NASA Announces Partnership Opportunities for U.S. Commercial Lunar Lander Capabi

[newpylong]

{snip}
No, but there aren't $60M Morpheus(i?) either. The entire program has only cost $14M since 2010.

The $14M is material costs.

Labor cost to the tax payer of the development = ~40 people * 3.5 years * $200000/person/year = ~$28M

Total $14M + $28M = ~$43M

Manufacturing cost of a Morpheus lander should be considerably less.

edit:add a 0

Your labor cost should be cut roughly in half. The entire team isnt (and probably no one on that team) is making 200k/yr.

Lander cost 750k to build.

[A_M_Swallow]

Your labor cost is a lot more than your wages.

[newpylong]

Yeah, that's why I said cut it in half to account for benefits, payroll taxes, indirect costs, etc. I don't know how you guys do things on that side of the pond but over here it doesn't cost $28M for 40 workers for that amount of time.

[A_M_Swallow]

Yeah, that's why I said cut it in half to account for benefits, payroll taxes, indirect costs, etc. I don't know how you guys do things on that side of the pond but over here it doesn't cost $28M for 40 workers for that amount of time.

If the organization has to pay it, it is a cost.
If the cost goes up with the number of people it is a personnel cost.

[Lar]

Yeah, that's why I said cut it in half to account for benefits, payroll taxes, indirect costs, etc. I don't know how you guys do things on that side of the pond but over here it doesn't cost $28M for 40 workers for that amount of time.

If the organization has to pay it, it is a cost.
If the cost goes up with the number of people it is a personnel cost.

This gets back to "how much does a person cost" that has been debated on other threads. Fully burdened cost of an employee is more than salary, it also includes desk space, benefits, electricity, the parking guard, etc... how much more is very debatable.

[AnalogMan]

NASA Discusses Lunar CATALYST Commercial Lunar Lander Initiative
MEDIA ADVISORY M14-023 - Jan. 24, 2014

NASA will host a media teleconference at 12:30 p.m. EST Monday, Jan. 27, to discuss the Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown (Lunar CATALYST) initiative.

Through Lunar CATALYST, announced on Jan. 16, NASA seeks proposals to partner in the development of reliable and cost-effective commercial robotic lunar lander capabilities that will enable the delivery of payloads to the lunar surface. Such capabilities could support commercial activities on the moon while enabling new science and exploration missions of interest to NASA and the larger scientific and academic communities.

Media will have an opportunity to discuss the initiative with NASA officials following an 11 a.m. pre-proposal conference call with the U.S. private sector.

Participants for the media teleconference are:

• Jason Crusan, director of Advanced Exploration Systems, NASA Headquarters
• Nantel Suzuki, Robotic Lunar Lander program executive, NASA Headquarters

For dial-in information, media should e-mail their name, affiliation and telephone number to Trent Perrotto at [email protected] by noon Monday.

The Advanced Exploration Systems Division in NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate manages Lunar CATALYST. Advanced Exploration Systems pioneers new approaches for rapidly developing prototype systems, demonstrating key capabilities and validating operational concepts for future human missions beyond Earth orbit.

For more information about Lunar CATALYST and the pre-proposal teleconference for the U.S. private sector, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/lunarcatalyst  [gives WebEx details to view presentation slides during teleconference]

Audio of the media teleconference will be streamed live on NASA's website at:

http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio

[yg1968]

Here are the slides to the pre-proposal conference of today:
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Lunar-CATALYST-Pre-Proposal-Conference_27Jan2014.pdf

[Elmar Moelzer]

This gets back to "how much does a person cost" that has been debated on other threads. Fully burdened cost of an employee is more than salary, it also includes desk space, benefits, electricity, the parking guard, etc... how much more is very debatable.

The parking guard is an employee also. So you cant count that guy twice. Desk Space and electricity are negligible. Benefits are between 25% and 35% of the base salary from what I have seen and paid. Some cost scales with salary, some does not. So it depends on the package provided by the employer how much it really is in the end. I believe that depending on some packages it can even go below 25%. E.g. Health Insurance does not scale with the salary and will make a smaller part of a higher salary. I think that 1.5 is a good assumption to make.

[Lar]

This gets back to "how much does a person cost" that has been debated on other threads. Fully burdened cost of an employee is more than salary, it also includes desk space, benefits, electricity, the parking guard, etc... how much more is very debatable.

The parking guard is an employee also. So you cant count that guy twice. Desk Space and electricity are negligible. Benefits are between 25% and 35% of the base salary from what I have seen and paid. Some cost scales with salary, some does not. So it depends on the package provided by the employer how much it really is in the end. I believe that depending on some packages it can even go below 25%. E.g. Health Insurance does not scale with the salary and will make a smaller part of a higher salary. I think that 1.5 is a good assumption to make.

Let's not have this debate here, we had it somewhere else already. That said, it varies a lot and is subject to all sorts of wrangling.  For example, the parking guard may be outsourced and thus not counted twice, his salary is bundled into the cost of parking the parking company charges.  The more you outsource, the higher your cost per employee (and revenue per employee) becomes.

[yg1968]

Here is the (zipped) mp3 file of the teleconference of today:
http://www.gamefront.com/files/24013384/Lunar+Robotic+Lander+Teleconference+2014-1-27.zip

P.S. There was a bit of a background hiss during the press conference. That was on their end.

[Robert Thompson]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24999-lunar-law-row-hots-up-as-nasa-enters-private-moon-rush.html#.UvKwFfZ74_I

There's a conflation or entanglement, here. Barcelona doesn't like NASA aiding U.S. groups like Moon Express that want to develop lunar capabilities, because that may give those U.S. contestants in the GLXP undue advantage. Is there any way to isolate and compartmentalize the components of aid NASA gives a U.S. lunar company from the skill set or technology base that same U.S. company brings to bear on GLPX? Should Barcelona Moon just drop it? They surely did not just have a contending superpower be the first to land on the moon in 40 years while they still have their pants down on getting their own astronauts to LEO.

[savuporo]

Came across this in the latest LEAG meeting papers :

http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/leag2013/pdf/7053.pdf

NASA is currently receiving the RS34's from the Air Force and will be hot-fire testing a single thruster at White Sands Test Facility in November, 2014...
A pahtfinder primary structure has been designed and fabricated for initial integration and interface definition.

Seems like someone, somewhere is bending quite a bit of metal and making hot flamey stuff for RP mission NASA in house lander.

[A_M_Swallow]

Came across this in the latest LEAG meeting papers :

http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/leag2013/pdf/7053.pdf

NASA is currently receiving the RS34's from the Air Force and will be hot-fire testing a single thruster at White Sands Test Facility in November, 2014...
A pahtfinder primary structure has been designed and fabricated for initial integration and interface definition.

Seems like someone, somewhere is bending quite a bit of metal and making hot flamey stuff for RP mission NASA in house lander.

NASA has flown the Morpheus Lander and the Mighty Eagle Lander.  There are 3 different types of Lunar CATALYST landers being developed.  Now an additional made-to-measure lander with new engines and avionics for the RESOLVE mission appears.  It is time one of them was sent to the Moon.

edit:spelling

[Garrett]

Just checked out the Lunar CATALYST webpage, and it seems like their last press release never got published here

----------------
April 30, 2014
RELEASE 14-126
NASA Selects Partners for U.S. Commercial Lander Capabilities
NASA announced Wednesday the selection of three U.S. companies to negotiate no-funds exchanged partnership agreements with the agency to advance lander capabilities that will enable delivery of payloads to the surface of the moon, as well as new science and exploration missions of interest to NASA and scientific and academic communities.
The selected companies are:
-- Astrobotic Technology, Inc., Pittsburgh
-- Masten Space Systems, Inc., Mojave, Calif.
-- Moon Express, Inc., Moffett Field, Calif.
NASA made the selections following a January solicitation for proposals. The agency now will negotiate no-funds exchanged Space Act Agreements with the companies as part of the agency's Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown (Lunar CATALYST) initiative. NASA's contributions for an estimated three-year period may include technical expertise, access to agency test facilities, equipment loans and/or software for lander development and testing.
"NASA is making advances to push the boundaries of human exploration farther into the solar system, including to an asteroid and Mars, and continues to spur development in the commercial space sector," said Jason Crusan, director of the Advanced Exploration Systems Division at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "Robotic missions to the moon have revealed the existence of local resources, including oxygen and water, which may be highly valuable for exploration of the solar system. The potential to use the lunar surface in partnership with our international and commercial partners may allow these resources to be characterized and used to enable future exploration and pioneering."
Commercial lunar transportation capabilities could support science and exploration objectives such as sample returns, geophysical network deployment, resource prospecting, and technology advancements.
The Advanced Exploration Systems Division of NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate manages Lunar CATALYST. Advanced Exploration Systems pioneers new approaches for rapidly developing prototype systems, demonstrating key capabilities and validating operational concepts for future human missions beyond Earth orbit.
As NASA works with U.S. industry to develop the next generation of U.S. spaceflight services, the agency also is developing the Orion spacecraft and Space Launch System (SLS), a crew capsule and heavy-lift rocket to provide an entirely new capability for human exploration. Designed for launching spacecraft for crew and cargo missions, SLS and Orion will expand human presence beyond low-Earth orbit and enable new missions of exploration across the solar system, including to a near-Earth asteroid and Mars.
For more information about the Lunar CATALYST initiative, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/lunarcatalyst
-----end----

[savuporo]

These two pages provide some further presentations about the stuff that preceded and presumably lead up to CATALYST

http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/leag2013/pdf/program.pdf
http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/leag2013/presentations/

Notice Astrobotic and Moon express there.

As for the RS-34 testing ( actually there are two engines, 11.7 kN main and 0.3kN attitude control engines, the second link gives specs )

http://www.nasa.gov/content/peacekeeper-safing-at-the-white-sands-test-facility-the-ultimate-re-use-project/
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=b913f0b1a753ec4f9809a9c956ec6db3&tab=core&_cview=0

[A_M_Swallow]

Project Morpheus has a meet the press tomorrow Wednesday May 21, 2014 at KSC.  I had assumed that this was a goodbye but there may be something else going on.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/news/releases/2014/release-20140501.html#.U3u-YHYUqSo

[Space Ghost 1962]

Imported from other thread ...

Really have to apologize for off topic here, but

http://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-releases-cots-final-report/

Well worth reading for all the commenters here, especially the "Lessons learned" parts. Some lessons appear to be promptly forgotten in the CCiCAP.

From "Conclusions", page 107

Building on the successful legacy of COTS, in early 2014, NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate began several initiatives to continue partnerships with the commercial space industry, including Lunar Cargo Transportation and
Landing by Soft Touchdown (Lunar CATALYST) opportunities to spur commercial cargo transportation
capabilities to the surface of the moon, and Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities (CCSC) to help
pioneer paths to Mars and other deep space destinations.

First I've hear of these. Could this mean that cargo via commercial makes it to the lunar surface cheaper/faster than humans do?

Now I see Lunar CATALYST is covered here. I see MoonX is involved. Barney Pell is ex NASA ARC and a great one for this.

[A_M_Swallow]

First I've hear of these. Could this mean that cargo via commercial makes it to the lunar surface cheaper/faster than humans do?

Now I see Lunar CATALYST is covered here. I see MoonX is involved. Barney Pell is ex NASA ARC and a great one for this.

Lunar CATALYST is weird.  The RFI had an office address at NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center.  It appears to have picked up the Morpheus development team from JSC and the Mighty Eagle team from MSFC and made them fly desks.  It is negotiating no-funds-exchanged Space Act Agreement (SAA) with Astrobotic Technology, Masten Space Systems and Moon Express.

http://www.nasa.gov/lunarcatalyst/#.U45dR3YUqSo Lunar CATALYST webpage

I can not make up my mind whether NASA has:
a. decided to crawl its way back to the Moon on its finger nails by setting up a COTS to the Moon,
b. rounded up all the bad boys to prevent them doing something embarrassing like returning to the Moon,
c. both.

[QuantumG]

It's a good question, anyone have any actual insight?

[savuporo]

I can not make up my mind whether NASA has:
a. decided to crawl its way back to the Moon on its finger nails by setting up a COTS to the Moon,
b. rounded up all the bad boys to prevent them doing something embarrassing like returning to the Moon,
c. both.

I think its a bit of both and more. Lunar Quest got completely zeroed out from the budgets, but there were multiple groups actively working on various lunar surface missions. So they have tried to carry on their efforts under various funding lines and now trying to bring some of these groups together as a more unified front - but they still have to scrape by.
Inching ever closer to the GLXP teams that have actual hardware is basically an attempt to make that shaky front a little bit more solid. Also maybe a honest attempt to help these teams a bit further if at all possible.

Who exactly will hitch a ride with who is entirely unclear, and who will pay for it all is even more unclear.