40 replies to this topic

[DocM]

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

Quote

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)


SpaceX Dragon (already flying)


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


Blue Origin New Shepard (somewhat black project)

[DocM]

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

[DocM]

Excerpts from the SpaceX Dragon data - looks like it flies in 2014. The 8 companies they're working with were redacted, so let the speculation begin

[DocM]

Boeing CST-100 timeline - they fly in 2015, a year after Dragon but they started later.

[DocM]

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.

[DocM]

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

http://www.nasa.gov/..._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.

[neoadorable]

wait wait have i got it all wrong? i thought Dream Chaser was SSTO this whole time!

[DocM]

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

[neoadorable]

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?

[DocM]

No bucks, no Buck Rogers. It would take billions for NASA to restart it, and with the development level of commercial crew and Falcon Heavy they'd be cheaper/kg of crew and cargo.

[DocM]

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

[neoadorable]

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!

[DocM]

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 ($$$$$$)

[neoadorable]

why can't we have several platforms at the same time? i kinda understand the logic in that.

[DocM]

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.