Recommended Posts

Here we go. What they're getting awards for - (spacecraft images bottom)

Boeing: CST-100 crew capsule

SpaceX: Dragon capsule launch escape/landing system

Sierra Nevada: Dream Chaser spaceplane

Blue Origin: New Shepard capsule

RELEASE: 11-102

NASA AWARDS NEXT SET OF COMMERCIAL CREW DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS

WASHINGTON -- NASA has awarded four Space Act Agreements in the second

round of the agency's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev2) effort.

Each company will receive between $22 million and $92.3 million to

advance commercial crew space transportation system concepts and

mature the design and development of elements of their systems, such

as launch vehicles and spacecraft.

The selectees for CCDev2 awards are:

-- Blue Origin, Kent, Wash., $22 million

-- Sierra Nevada Corporation, Louisville, Colo., $80 million

-- Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), Hawthorne, Calif., $75

million

-- The Boeing Company, Houston, $92.3 million

"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on

American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to

foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said. "These

agreements are significant milestones in NASA's plans to take

advantage of American ingenuity to get to low-Earth orbit, so we can

concentrate our resources on deep space exploration."

The goal of CCDev2 is to accelerate the availability of U.S.

commercial crew transportation capabilities and reduce the gap in

American human spaceflight capability. Through this activity, NASA

also may be able to spur economic growth as potential new space

markets are created.

Once developed, crew transportation capabilities could become

available to commercial and government customers.

"The next American-flagged vehicle to carry our astronauts into space

is going to be a U.S. commercial provider," said Ed Mango, NASA's

Commercial Crew Program manager. "The partnerships NASA is forming

with industry will support the development of multiple American

systems capable of providing future access to low-Earth orbit."

These awards are a continuation of NASA's CCDev initiatives, which

began in 2009 to stimulate efforts within U.S. industry to develop

and demonstrate human spaceflight capabilities. For more information

about NASA's Commercial Crew Program, visit:

Boeing CST-100 (partnered with Bigelow Aerospace)

CST-100.jpg

SpaceX Dragon (already flying)

fancy-dragon3_640x480.jpg

Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser (partnered with Northrop Grumman & Virgin Galactic)

Sierra+Nevada+Dream_Chaser.jpg

Blue Origin New Shepard (somewhat black project)

A513.jpg

Details -

Sierra Nevada:

system requirements review

canted airfoil fin selection

cockpit based flight simulator

vehicle avionics integration laboratory

system defniition review

flight control integration laboratory

ETA structure delivery

separation system test

preliminary design review for Dream Chaser

optional milestones: materials testing captive carry and ETA landing gear drop tests, ETA captive carry flight test, wind tunnel testing, dream chaser handling qualities evaluation, main RCS test, two hybrid rocket motor test firing, thrust vector control test, ETA captive carry flight test readiness review, ETA free flight test

Blue Origin:

* Space Vehicle Design: space vehicle system requirements review

* Pusher escape Risk Reduction: pusher escape ground firing, pusher escape pad escape test (optional milestones: pusher escape max-Q sled test calibration run, pusher escape mas-Q sled test egress run)

* RBS (reusable booster system) engine risk reduction: engine thrust chamber assembly test at Stennis (optional: engine pump cold gas drive test, engine pump hot gas drive test) [as an aside, apparently the RBF is a 100klbf restartable hydrolox engine)

Boeing:

launch abort engine fabrication & hot fire test demonstration

landing air bag drop demonstration #1

phase I wind tunnel tests

interim design review - 4

parachute drop tests demonstration

SM propellant tank development test

LV EDS/ASIF interface simulation test

Preliminary design review

SpaceX:

launch abort system propulsion conceptual design review

design status review 1 (for Falcon 9/Dragon crew transportation system)

LAS propulsion components PDR

crew accommodation concept prototype and in situ trial (internally-funded by SpaceX, NASA astronauts invited to try crew accomodations and give feedback)

DSR 2

crew accommodation concept delta-prototype and in-situ trial 2

LAS propulsion component test articles complete

LAS propulsion component initial test cycle

concept baseline review

Sierra Nevada hasn't provided a timeline graphic for Dream Chaser's timeline, but drop tests of the full size test bird, analogous to the Shuttle Enterprise, will perform drop-test flights in 2012 - likely using the Virgin Galactic White Knight Two serving as its mothership. A launch is possible atop an Atlas V in 2014.

Blue Origin is, as usual, cryptic other than the test flight will be on an Atlas V and later flights on their own reusable booster.

  • 2 months later...

CCDev is now starting level 2 (CCDev-2) and is issuing bi-monthly reports. The most recent is here -

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/563409main_201106_Commercial_60day_Report_508.pdf

Highlights:

Boeing CST-100: Delta Systems Design Review completed, Full-scale landing airbag test this summer.

SpaceX Dragon: abort system design and supporting paper gets sent to NASA this month (July 2011). Cabin hardware (seats, controls, and enhanced life support) development in parallel.

SNC Dream Chaser: system requirements review, preliminary design review, airfoil selection

Blue Origin SV: vehicle design, pusher launch escape, and reusable booster.

No, it's TSTO - two stages.

The only SSTO spacecraft that's been proposed was the Lockheed Martin VentureStar spaceplane and it's X-33 testbed, both of which used the revolutionary Linear Aerospike engine. They were cancelled by NASA & Congress in 2001 during X-33's construction; it was too big a threat to the Space Shuttle establishment.

VentureStar was shown in the opening credits for Star Trek: Enterprise and was also referenced in Avatar.

Left to right: X-33, VentureStar and Space Shuttle

x33_venturestar_shuttle.jpg

oh come on Doc, you know i love the VentureStar, it's basically my Valkyrie shuttle, and yes the name was used in the Avatar ISV...that was a nice touch i thought. is there a chance the VS will be resurrected now the shuttle is retired? will the aeospike engine magically work to spec now? please?

When who is scheduled to do what - subject to change, of course

2011:

Dragon C2 cargo - ISS approach (optional C3 - ISS docking)

2012:

Dragon C3 cargo - ISS docking (if blended C2/C3 isn't done)

Dream Chaser drop tests (from WhiteKnightTwo)

Cygnus C1 cargo first test flight - ISS approach

Falcon Heavy delivered to Vandenberg AFB SLC-4E

Dragon cargo to ISS goes operational - 12 flights

Cygnus cargo to ISS goes operational - 8 flights

2013:

Falcon Heavy first flight

Dream Chaser unmanned flight

2014:

CST100 unmanned flight

Dragon manned flight

Dream Chaser manned flight

2016:

NASA MPCV* unmaned flight (if NASA's SLS** booster is ready)

* Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

** Space Launch System ultra-heavy lift rocket

MPCV is what's supposed to take us to the moon and Mars, right? So why not just launch it to the moon 2016?

EDIT: i liked your Buck Rogers joke, but i intentionally avoided it...the Venture Star cancellation really saddens me...such a beautiful ship!

Orion/MPCV is what's left of the Constellation lunar program, an exercise in how NOT to do things.

Constellation was finally killed last year but its supporters keep trying to resurrect it, and MPCV is part of that in spite of Dragon being designed to be just as capable for beyond Earth orbit missions. Its launcher, SLS, is late and getting later as Constellation advocates try to resurrect Ares V as the design goal in spite of good reasons not to ($$$$$$)

Stupidity & greed.

The correct way to do heavy lift is to have a competition like COTS for cargo and CCDev for crew; let SpaceX's Falcon X/XX concept etc. take on all comers. The problem is that this puts the old-paradigm high-cost systems like shuttle-derived (SLS/Ares V, Direct etc) at a cost disadvantage, which doesn't sit well with congressmen & senators who have shuttle-based NASA centers and suppliers in their states/districts.

NASA and United Launch Associates (ULA - a Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) have signed a Space Act Agreement for the human-rating of the Atlas V booster. This agreement is unfunded, but it will allow ULA to use NASA's labs to develop, simulate and test towards this end. ULA's dime.

Atlas V is to be the front line launcher for the SNC Dream Chaser, Blue Origin's Space Vehicle, and Boeing's CST-100.

The big question is if the $120M+ cost of Atlas V will be lowered enough to compete with Falcon 9's $59M - $69M price point. The current price is the same as a cross-fed Falcon Heavy, a much more powerful system set to start flying in 2013. Massive overkill for this purpose, but still....

Atlas V and CST-100

atlas402.jpg

Atlas V and Dream Chaser

atlas_dreamchaser.jpg

every time you feel hostile towards spaceplanes, just sing the theme song from Star Blazers to yourself, and picture the Argo/Yamato flying through space with that huge citadel on top. you'll get in the spirit and won't hate spaceplanes any more.

"we're off to outer space, we're leaving mother Earth, to save the human race..."

As I'v said, they have their uses including emergency medical and delicate experiment/materials return, but for now not the routine up/down stuff.

That said, I'm prepping a post that may make you happier. It's not near term but it is commercial and very real.

  • 4 weeks later...

CCDev 60 day update #2

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/580957main_August%202011_CSD%2060%20Day%20Report_508.pdf

Notables:

The main potential delay for SpaceX's COTS-2/3 flight actually docking at ISS is not them but delays in software updates at ISS itself.

SpaceX will be testing at White Sands, presumably the Super Draco thrusters.

Blue Origin will be testing engines at Stennis.

SNC at Langley, KSC and JSC.

Boeing at Langley.

Aside-

SpaceX is testing the Super Draco's at White Sands because that center is set up to handle engine testing with toxic hypergolic fuels; nitrogen tetroxide and hydrazine - the same as most other spacecraft. The plan is to eventually transition to the NOBFx monopropellant if its ignition speed is fast enough for use in launch abort systems.

NOBFx = Nitrous Oxide Fuel Blend x, a FireStar Technologies propitiatory mix of nitrous oxide with a fuel and blending agents in various proportions (the "x") according to the mission. By storing both oxidizer and fuel in a stabilized mix it simplifies the plumbing considerably and it's not anywhere near as toxic as hypergolics. It gets tested at ISS in 2012,

http://www.firestar-engineering.com/index.html

NOFBx advantages -

  • constituents are widely available from chemical suppliers, inexpensive and safe to handle.
    can be transported and handled without undue precautions or hazards.
    effluents are non-toxic and produces no accumulated deposits or contamination.
    propulsion system has high Isp (320-340 s) ? similar to the most common bi-propellant.
    has far better lift capability than the current workhorse monopropellant, hydrazine.
    is tolerant to a wide thermal range; storable at room temperature on the ground and is Space-storable.
    [is projected to] lower cost compared to existing propulsion systems of comparable performance.
    is monopropellant, which significantly reduces the need for auxiliary hardware, saving cost, volume, and mass for launch systems.
    utilizes cool running thrusters that dramatically reduce thermal design challenges.
    burns in liquid, gas, and two-phase flow.
    does not have the materials compatibility constraints of traditional hypergolic systems.

  • 2 months later...

Boeing will be using one of the old Shuttle processing facilities to prep & refurbish their CST-100 CCDev entry -

Link....

Boeing signs lease for NASA's space shuttle hangar

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. ? The Boeing Co. plans to build space taxis at a mothballed space shuttle processing hangar at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in central Florida.

On Monday, NASA officials and company executives confirmed that Boeing has reached an agreement with Space Florida, a state-backed agency working to expand space-related businesses in Florida, to lease Orbiter Processing Facility 3 at the center.

Boeing will also place the headquarters of its commercial crew operation in Florida, said John Mulholland, vice president and program manager for the company's effort.

"We will launch from right here, on Florida's Space Coast," Mullholland said.

The agreement was hailed by state and federal officials during a news conference inside the Orbiter Processing Facility. "Ladies and gentlemen, the dream is alive," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.

NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver said the agreement would give a "major boost" to the space agency's commercialization efforts. She noted that Boeing and Space Florida were already sprucing up the shuttle's old hangar.

"I love what you've done to the place so far," she joked.

Kennedy Space Center is drafting a master plan for a revamped spaceport that, in addition to supporting future NASA spacecraft, will host commercial, military and international customers.

Boeing is one of four companies NASA is sponsoring to develop spaceships that can ferry astronauts to the International Space Station, a $100 billion project of 16 nations orbiting 240 miles (385 kilometers) above Earth.

With the retirement of NASA's space shuttles this summer, the United States is currently dependent on Russia to fly crews to the orbital outpost, at a cost of about $350 million per year.

NASA hopes to be able to buy rides from U.S. firms before the end of 2016.

Boeing's proposed space taxi is a seven-seat capsule called the CST-100, which would launch on an Atlas 5 rocket.

The company also has an agreement to provide rides for clients of Bigelow Aerospace, which is developing privately-owned inflatable space habitats for commercial and government lease.

NASA has spent $388 million to bolster the development of passenger spaceships. Boeing won $18 million in the program's first round of financing and $92.3 million in the second phase, which is currently under way.

The U.S. space agency this year added $20.6 million in options to Boeing's agreement if the company can complete additional milestones in the CST-100 development.

The Obama administration is requesting $850 million for the program for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Bills pending in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate would cut that to $312 million and $500 million, respectively.

OPF-3

5936079070_d2590e369e.jpg

  • 1 month later...

Q1 2012 Commercial Crew Development milestones -

Sierra Nevada Corp. (SNC) Dream Chaser

- Engineering Test Article (ETA) Structure Delivery

- Captive Carry Interface & ETA Landing Gear Drop Tests (read: attachment for the Virgin WhiteKnightTwo mothership)

- Separation System Test

- ETA Captive Carry Flight Test Readiness Review

Boeing CST-100

- Launch Vehicle Emergency Detection System/Avionics System Integration Facility Interface Simulation Test Phase 2

- Launch Abort Engine (LAE) Fabrication and Hot Fire Test Demo

SpaceX Dragon

- Crew Accommodation Concept Prototype and In-Situ Trial 1 (read: seats, control panel layouts & controls)

- Crew Accommodation Concept Delta-Prototype and In-Situ Trial 2

(launch abort/DragonRider test fire in Q2)

Blue Origin SV

- Pusher Escape Ground Firing (read: launch abort system)

- Pusher Escape Test Vehicle #1 Shipment

United Launch Alliance (ULA) human-rated Atlas V launcher

- No milestone in Q1

Alliant Techsystems Inc. (ATK) Liberty launcher (unfunded)

- Launch System Initial System Design (ISD)

- Technical Interchange Meeting 2

- Program Status Review (PSR)

Excalibur Almaz Incorporated (EAI) (unfunded)

- System Requirements Review

- Launch Vehicle Compatibility Review

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Sihoo Doro C300 Pro V2 Ergonomic Office Chair review: The Ikea of chairs by Steven Parker I've reviewed a few gaming chairs over the past three years or so and generally found them to score well in our reviews. SIHOO reached out asking if I was interested in taking a look at their flagship chair, the Doro C300 Pro V2. I never got the chance to check out its predecessor, but the V2 is described as an "Adaptive Ergonomic Chair." It became available to buy in April of this year. Let's get things rolling with a closer look at the specifications and features. Specifications Doro C300 Pro V2 Model Ergonomic Materials Mesh Back and Seat; Soft PU Coated Armrests Height adjustability 45.5 - 53 cm / 17.5" - 20.9" Seat (w+d) 52 x 43 - 47 cm / 20.5" x 16.9" - 18.5" (adjustable) Backrest 52 – 60 cm / 20.5" - 23.6" (adjustable) Lumbar support Mesh built-in (adjustable) Armrest adjustability 8D Bionic Armrests Rocking angle 105°, 120°, 135° (fixed) Neck support Mesh built-in (adjustable) Net weight 27.3 kg / 59.64 lbs Weight support 150 kg / 330 lbs Colors Black, White Warranty 5 years (upon registering) Price $499.99, $539.99 Introduction At first glance, it looks like a chair that in another life wants to be a Herman Miller; It certainly looks like my Aeron Remastered, but the Doro C300 Pro V2 has quite a few more features and costs quite a bit less. SIHOO says that it is made up of a "DynaCore" system that tracks your movement and synchronizes the headrest, backrest, lumbar support, and armrests as you shift, twist, or recline. They also say that the "SyncroFlex Backrest" molds to your spine, which kind of describes how the mesh fabric works in most ergonomic chairs, but anyway. Below are the meat and potatoes measurements for the chair. Here is the same tech sheet, but in inches. Durability I would be remiss to not talk about the various durability testing this chair underwent before coming to market, as this is claimed on the product page. First of all, the chair is BIFMA-, SGS-, and TÜV-certified. As for durability, the tests undergone were: 100,000 Castor cycles tested 120,000 Armrest cycles tested 120,000 Recline cycles tested 120,000 Gas lift cycles tested 60,000 Armrest durability cycles tested 120,000 Rotation cycles tested Nothing about weights testing, though. Now that's all disclosed, now onto my own personal findings. Assembly The Doro C300 Pro V2 came in two large boxes (1) (2), and everything was packed very well, protecting the different parts of the chair. In the box, there is a folded sheet that explains the 12 steps to assemble it; they are: Remove the bottom cover on the aluminum base; Insert the five legs into the aluminum base and use ten screws to fasten them; Insert the castors into the legs; Replace the bottom cover on the bottom of the aluminum base; Place the Class 4 Hydraulics gas cylinder into the aluminum base; Screw the bottom part of the arm rests, taking care of the orientation using two screws on each side; Use three torx screws to fasten the footrest to the bottom of the seat; Fasten the backrest to the seat using four torx bolts; Fasten the armrests to the backrest using four Torx bolts (two on each side), taking care to note the orientation; Place the chair onto the Class 4 Hydraulics gas cylinder; Insert the headrest into the top of the backrest; Use two torx screws to fasten the headrest to the backrest. There's also an online guide you can refer to. Carefully unpacking the two boxes took around 15 minutes because almost everything is wrapped in plastic and protective foam; the chair assembly itself took around an hour. I say in the above assembly steps to take note of the orientation, because it's not obvious which way around the bottom portion of the armrests go, and although there is an L and R on the bottom of the armrests, it also wasn't clear from the instructions which was actually left or right, facing the chair, or in the seated down orientation? Anyway, I ended up putting the bottom portions on the wrong sides, and after securing one of the armrests, I discovered that although it was on the correct side, the armrest base could rotate a full 360°, but not when bolted to the chair, so I had to remove it, rotate it, and then bolt it back on. Truly an Ikea experience! Also, to complicate things further, although all the parts are labeled from A to X (yes, that's 24 parts) unhelpfully, these letters do not appear on the parts themselves or the package with the bolts, screws, and washers. There's also a pair of protective gloves in the box, but I think they were made for much smaller hands than I have. Even my friend, who is 5.1, had difficulty putting them on. Once assembled, I needed to sit down. Anyway, as I said, it looks quite similar to my Herman Miller. And here is the back of it. If you look at the product page and on Amazon, it seems like a lot of thought has gone into the chair itself and what it's capable of, but there is no mention at all about the castors, and this is an area where I think the chair trips up quite quickly. I found it difficult to move the chair in any direction. I asked a friend who came to visit me earlier this week to test my findings, and she said that the wheels were "no good," so it definitely isn't just me. I am 6'2 myself and a big guy, I work from home and gained a few pounds from mostly staying in and the hell away from other people. However, the Doro C300 Pro V2 is rated for up to 150kg (330lbs), which in my case is used well within its max rating. Ergonomics The number of adjustments you can make, right up to setting it in nap mode — which I haven't fully tested yet — is what you'd expect from a premium chair. Yes, you can go up and down (max 7.5 cm adjustment), rock back and forth (with tilt adjustment), and lock the chair between three stages of 105°, 120°, 135°, which is not quite as flat as the AndaSeat I tested at 160°. Some thought has also gone into the "8D" armrests, too, which are cushioned but quite firm; you'll only know it if you press hard into the PU-covered tops, which give about half a centimeter, but it's enough to ensure your skin won't get awkwardly stuck to it in warmer (or sweatier) conditions. It almost feels like plastic and is very easy to keep clean. However, the armrest positions move far too easily, and I am not sure what that "elbow" function is. Maybe it is good for a short person with short arms, anyway, I never used it and kept it flat at all times. There are eight levels of adjustment for the armrests, they are: backwards, forwards, swing left/right, height up and down, tilt, and 360° rotation, which can be handy for desk clearance. As I said, the armrest pads shift far too easily, which could give off an ergonomic vibe, but who wants the armrest sliding when you are shifting weight? The height adjustability does lock into place when lifting and adjusting. Comfort This is ultimately what it boils down to at the end of the day, right? Quite a lot of reviews praise the comfort of this chair, and I don't disagree that the mesh seating is quite comfortable. I am used to the material from my daily Herman Miller. However, the backrest cannot be locked into place, and this is actually a feature; as you shift or recline yourself on the chair, the backrest moves with your body. It took some getting used to. The lumbar gives ample support, but I would have preferred an adjustable one built into the seat base, as this causes the backrest to move up and down at will. Again, as with my previous chair review, this chair is also rated for tall people, but nowhere in the product documentation does it say how tall. Being 6'2 myself, I'm happy to say that the backrest is tall and wide enough, and thought has been given to being able to adjust the neck rest, but as others have mentioned in their reviews, people as tall as 6.2ft is about the limit for the neckrest. Conclusion What I didn't like The footrest is rated for 15kg (33 lbs), which to me seems a bit light, and after looking online, it seems like a chair footrest for adults must be at least twice that rating. In all honesty, they are just hollow metal tubes, so it is not recommended to let a kid sit on them. I also feel like it doesn't really go out far enough for my height, so that kind of puts the dampener on me being able to use it regularly. I'll just have to continue to use my subwoofer as a footrest! I do not like the armrests being able to shift around as easily as they can, and they are a little too forward-positioned in the chair to comfortably sit close to my desk, because even in the lowest height position, they don't allow me to go under the desk like is possible with my Herman Miller. I also feel like this chair could have been delivered partially constructed, especially the armrests on the seat, and why the aluminum base wasn't already pre-constructed (without the castors) is baffling, considering it would have fit in one of the two boxes that way. The instructions also need to be clearer. On the pamphlet, there's an A to X listing (which is also used in the steps), but none of the physical parts use this lettering system! What I did like I'll be honest, I haven't used it for very long, just one week, and seating comfort is subjective after all! Any spills wiped straight off it, the stitching, and the lines look great, not a fray to be seen or stitch out of place. It looks kind of cool, too. My favorite feature of these seats is the nap mode. While you're not lying completely flat, it leans far back enough to make you easily doze off after a heavy gaming or working session. Overall, this chair offers plenty of comfort features. The MSRP does vary quite a bit depending on the region, at £549.99 in the UK, and €580 in Europe, and $599 before tax in the U.S. However, shipping is free, which is a bonus for such a heavy item. Is it worth it, though? At three years' warranty, I think it's a decent deal. Another firm out of Germany sent me a free replacement hydraulic gas spring for a chair that failed after almost four years, so it was well outside its two-year warranty. My advice is to always try, as you might have the same luck I did. If I could fault it at all, it would be the constant shifting of the armrests and backrest. Where to buy Although the footrest variant normally costs $539.99, it has been discounted to $469.99 on the official website in Black or White. In fact, the non-footrest variant is only $40 cheaper. On Amazon, it currently costs more at $499.99 links below. Sihoo Doro C300 Pro V2 for $469.99 (official website) Sihoo Doro C300 Pro V2 for $499.99 at Amazon US SIHOO provided a free sample without any review or pre-approval. Good to know This Amazon link is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Making US citizens pay is a prominent tool? Joke of the week…
    • Price Drop: Save 86% on Microsoft Office 2021 Professional Plus lifetime digital license by Steven Parker Today's highlighted deal comes via our Apps + Software section of the Neowin Deals store, where you can save 86% on a lifetime license to Microsoft Office 2021 for Windows. This bundle is for families and small businesses who want classic Office apps and email. It includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Teams, and OneNote. A one-time purchase installed on 1 Windows PC for use at home or work. Lifetime license for MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Teams, & OneNote One-time purchase installed on 1 Windows PC for use at home or work Instant Delivery & Download – access your software license keys and download links instantly Free customer service – only the best support! Microsoft Office Professional 2021 (for Windows) includes: Microsoft Office Word Microsoft Office Excel Microsoft Office PowerPoint Microsoft Office Outlook Microsoft Office Teams Microsoft Office OneNote Microsoft Office Publisher Microsoft Office Access No faffing about with subscriptions, just classic apps that don't expire. Good to Know ONE-TIME PURCHASE INSTALLED ON 1 DEVICE Redemption deadline: redeem your code within 30 days of purchase Access options: desktop Full versions No subscriptions – no monthly/annual fees Version: 2021 Updates included* *Support for this version of Office ends on Oct 13, 2026 A lifetime subscription to Microsoft Office 2021 Professional normally costs $219.99, but this deal can be yours for just $29.97, that's a saving of $190. For full terms, specifications, and license info, click the link below. Get Microsoft Office Professional 2021 for just $29.97, or learn more Although priced in U.S. dollars, this deal is available for digital purchase worldwide. Support queries If you have queries or need support for any of the Neowin Deals, please use the contact form here. Neowin Deals are managed and sold by StackCommerce who represent Neowin on an affiliate basis. Why we post these deals We post these because we earn commission on each sale so as not to rely solely on advertising, which many of our readers block. It all helps toward paying staff reporters, servers and hosting costs. So for those that keep moaning and complaining, be thankful we're still online for you to even do that. Other ways to support Neowin Whitelist Neowin by not blocking our ads Create a free member account to see fewer ads Make a donation to support our day to day running costs Subscribe to Neowin - for $14 a year, or $28 a year for an ad-free experience Disclosure: Neowin benefits from revenue of each sale made through our branded deals site powered by StackCommerce.
    • The only reason I want to know where you from is because if you are not from the U.K, then why should you care what we in the U.K do or don't do? Racist I am not, I am fed up with the amount coming over here and feel they can come over here and think we need to support them. Do you know how much it costs this country to support these people coming over here? Even when we give them a place to live it is not good enough. We had a barge that was being used to house immigrants, oh but that was not good enough. A mate said to me at the time, when he was homeless, he would have been happy to live on the barge, instead of ending up sleeping on a bench on the beach. I am not scared to say what my family heritage is, unlike you who is scared to say where they are from or where they live. Father side U.S, mother side Wales, still have family living in the U.S. A mate who sadly died a few years ago, had a load of people from different races recording in his studio, I got on with all of them. Skin colour don't bother me, where they are from don't bother me. Religion don't bother me as long as they don't push it onto me and it is not crazy stuff. I am not religious. But if you are not living in the U.K, then why should you care if we are in the E.U or not? This the problem, too many people poking their noses into where it don't belong. But you believe what you believe, if you think I am racist, then be it, I really do not care. Just grow a pair
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      73
    5. 5
      macoman
      62
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!