterAlt]

Man-rating the Atlas V.  Under CCDev-1 United Launch Alliance (ULA) received $6.7M for an Emergency Detection System (EDS), the funding was provided as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  The XCOR moving to Texas video mentioned Recovery Act money, so politicians will be checking to see what happened.  Fortunately for NASA ULA is putting the EDS into the Atlas V and at least one of the Boeing CCiCap milestones will verify that it is there.

The ECLSS from Paragon (or its technology) may be able to tell a similar good news story.

Press releases and an update to NASA's website would be useful places for this information.

Elaborate on the ECLSS from Paragon. I'm in the dark here.

[Prober]

ULA [has] 0 experience in building [dual-engine Centaur] (although there may be some personnel who have possibly built such a stage over 10 years ago there will likely not be many). There will be many new parts (the old ones are not available anymore) and testing will have to be done with design iterations to get to a reliable design.

For clarification, is this speculation, or do you have sources for (or direct knowledge of) this? ULA has been offering DEC all along, and the funded Boeing milestones seem to imply there is current knowledge within ULA of what issues need to be worked.

Also, would someone please clarify where the DEC work would/will take place. Is Centaur production now entirely at Decatur? If a ground test were to be conducted, on what test stand would that occur?

As far as parts for Centaur, see Gen Shelton (Commander Space Command)statements to Congress. This is primarilly talking about the RL10 manufacture but it applies to all parts that have not been in production.

Unknown if ULA has shifted the Centaur tooling (circa 1960's) from San Diego. As far as I know the 1960's tank tooling has never been replaced with anything newer. The last time I saw this tooling in 1980's it was at San Diego and it was bolted into the concrete. I don't think they would have moved it unless there was a really good reason.

As far as knowing what needs to be reingineered it is fairly straight forward as a DEC Centaur has flown in the past but the venders for some of the parts no longer exist and ULA is either having to build them itself or find and qualify a new vender. Just think of the new DEC as similar in tasks that SpaceX is going through in order to put the M1D onto the F9. There are changes and changes require testing.

Believe Centaur production is still located in San Diego.  Recall seeing it in the ULA presskits.

[Prober]

At some point, Bigelow will need to make sure it's docking adapters are compatible with the docking adapters on the ISS, or else the same spacecraft will not be able to visit both stations. It's not a NASA problem, but one that needs to be worked out between Bigelow and the spacecraft that plan on visiting his station that may fly sometime in the future.

He builds his to the NDS standard.  Simple as that.

Keep in mind he will need to bring in fuel, so it will need a fully built out adapter.

[PeterAlt]

Elon's money

The $100M or so he actually invested in SpaceX?

There is nothing that stops Sierra from getting someone/some group to invest $100m.  Elon is making a bet that he can win a NASA contract and make a profit.  Even if SpaceX does not win a contract---SpaceX is a lot further along in their own plans to go space than without NASA money.  SpaceX has a business case so does Sierra and Boeing---please remember are doing this at the end of the day to make a profit or most business go out of business.  Sierra may/may not have less money than Elon, but that is not Elon's fault. If Sierra wants more money for their plan--then find more/raise money....I am trying to find your argument with SpaceX--but it seems to be Sierra cannot complete fairly since  Elon invested money in his own company and won a CRS contract, therefore Sierra should get more money.  We will have to see what NASA thought of technical risk and other factors and that may be why Sierra got less money. Even so, if you are competing against ATT, don't blame ATT because you have no money to compete.

SpaceX could buy SNC and incorporate DC into the product line...

EDIT: DC would have to be redesigned to launch on a F9.

DC would just need a long specialized adapter. The DC needs a short one for Atlas V between the Centaur and DC. The real challange is the wind tunnel tests and aerodynamic designs for the adapter.

Elon, are you listening?

SpaceX can actually acquire SNC without cash, if they wanted to. They can acquire them simply by trading out each other's stock. This would result in Elon owning less shares in SpaceX and the SNC shareholders owning even less shares (of the merged company). Would it be worth it?

[Prober]

Personally, even though I am a SpaceX fan, I would have preferred to see the awards between SpaceX and Sierra Nevada reversed. SpaceX has the cargo delivery contract and that will be a huge money-maker for them. Couple that with over $200 million to complete the spacecraft transition from cargo to crew and SpaceX would have been just fine. The additional $200 million would have taken Dream Chaser all the way to the ISS.

Edit: grammer

So if Sierra had the CRS contract what would you want? I like the way things turned out--SpaceX earned it the CRS contract and has performed...what has stopped Sierra from being where SpaceX is now in the front seat???

This is why some talk about NASA & the Government picking winners and loosers.  Unless you have deep enough pockets of your own.

[sdsds]

Believe Centaur production is still located in San Diego.  Recall seeing it in the ULA presskits.

I think if you look at the press kits closely you will find it is only Centaur tanks that are built in San Diego; the stage is assembled (as others indicate) in Decatur.

Is it fair to assume engineering for the stage is now in Colorado?

[Prober]

ULA [has] 0 experience in building [dual-engine Centaur] (although there may be some personnel who have possibly built such a stage over 10 years ago there will likely not be many). There will be many new parts (the old ones are not available anymore) and testing will have to be done with design iterations to get to a reliable design.

For clarification, is this speculation, or do you have sources for (or direct knowledge of) this? ULA has been offering DEC all along, and the funded Boeing milestones seem to imply there is current knowledge within ULA of what issues need to be worked.

Also, would someone please clarify where the DEC work would/will take place. Is Centaur production now entirely at Decatur? If a ground test were to be conducted, on what test stand would that occur?

As far as parts for Centaur, see Gen Shelton (Commander Space Command)statements to Congress. This is primarilly talking about the RL10 manufacture but it applies to all parts that have not been in production.

Unknown if ULA has shifted the Centaur tooling (circa 1960's) from San Diego. As far as I know the 1960's tank tooling has never been replaced with anything newer. The last time I saw this tooling in 1980's it was at San Diego and it was bolted into the concrete. I don't think they would have moved it unless there was a really good reason.

Let me tell you about the dirty little secret no one in the press is talking about. 

Three nuke power plants went down in Calif. thats one issue.  Many in Calif. and prob washington DC don't want to have all the plants restarted.

Now the news......the US Navy base in San Diego is taking the power hit.

Its my belief the opening back up of the research station in FLA is just the start of some movement by the Navy of some assets to Fla.
 

[Prober]

Believe Centaur production is still located in San Diego.  Recall seeing it in the ULA presskits.

I think if you look at the press kits closely you will find it is only Centaur tanks that are built in San Diego; the stage is assembled (as others indicate) in Decatur.

Is it fair to assume engineering for the stage is now in Colorado?

Isn't some of the tank made in Japan for Centaur?  or is that some of the Delta tanks?

[clongton]

Elon's money

The $100M or so he actually invested in SpaceX?

There is nothing that stops Sierra from getting someone/some group to invest $100m.  Elon is making a bet that he can win a NASA contract and make a profit.  Even if SpaceX does not win a contract---SpaceX is a lot further along in their own plans to go space than without NASA money.  SpaceX has a business case so does Sierra and Boeing---please remember are doing this at the end of the day to make a profit or most business go out of business.  Sierra may/may not have less money than Elon, but that is not Elon's fault. If Sierra wants more money for their plan--then find more/raise money....I am trying to find your argument with SpaceX--but it seems to be Sierra cannot complete fairly since  Elon invested money in his own company and won a CRS contract, therefore Sierra should get more money.  We will have to see what NASA thought of technical risk and other factors and that may be why Sierra got less money. Even so, if you are competing against ATT, don't blame ATT because you have no money to compete.

WOW! You read a LOT more into a simple answer to a simple question than I would have thought possible. He asked what the difference was that stopped exchanging places. Simple answer is that Elon put more money in than SN did. No motive or blame was even thought of. Your response was, well, "interesting"

[HIP2BSQRE]

Personally, even though I am a SpaceX fan, I would have preferred to see the awards between SpaceX and Sierra Nevada reversed. SpaceX has the cargo delivery contract and that will be a huge money-maker for them. Couple that with over $200 million to complete the spacecraft transition from cargo to crew and SpaceX would have been just fine. The additional $200 million would have taken Dream Chaser all the way to the ISS.

Edit: grammer

So if Sierra had the CRS contract what would you want? I like the way things turned out--SpaceX earned it the CRS contract and has performed...what has stopped Sierra from being where SpaceX is now in the front seat???

This is why some talk about NASA & the Government picking winners and loosers.  Unless you have deep enough pockets of your own.

My issue is not with NASA.  I do have an issue with people saying Sierra should get more funding without giving a rational reasons why they should get more money.  Blaming spacex since it already has a contract -- is not a good reason.  if those reasons are so good and so great then go and get someone to invest in your idea.  What am I missing???    Even if NASA descide had $200 million more dollars--why would NASA give it to Sierra and not split it up between Boeing and Spacex? 

[PeterAlt]

ULA [has] 0 experience in building [dual-engine Centaur] (although there may be some personnel who have possibly built such a stage over 10 years ago there will likely not be many). There will be many new parts (the old ones are not available anymore) and testing will have to be done with design iterations to get to a reliable design.

For clarification, is this speculation, or do you have sources for (or direct knowledge of) this? ULA has been offering DEC all along, and the funded Boeing milestones seem to imply there is current knowledge within ULA of what issues need to be worked.

Also, would someone please clarify where the DEC work would/will take place. Is Centaur production now entirely at Decatur? If a ground test were to be conducted, on what test stand would that occur?

As far as parts for Centaur, see Gen Shelton (Commander Space Command)statements to Congress. This is primarilly talking about the RL10 manufacture but it applies to all parts that have not been in production.

Unknown if ULA has shifted the Centaur tooling (circa 1960's) from San Diego. As far as I know the 1960's tank tooling has never been replaced with anything newer. The last time I saw this tooling in 1980's it was at San Diego and it was bolted into the concrete. I don't think they would have moved it unless there was a really good reason.

Let me tell you about the dirty little secret no one in the press is talking about. 

Three nuke power plants went down in Calif. thats one issue.  Many in Calif. and prob washington DC don't want to have all the plants restarted.

Now the news......the US Navy base in San Diego is taking the power hit.

Its my belief the opening back up of the research station in FLA is just the start of some movement by the Navy of some assets to Fla.
 

That's good news for jobs in FL!!

[A_M_Swallow]

Man-rating the Atlas V.  Under CCDev-1 United Launch Alliance (ULA) received $6.7M for an Emergency Detection System (EDS), the funding was provided as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  The XCOR moving to Texas video mentioned Recovery Act money, so politicians will be checking to see what happened.  Fortunately for NASA ULA is putting the EDS into the Atlas V and at least one of the Boeing CCiCap milestones will verify that it is there.

The ECLSS from Paragon (or its technology) may be able to tell a similar good news story.

Press releases and an update to NASA's website would be useful places for this information.

Elaborate on the ECLSS from Paragon. I'm in the dark here.

Under CCDev-1 Paragon Space Development Corporation received $1.4 million, the money came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/feb/HQ_C10-004_Commercia_Crew_Dev.html

This was to develop a plug-and-play environmental control and life support system (ECLSS) Air Revitalization System (ARS) Engineering Development Unit.  They completed all their milestones.  Here is a short description of the equipment.
http://www.paragonsdc.com/paragon_projects_09.php

From the list of Paragon customers it may be a successful product or the spacecraft manufacturers may just have had a look at it and made their own.
http://www.paragonsdc.com/paragon_customers_09.php

[PeterAlt]

Man-rating the Atlas V.  Under CCDev-1 United Launch Alliance (ULA) received $6.7M for an Emergency Detection System (EDS), the funding was provided as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  The XCOR moving to Texas video mentioned Recovery Act money, so politicians will be checking to see what happened.  Fortunately for NASA ULA is putting the EDS into the Atlas V and at least one of the Boeing CCiCap milestones will verify that it is there.

The ECLSS from Paragon (or its technology) may be able to tell a similar good news story.

Press releases and an update to NASA's website would be useful places for this information.

Elaborate on the ECLSS from Paragon. I'm in the dark here.

Under CCDev-1 Paragon Space Development Corporation received $1.4 million, the money came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/feb/HQ_C10-004_Commercia_Crew_Dev.html

This was to develop a plug-and-play environmental control and life support system (ECLSS) Air Revitalization System (ARS) Engineering Development Unit.  They completed all their milestones.  Here is a short description of the equipment.
http://www.paragonsdc.com/paragon_projects_09.php

From the list of Paragon customers it may be a successful product or the spacecraft manufacturers may just have had a look at it and made their own.
http://www.paragonsdc.com/paragon_customers_09.php

So, will it be used on the three vehicles being funded?