Commercial Lunar Payload Services Program (CLPS)

[theinternetftw]

Surprise! The final RFP came out a day early.

Proposals are due 2018-10-09.
Selections ostensibly still made by 2018-12-31.

Evaluation and Selection:

* Thomas Zurbuchen, head honcho. Associate Administrator for the Science Mission Directorate.
* Chris Culbert, Chief Technologist for JSC
* Theresa Stevens, Sr. Contracting Officer
* Nantel Suzuki, Program Executive for Lunar CATALYST
* Mary Faller, Sr. Mission Manager for LSP
* Sarah Noble, Program Scientist for Psyche (was Program Scientist for LADEE)
* Rob Landis, Program Executive for Planetary Defense
* Greg Chavers, test lead at MSFC for the 2012 Mighty Eagle lunar lander prototype

Edit: Added the quote to help avoid folks missing the announcement post due to pagination.

[DigitalMan]

Surprise! The final RFP came out a day early.

Proposals are due 2018-10-09.
Selections ostensibly still made by 2018-12-31.

Edit: RFP files are now attached.

I didn't have time to read this in detail.  After skimming it quickly it indicates a capability to deliver at least 10kg to the lunar surface intact (I guess that would be an important clause!) by Dec 31, 2021. 

I didn't see a maximum payload mentioned, I'm sure I missed it.  Anyone find the details of that?

[speedevil]

I didn't have time to read this in detail.  After skimming it quickly it indicates a capability to deliver at least 10kg to the lunar surface intact (I guess that would be an important clause!) by Dec 31, 2021. 

I didn't see a maximum payload mentioned, I'm sure I missed it.  Anyone find the details of that?

It historically hasn't listed a maximum payload, if I recall correctly.
The maximum payload is touched on by 'The contractor is not obligated to honor' ... 'any item or series of items over $500M'.
The government may order up to $2.6B of stuff in this contract total from all vendors.

During the contract, new entrants, or companies not doing a specific part of the contract may be added.

[theinternetftw]

It looks like it would be useful to have a quick summary of the current state of lunar landing plans now that the full RFP for CLPS has been posted.  This is basically a consolidation made from all the previous informational posts, overriding old information with new, plus a few new bits I found while compiling everything together.



CLPS: Commerical Lunar Payload Services

* Up to $2.6B over ten years for multiple providers bringing cargo to the surface.

* The RFP doesn't describe any one mission, instead you show that you can bring 10kg to the surface by 2021.  That gets you in the club.

* The club can be expanded with new members every two years.

* The club will bid for Task Orders after induction.  The first Task Order will be $25,000 for a Provider User Guide. Around this time NASA will release an example User Guide.

* Selection by end of 2018.  First missions in 2019.  The idea is to send more than one at a time to increase chances of success (from different providers, it sounds like). 

* There's a parallel payload development program called DALI: Development and Advancement of Lunar Instrumentation.  The maximum time allowed for a DALI program to mature is four years (to 2022), with three years encouraged, because the first flight opportunities for DALI payloads are in 2021.

* Flights before 2021 will carry whatever NASA has lying around: retroreflectors, engineering models/spares, student-built hardware, off the shelf hardware.

* 71 proposals received for DALI: Spectrometers (UV/Vis/IR/Thermal/Mass/Raman/Neutron/Gamma/), Dust/plasma/solar, seismic, heat flow, laser ranging, magnetometers, radar, lidar, laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy, x-ray diffraction/fluorescence, volatile detection, radiation detection.

* Five of those DALI proposals are expected to be selected.  Each will get ~$1M a year for 3-4 years.

* STMD plans to use landers for tech demonstrators. Potential payloads include demonstrators on: precision landing/hazard avoidance, power generation (solar and fission), ISRU, cryogenic fluid management, autonomous ops/sensing, and advanced avionics/mobility/mechanisms/materials.

* Landers are expected to last one lunar day (14 earth days).  Workshops being held on surviving the lunar night.

* Offering Radioisotope Heating Units is being discussed.

* Smallsats as ridealongs for CLPS missions are being funded under SIMPLEx. Emphasizing science that will aid prep for human missions.

* Here are the interested parties, quite a few of which are probably working together.



FLEx: Flexible Lunar Explorer

* This is under NextSTEP.

* Its earlier name (or parent program?): Advanced Cislunar and Surface Capabilities. Folks started mentioning FLEx this summer and use of ACSC plummeted.

* A big lander program: 500kg to 1000kg.  Evolving towards human-class.  Much more NASA control than CLPS.

* One lander in 2022, another in 2024. Two different designs.

* It's now intimated that the 2022 rover will be a modified version of the Lunar Pallet Lander that was originally going to land Resource Prospector.

* Selecting towards reusability: Engines with multiple restarts and deep throttling, propellant combinations ("LOX at least for descent"), precision landing, reliability.  With the Lunar Pallet Lander now the basis of the 2022 mission, all of this development will most likely have to be reserved for the 2024 lander and later.

* The program is being funded at ~$120M a year, increasing each year, and gets up to $320M a year by 2023.

[TrevorMonty]

Could find suitable Astrobotic thread placed this here.


http://www.parabolicarc.com/2018/09/18/astrobotic-ris4e-demonstrate-technologies-explore-extreme-lunar-environments/

Under a research contract with NASA, Astrobotic has developed a custom navigation software product, known as AstroNav, to give small free-flying spacecraft the ability to autonomously explore lunar lava tubes. Meanwhile, SSERVI researchers have been working to analyze the capabilities of compact and deployable instruments needed to collect and characterize geologic samples in the field. Advances in both areas are paving the way for future missions that are far more dynamic and autonomous than those possible today.


They are using drones to test this on earth, there also potential earth markets for this technology especially with drones.
For moon missions I can see case for small hopper to be used for cave exploration. Have it return to lander for refuelling.

[theinternetftw]

Small update post-RFP release.

The RFP was amended to delete the "Drug-Free Workplace" clause.

A new Q&A was released, which is attached.

Proposals still due Oct 9.

[A_M_Swallow]

Small update post-RFP release.

The RFP was amended to delete the "Drug-Free Workplace" clause.

A new Q&A was released, which is attached.

Proposals still due Oct 9.

IMHO That is one way to around Musk smoking cannabis.

[su27k]

Small update post-RFP release.

The RFP was amended to delete the "Drug-Free Workplace" clause.

A new Q&A was released, which is attached.

Proposals still due Oct 9.

IMHO That is one way to around Musk smoking cannabis.

I assume this is a joke, because the "Drug-Free Workplace" clause has no impact on Musk "smoking" cannabis because: a. his action is in the past; b. it didn't occur in the workplace; c. he's not convicted of a drug offense, d. it's not clear he can be considered an "Employee" under the clause.

[Lar]

K, lets not have this argument here...  or anywhere on NSF, thanks. We squashed it last time and will again.

[Markstark]

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1049997116196540416

[Markstark]

Reaction from competitor:


https://twitter.com/dmasten/status/1050024176122093570?

[theinternetftw]

All "firms that construct, produce, manufacture or otherwise provide space transportation vehicles for the purpose of the prime contractor’s performance of CLPS" must be domestic-controlled entities.

Surely the design of the vehicle itself would be included in "otherwise provide?"  Regardless, accepting this bid would completely violate the spirit of "creating or maintaining required domestic capabilities for production of critical space transportation services."

Unless they're head and shoulders above everyone else and NASA sees no other option to get multiple viable providers at all, I don't see NASA bending their own rules to accept this bid.  For instance, even if they went into the process wanting three providers, I think they'd accept only having two rather than accept this bid.

[Phil Stooke]

https://ispace-inc.com/aboutus/


They have an office in the US (at NASA Ames).  That's not enough to be US-controlled, but it's a start - set up a US subsidiary and off you go.   Rather like that well-known US rocket company Rocket Lab:

"Rocket Lab is an American aerospace manufacturer with a wholly owned New Zealand subsidiary."

Nothing a good corporate lawyer couldn't manage.

[theinternetftw]

They have an office in the US (at NASA Ames).  That's not enough to be US-controlled, but it's a start - set up a US subsidiary and off you go.

US subsidiaries of foreign entities are specifically disqualified from consideration.

[theinternetftw]

<snipped twitter embed down to just the thing it links to>
https://spacenews.com/draper-bids-on-nasa-commercial-lunar-lander-competition/

Note in that SpaceNews story that NASA officials are now intimating that the first landing will most likely be NET 2020, not 2019:

Those missions could launch as soon as 2019, although agency officials said it’s more likely the first CLPS missions would not fly until at least 2020 based on the status of the companies anticipated to compete for the competition.

[Phil Stooke]

"    They have an office in the US (at NASA Ames).  That's not enough to be US-controlled, but it's a start - set up a US subsidiary and off you go.


US subsidiaries of foreign entities are specifically disqualified from consideration."

Right, but the point is that other structures are possible, which is what Rocket Lab has done.  It's not the obstacle suggested earler, it's just something that needs a bit of a work-around.  Set up that subsidiary, and do the paperwork so the subsidiary becomes an independent entity.  You do what it takes. 

[theinternetftw]

Draper/Spaceflight/ispace/General Atomics are so far the only team that has talked about their bid.

They also say they're prepared to move forward even if not selected:

“If we don’t get awarded, then we’re going to continue working with ispace on their commercial missions,” says Campbell. “And we’re still looking to work with NASA and our commercial partners.”

[theinternetftw]

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1057635691570454530

This would be for FLEx.  FLEx is currently expected to be funded at 120M-320M a year.

[theinternetftw]

The LEAG annual meeting is happening right now.

CLPS selection is still on track for before the end of the year.

On ACSC/FLEx, NASA is thinking about a three stage lander, all to make sure commercial launch can be an option:

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1062711376907526144

There's a desire to support the development of mid-sized landers (unclear if this is CLPS):

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1062721966631804928

Tomorrow, there'll be a panel called "Working with Commercial Partners to Explore the Moon"  There'll be a scientists panel first at 8:30 AM EST, and then at 9:15 AM EST a "providers" panel, featuring Astrobotic, Moon Express, Masten, SpaceX and iSpace.  A third panel called "customers" with NASA officials is at 10:30 AM EST.

It will be streamed.  You can use the LEAG meeting link to get to that stream and listen in.

[theinternetftw]

From the Users Advisory Group meeting that just happened, this slide.  NASA's lunar roadmap for the next decade.