Author Topic: ISS Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) 2017-2030 (Read 470088 times)

fast · « **Reply #380 on:** 12/23/2014 12:32 pm »

If there will be booster to take it up.
Atlas future in few years is unclear, new ULA booster availability even more unclear. Delta 4 too expensive. F9 is a competitor, but actually possible option...

arachnitect · « **Reply #381 on:** 12/23/2014 01:49 pm »

Quote from: DGH on 12/23/2014 11:53 am

Quote from: terryy on 12/16/2014 11:15 pm
Looks like we have confirmation that Boeing and SNC both put in bids on the CRS2 contract.

http://spacenews.com/boeing-offers-cst-100-for-iss-cargo-contract/

Very useful article, I am surprised there have not been more comments.
This article confirms cargo version of CST-100 is in excess of 2500 kg.
Previously they kept saying in excess of 1100 kg which was strangely similar to an early number of 1067 kg and 7 crew.
It looks like Boeing has been underplaying CST-100’s capabilities to the media.

It's been talked about a bit in the CST-100 thread

TrevorMonty · « **Reply #382 on:** 12/23/2014 03:43 pm »

Quote from: fast on 12/23/2014 12:32 pm

If there will be booster to take it up.
Atlas future in few years is unclear, new ULA booster availability even more unclear. Delta 4 too expensive. F9 is a competitor, but actually possible option...

The ban on using RD180 after 2019 only affects DOD missions, it doesn't apply to ISS missions using Atlas (RD180).
ULA will keep flying Atlas until they are confident with NLV.

Jimmy Murdok · « **Reply #383 on:** 03/04/2015 10:12 pm »

Quote from: mme on 03/04/2015 09:08 pm

Quote from: Jimmy Murdok on 03/04/2015 08:38 pm
Any topic or public info on CRS 2 SpaceX vehicle?
My conservative logic gives me a simplified Dragon 2 with the big berthing port. But Orbital will offer almost 3 times it's pressurized volume, so 2018 might be time to make a bigger pressure vessel for an enhanced cargo Dragon , something around 20-25m3 that in the future could be used for an upgraded BEO crewed Dragon.
I have no insight, but I'm not sure how big of an issue the difference in volume is between Cygnus and Dragon 1 as they have complementary capabilities. NASA needs something that can return cargo to Earth and Cygnus can't do that. So the potential competitors to SpaceX are CST-100, Liberty, Dream Chaser and whoever else offering to return cargo to Earth.

Sure, Dragon 1 could offer a great price and is doing what NASA needs, they present the same product and get the contract.
But it is also true that the other contenders except Orbital need to develop their vehicles, so SpaceX have some margins to request some extra money to improve their vehicle and offer a bigger and upgraded product keeping the same shape and in the limits of F9 with SD for landing. Further speculating, future upgrades of crewed Dragon could use this experience for a bigger pressure vessel that could really handle 7PAX for tourism in decent conditions. This would avoid the need of attached Beam module style solutions to increase the habitability.

Blackstar · « **Reply #384 on:** 03/05/2015 05:27 pm »

There will be a very interesting announcement about this very soon.

Malderi · « **Reply #385 on:** 03/05/2015 05:36 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 05:27 pm

There will be a very interesting announcement about this very soon.

I assume that means you have information that the CRS2 contract will not be awarded to SpaceX/Orbital, and that either one of those lost out or there's a third awardee. Thanks for being cryptic. :-)

arachnitect · « **Reply #386 on:** 03/05/2015 05:48 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 05:27 pm

There will be a very interesting announcement about this very soon.

Friday at 5:00? Or today, during a DC blizzard?

Contract award isn't scheduled for 3 more months. When was the last time anything got done 3 months early?

woods170 · « **Reply #387 on:** 03/05/2015 06:00 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 05:27 pm

There will be a very interesting announcement about this very soon.

Any announcement about CRS-2 will be (very) interesting.

Blackstar · « **Reply #388 on:** 03/05/2015 06:01 pm »

A week from today.

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #389 on:** 03/05/2015 06:13 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 05:27 pm

There will be a very interesting announcement about this very soon.

An announcement by NASA or by a company?

Blackstar · « **Reply #390 on:** 03/05/2015 06:18 pm »

Lockheed Martin.

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #391 on:** 03/05/2015 06:22 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 06:18 pm

Lockheed Martin.

That is interesting! I hope that means LM put in an unexpected bid for CRS2.

The Amazing Catstronaut · « **Reply #392 on:** 03/05/2015 06:39 pm »

Lockheed/Boeing wars???!!

This should be something intriguing right here... It'll be quite the thing in the long run if Lockheed starts throwing up cargo services.

I expect them to be canny about this one - thanks for the tease, Blackstar - you've given me something to sink my jaws into.

TrevorMonty · « **Reply #393 on:** 03/05/2015 08:56 pm »

It just so happens that LM build DC for SNC.

yg1968 · « **Reply #394 on:** 03/06/2015 01:35 am »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/05/2015 08:56 pm

It just so happens that LM build DC for SNC.

LM is not the lead on the SNC proposal. It's just a contractor. But it's possible that LM has submitted its own bid. Perhaps, a cargo Orion?

Robotbeat · « **Reply #395 on:** 03/06/2015 02:32 am »

Yeah, I was thinking Orion. If true, it probably has been in the works for quite a while... And perhaps even the criteria favored such a selection?

arachnitect · « **Reply #396 on:** 03/06/2015 02:37 am »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/06/2015 02:32 am

Yeah, I was thinking Orion. If true, it probably has been in the works for quite a while... And perhaps even the criteria favored such a selection?

Return of Planetspace OTV

jongoff · « **Reply #397 on:** 03/06/2015 04:22 am »

Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 03/05/2015 06:22 pm

Quote from: Blackstar on 03/05/2015 06:18 pm
Lockheed Martin.

That is interesting! I hope that means LM put in an unexpected bid for CRS2.

I had heard from a few non-LM sources that they had put in a CRS-2 bid. I've even heard some speculation on their approach. It would be cool to hear a formal confirmation and more details if that's what the announcement is. So no, I at least don't find this unexpected at all.

Now with that out of the way here's a few speculations on my part about what they're doing (assuming they're going to announce their concept, which Blackstar hasn't actually stated yet):

1- A CRS-2 bid means they're going to have to cover the development cost themselves, and try to recoup it during the CRS-2 process while competing with SpaceX and OSC that have already had their development paid for. This suggests something very simple, flying on a vehicle that's already operational (Atlas V, IMO).
2- My best guess would be an LM-flavored Cygnus equivalent. Centaur tank derived pressure structure (like what ARCTUS proposed but likely bigger), bus derived from one of their existing buses (either a commercial one, a DoD one, or a NASA one), and prox ops based on what they've proven out for Orion.
3- I think they'll shoot for bigger payloads with fewer flights per year than Cygnus.
4- Unclear on if they would try for something recoverable or not, though my guess based on #1 is that they'd go for disposable like Cygnus.

Anyhow, speculation aside, it'll be interesting to see what the actual announcement is.

~Jon

Danderman · « **Reply #398 on:** 03/06/2015 05:55 am »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/05/2015 08:56 pm

It just so happens that LM build DC for SNC.

I didn't quite understand that post. We seem to moving from 4 letter acronyms to 2 letters. Perhaps in the future, we can economize further by using just one letter for everything.

Star One · « **Reply #399 on:** 03/06/2015 06:34 am »

Interesting I wonder what decided LM that they wanted a piece of that pie. Being a legacy supplier in this area of all types of vehicles will probably give them something of an advantage when it comes to the choice.