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

[MikeAtkinson]

That depends on how much NASA program overhead/costs are.

[joek]

That depends on how much NASA program overhead/costs are.

Upper bound appears to be ~17% based on the COTS "risk reduction" supplemental funding (COTS "Suppl" in the table above)--which was a late-to-the-party effort.  However, it's unclear how much of the $300M budgeted vs. $236M awarded was actually spent on NASA overhead, so it may be significantly less.  IIRC figures of 7-8% for similar programs have been mentioned in the past vs. 15-20% for "traditional" (sorry, can't find a reference ai the moment).

edit: p.s. Note that COTS-1, CCDev-1 and CCDev-2 apparently had a relatively low overhead based on awarded vs. budgeted amounts.  As CCP moves from development-SAA to certification/acquisition-FAR, overhead will undoubtedly increase (both for NASA and the contractors).  However, that still appears to be nominal (?), and in any case it all has to nominally fit within NASA's budget line for the program.  Going by the budget (not awards), the costs still appear to be reasonable.

[peter-b]

Seems to me that "cheap at twice the price" describes CCDev pretty well, so far.

[john smith 19]

While I agree COTS, CCDev, CCiCap, et. al. seem to be a pretty good deal (time will tell), not sure where the "South of $4Bn" comes from (seems a much less than that)? ...

Thanks for this very nice table that sets NASA spend in perspective.

I had not researched the numbers and since I had a figure for this year of roughly $1Bn I mentally reckoned it would be less than 4 yrs worth at that level. I may have also factored in the outside investment that Spacex has had. Post in haste, repent at leisure.

As your figures show the whole of the Commercial Cargo & Crew effort is indeed South of $4Bn (IE downward) but my surprise was how *much* below ($2.2Bn) it is.

For less than $2.2Bn NASA have bought 2 cargo LV/capsules and and a further 3 vehicles targeting crew transport (with some cargo probable) and the extension of Dragon to crew.

This could give 3 vehicles *certified* to carry a *whole* ISS crew (weather or not they are funded is another question) and 2 providing up mass which did not exist before.

Personally I hope NASA (or FAA, whichever is relevant) will certify the *designs* that meet all their crew rating requirements. Even if not funded for construction the certification would be a *huge* boost in raising outside funding

A *very* good deal for less than $2.2Bn.

PS
People have suggested that Commercial Crew & Commercial Cargo contracts be combined. I'd suggest people think about 2 things.

AFAIK there is *no* services contract to carry crew to ISS yet. Only cargo has been awarded to Spacex and OSC.

Only Spacex has bid (and won) on both *development* contracts.   

People *presume* a merger would eliminate OSC (and their launcher) because crew have priority, but what if it's the other way round? That would leave Spacex as the only design committed to *both* crew and cargo since day one.

I've never quite got the rationale for separate Crew & Cargo. Did NASA expect to save *that* much by cost savings of a presumably less reliable LV/vehicle combination? *Everything* that joins to the ISS has to be crew rated and capable of independent maneuvering, and saving money by stuff like going single string on the thrusters is *not* an option. The only way the cargo vehicle was going to be *really* low cost was a)Accept a higher LV/payload failure rate (that was Space Systems Loral plan) and/or b) have it lob the payload to within capture range of the ISS robot arms, so *eliminating* the RCS sub system entirely. Very cool but not a snowballs chance in hell of NASA agreeing to it.

[jabe]

not sure if it has been posted elsewhere...but parabolicarc has both spacex'sand Boeing's mlestone summaries
going to be a fun time to watch the developments
jb

[Prober]

not sure if it has been posted elsewhere...but parabolicarc has both spacex'sand Boeing's mlestone summaries
going to be a fun time to watch the developments
jb

better than those blocked out pages thx.   

top milesone for each just adds how ............ this program is.

CCiCap Kickoff Meeting. SpaceX will hold a kickoff meeting at the SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, CA, or a nearby facility to review the current state of existing hardware, processes and designs, describe plans for CCiCap program execution during both the base period and the optional period and lay the groundwork for a successful partnership between NASA and SpaceX.   August 2012   $60 Million

Integrated System Review. Boeing shall conduct an Integrated Systems Review (ISR) which establishes and demonstrates a baseline design of the Commercial Crew Transportation System (CCTS) integrated vehicle and operations that meets system requirements.   August 2012   $50 Million

Both companies need to hold meetings and they get a check.  Now im sure someone will come back and say I don't understand.  For SpaceX (what ever work done) is getting 2 millon dollars a DAY of the taxpayers money for Aug.
Boeing gets a little less.

Why couldn't both companies have gotten 10 million (still alot of cash) and given the rest toward real HW or the DC ( I know the rules).

[Swatch]

That would be called seed money.  It costs money to get things rolling.  That initial milestone provides that.  It's the same reason why venture capitalists exist.

I wouldn't be surprised if DreamChaser has a similar kick-off milestone.

The contracts will typically be front-loaded.  Look at the COTS contracts, 5 million for a flight, but lots of $$$ for powerpoint presentations.

[QuantumG]

top milesone for each just adds how ............ this program is.

Both companies need to hold meetings and they get a check.

If you had bothered to watch the press conference, you would have heard Ed Mango say the payments for each milestone do not reflect the work completed to the date of the milestone. The value of each milestone payment is judged by how much the company is going to need to complete long lead work on future milestones.

This is no better demonstrated than by the recent docking on the Dragon with the ISS, for which SpaceX received a measly $10M.

[joek]

I wouldn't be surprised if DreamChaser has a similar kick-off milestone.
The contracts will typically be front-loaded.  ...

Yes; even if not quite as large in absolute terms for SNC, similar in relative terms.  See also CCiCap SAA spend profile which is a graphic of the table below...

edit: txt/csv of data attached if anyone wants to play with it.

[joek]

better than those blocked out pages thx.   

top milesone for each just adds how ............ this program is.

Why couldn't both companies have gotten 10 million (still alot of cash) and given the rest toward real HW or the DC ( I know the rules).

Parabolic arc's post simply regurgitates available public information (and provides no insight into those "blocked out pages"), which can be obtained with a few minutes of cut-and-paste (as provided in previous posts).

Yet you seem surprised at "how ............ this program is"?  Why?  Anyone paying attention to CCDev/CCiCap over the last several months, or who is familiar with how these programs have progressed, should not be surprised.  In short, don't blame the program; if you haven't been paying attention.

[MP99]

not sure if it has been posted elsewhere...but parabolicarc has both spacex'sand Boeing's mlestone summaries
going to be a fun time to watch the developments
jb

better than those blocked out pages thx.   

top milesone for each just adds how ............ this program is.

CCiCap Kickoff Meeting. SpaceX will hold a kickoff meeting at the SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, CA, or a nearby facility to review the current state of existing hardware, processes and designs, describe plans for CCiCap program execution during both the base period and the optional period and lay the groundwork for a successful partnership between NASA and SpaceX.   August 2012   $60 Million

Integrated System Review. Boeing shall conduct an Integrated Systems Review (ISR) which establishes and demonstrates a baseline design of the Commercial Crew Transportation System (CCTS) integrated vehicle and operations that meets system requirements.   August 2012   $50 Million

Both companies need to hold meetings and they get a check.  Now im sure someone will come back and say I don't understand.  For SpaceX (what ever work done) is getting 2 millon dollars a DAY of the taxpayers money for Aug.
Boeing gets a little less.

Why couldn't both companies have gotten 10 million (still alot of cash) and given the rest toward real HW or the DC ( I know the rules).

This sounds like a "gating" process, which reviews something like the requirements capture or high-level design to confirm that input to next stage of the waterfall is fit for purpose. Budget for the next phase is not released unless the gating review is successful. (There may be caveats for minor deficiencies which will be fixed under the budget for the phase being reviewed - by analogy fixed at the CCiCap participants own cost).

NASA won't unlock the money to proceed with the program (make first milestone payment) until the companies have demonstrated their plans are on a solid footing. "review the current state of...", "describe plans for..." and "lay the groundwork for a successful partnership". "establishes and demonstrates a baseline design" and "meets system requirements".

cheers, Martin

[A_M_Swallow]

not sure if it has been posted elsewhere...but parabolicarc has both spacex'sand Boeing's mlestone summaries
going to be a fun time to watch the developments
jb

better than those blocked out pages thx.   

top milesone for each just adds how ............ this program is.

CCiCap Kickoff Meeting. SpaceX will hold a kickoff meeting at the SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, CA, or a nearby facility to review the current state of existing hardware, processes and designs, describe plans for CCiCap program execution during both the base period and the optional period and lay the groundwork for a successful partnership between NASA and SpaceX.   August 2012   $60 Million

Integrated System Review. Boeing shall conduct an Integrated Systems Review (ISR) which establishes and demonstrates a baseline design of the Commercial Crew Transportation System (CCTS) integrated vehicle and operations that meets system requirements.   August 2012   $50 Million

Both companies need to hold meetings and they get a check.  Now im sure someone will come back and say I don't understand.  For SpaceX (what ever work done) is getting 2 millon dollars a DAY of the taxpayers money for Aug.
Boeing gets a little less.

Why couldn't both companies have gotten 10 million (still alot of cash) and given the rest toward real HW or the DC ( I know the rules).

This sounds like a "gating" process, which reviews something like the requirements capture or high-level design to confirm that input to next stage of the waterfall is fit for purpose. Budget for the next phase is not released unless the gating review is successful. (There may be caveats for minor deficiencies which will be fixed under the budget for the phase being reviewed - by analogy fixed at the CCiCap participants own cost).

NASA won't unlock the money to proceed with the program (make first milestone payment) until the companies have demonstrated their plans are on a solid footing. "review the current state of...", "describe plans for..." and "lay the groundwork for a successful partnership". "establishes and demonstrates a baseline design" and "meets system requirements".

cheers, Martin

At the start of a project you need something to cover have recruited the staff and found somewhere for them to work.  It is an infeed rather than an outfeed but project failure is guaranteed unless it happens.

[Lurker Steve]

That would be true if each company actually stopped work for a period between the CCDev and CCiCAP projects, but in all cases it's the same companies, and more or less the same personnel at these companies.

You can do some hiring in order to speed up some tasks, or purchase some long lead time items, but none of these companies really should need a formal "project kickoff" meeting.

There already have been formal reviews with NASA regarding their overall design and the state of the project. How do you think they won these contracts anyway ??

[Prober]

That would be true if each company actually stopped work for a period between the CCDev and CCiCAP projects, but in all cases it's the same companies, and more or less the same personnel at these companies.

You can do some hiring in order to speed up some tasks, or purchase some long lead time items, but none of these companies really should need a formal "project kickoff" meeting.

There already have been formal reviews with NASA regarding their overall design and the state of the project. How do you think they won these contracts anyway ??

thx, glad to see I'm not the only one seeing this. 

[jongoff]

That would be true if each company actually stopped work for a period between the CCDev and CCiCAP projects, but in all cases it's the same companies, and more or less the same personnel at these companies.

You can do some hiring in order to speed up some tasks, or purchase some long lead time items, but none of these companies really should need a formal "project kickoff" meeting.

There already have been formal reviews with NASA regarding their overall design and the state of the project. How do you think they won these contracts anyway ??

thx, glad to see I'm not the only one seeing this. 

Kickoff payments are extremely common for Firm Fixed-Price contracts like this. I'm not sure I've ever seen an FFP without some sort of Kickoff Payment. It allows the company to have a little cash reserve on-hand at the start of the contract to deal with contingencies that come up, to improve their odds of hitting milestones in spite of a milestone occasionally taking more time or effort than planned.

For an FFP contract of this size, the companies probably had to provide justifications for costing that included estimates of labor, overhead, other direct costs, and G&A for the whole project, plus some small nominal profit (typically 5-6%). The milestones are often then broken up into chunks based on cashflow needs and estimates of when the big expense items will come up. If they're getting more for the kickoff meeting milestone than it cost them (which is almost guaranteed), that money is coming out of the expected cost of the other milestones. It isn't some sort of free lunch or anything nefarious. Pretty bog standard Firm Fixed Price contracting.

Not sure why you're making such a big deal out of something that's as standard as this. But if it would help, I could give you a simplified example.

~Jon

[Prober]

That would be true if each company actually stopped work for a period between the CCDev and CCiCAP projects, but in all cases it's the same companies, and more or less the same personnel at these companies.

You can do some hiring in order to speed up some tasks, or purchase some long lead time items, but none of these companies really should need a formal "project kickoff" meeting.

There already have been formal reviews with NASA regarding their overall design and the state of the project. How do you think they won these contracts anyway ??

thx, glad to see I'm not the only one seeing this. 

Not sure why you're making such a big deal out of something that's as standard as this. But if it would help, I could give you a simplified example.

~Jon

Jon this advertised as "different" ie commercial.   If the companies need cash upfront say so, not hidden as the term "milestones".  Program should have just given x amount of dollars as an award to start the program, or winning the program.

Keep in mind taxpayers are looking in on everything now.  You may not know this but some of the local taxpayers were not happy about the Rover landing on Mars.

[mrmandias]

Purely commercial contracts of that scale often work just like Jon described.  I really don't understand the problem that you're seeing.

[Jim]

There is nothing wrong or unusual about this.  And it is standard for "commercial".   For launch service contracts, there is a milestone payment for the kickoff mission integration working group.

And yes, they do need a formal kick off because they have not been on contract for the tasks under CCiCAP.  There have not been formal reviews on the state of design or overall program.

People are making a big deal about nothing

[jongoff]

Jon this advertised as "different" ie commercial.   If the companies need cash upfront say so, not hidden as the term "milestones".  Program should have just given x amount of dollars as an award to start the program, or winning the program.

Keep in mind taxpayers are looking in on everything now.  You may not know this but some of the local taxpayers were not happy about the Rover landing on Mars.

Prober,

From your response, I'm guess you've never been involved in any commercial or government FFP contracts before. Because frankly, almost every commercial or government FFP contract I've been involved with has involved some sort of up-front payment (sure the bulk was usually tied to later delivery milestones, but a 25-30% up front was not uncommon at all). We had kickoff payments for all four of the commercial contracts Altius has had, as well as both of the government contracts it has had to-date. At Masten, most of our major suppliers, especially when they were doing any custom R&D work for us, required an up-front charge. The only cases I can think of where suppliers didn't require up-front payment were very small machining jobs (with suppliers that knew they could count on us to pay them quickly), and when we were ordering small-to-medium dollar value COTS parts like valves and such.

But in the real "commercial" world, R&D projects almost always have an up-front payment. This is not at all unusual.

~Jon

[Prober]

Jon
i understand fully....just trying to say that the public taxpayer won't understand this if framed wrongly.