Форум Новости Космонавтики

ЦитироватьBoeing Submits Proposal for NASA Commercial Crew Transport System

ST. LOUIS, Sept. 23, 2009 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE] submitted a proposal to NASA on Sept. 22 to accelerate the development of commercial human space transportation as defined by NASA in its Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) announcement. Boeing's submission, which draws on the company's experience with proven human-rated spacecraft, proposes development of technologies that will mature its Commercial Crew Transportation System concept.

NASA's CCDev initiative is intended to stimulate private-sector development of a commercially managed system that could be used to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station, Bigelow Aerospace's Orbital Space Complex, and other potential destinations in low Earth orbit.

"Boeing's knowledge of the space station and our long history of supporting NASA with proven human-rated systems should allow us to work closely with NASA to develop a commercially viable, yet safe, crew transportation system," said Keith Reiley, Boeing program manager for the CCDev proposal. "Boeing has a lot to offer NASA in this new field of commercial crew transportation services. To show our commitment, we are willing to make a substantial investment in research and development."

Boeing has strong project management skills, commercial manufacturing experience using Lean management practices, one of the strongest supplier networks in the United States, and a team of talented engineers with practical human spaceflight experience. Most recently, Boeing has applied this experience on its Ares I and Constellation work in support of NASA's exploration mission. Boeing can apply these skills and capabilities to meeting specific milestones to show progress in developing a reliable and safe commercial crew transportation system.

Joining Boeing on the CCDev team will be Las Vegas-based Bigelow Aerospace, LLC. Bigelow Aerospace will provide additional investment, requirements for crew transportation to its Orbital Space Complex, and its expertise from testing and validating the technologies necessary to construct and deploy a full-scale, crewed, commercial orbital space complex.

To support the commercial space industry with space-platform and human-rated systems experience, Boeing also has joined three other teams competing for CCDev agreements. These teams are submitting their own separate proposals.

NASA has announced it will sign funded agreements with one or more teams in November, using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The value of the Space Act Agreements can vary, but NASA has said approximately $50 million is available to distribute and that the funded, fixed-price agreements will run through September 2010.

ЦитироватьDATE:24/09/09
SOURCE:Flight International
Boeing reveals commercial crew transport bid
By Rob Coppinger

Boeing is piling into a $50 million NASA competition to fill the crew transport gap left by the Space Shuttle fleet's 2010 retirement with a concept using its own spacecraft design to deliver cargo and astronauts to low Earth orbit.

Starting in November, NASA's 10-month Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) programme will provide space act agreement (SAA) funding, matched by private finance, either to a single winner or split between many SAAs for multiple companies.

Boeing says: "We will initiate the basic overall system definition and design and will perform subsystem demonstration, such as life support, avionics and landing systems." Boeing's system would be compatible with multiple-launch vehicles.

(http://s45.radikal.ru/i108/0910/b2/762588107b74.jpg)
©Boeing
 Boeing's capsule work (see above) for NASA's defunct Orbital Spaceplane programme will contribute towards its Commercial Crew Development concept

Boeing has on its team Las Vegas, Nevada-based Bigelow Aerospace, which is developing a private space station for government and commercial research and tourism. Bigelow says it is contributing "substantial" private financing and its station will use Boeing's spacecraft, launched on an evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV). Boeing builds the Delta IV EELV.

Boeing says Bigelow will provide details on its station's life support, communications, crew interface and support equipment. Bigelow is submitting its own CCDev proposal, which it says is for "developing a long lead item technology that is applicable to any spacecraft".

Boeing declines to name its other team members, but says its divisions, advanced network and space systems and its space and intelligence systems are onboard three separate CCDev teams. Other companies interested in CCDev are Space Exploration Technologies, Orbital Sciences and Xcor Aerospace.

ЦитироватьНу, коллеги из НАСА на всех переговорах рисуют в планах пусков коммерческие корабли. И они рисуют не политпросветовские рекламные сайты - а абсолютно рабочую информацию. Только вот сроки все время ползут и цены растут.
Поживем - увидим.

Цитироватьwhich it says is for "long lead item technology that is applicable to any spacecraf"

ЦитироватьЭто не альтернатива Constellation. Просто неизбежное осознание что, богу - богово, кесарю - кесарево. NASA это exploration, а логистика и транспорт на LEO вполне по зубам и частникам. При этом NASA осуществляет только общее управление и освобождает собственные ресурсы для более "творческой" работы.

Цитировать...NASA намеревается выделить 50 млн долл в целях экономического стимулирования развития технологий коммерческого пилотируемого транспорта к МКС и другим возможным целям на низкой околоземной орбите.

ЦитироватьNASTAR Center and Special Aerospace Services Commence Research Study on Emergency Detection and Human Response of Atlas V Profile
 
PRESS Release
Date Released: Saturday, August 28, 2010
Source: NASTAR Center

The NASTAR(R) Center, the premier commercial space training and research center in the world, has completed the initial phase of a research effort focused on commercial human spaceflight and systems development related to emergency detection and response using an Atlas V flight profile, under a contract with Special Aerospace Service (SAS) on August 16, 2010.

SAS used the capabilities of NASTAR Center's unique Space Training Simulator (STS-400) to accurately simulate the ascent G accelerations of an Atlas V rocket in Atlas 402 configuration. Nominal scenarios were performed with three subjects in order to understand crew reaction times. Subjects are medically monitored and tested at NASTAR Center. One subject, Jeff Ashby, is a former NASA Space Shuttle commander.

Under current funded efforts with NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program, SAS is supporting United Launch Alliance's Emergency Detection System (EDS) development program. EDS is the key technology
to enable use of the flight-proven Atlas V and Delta IV fleet as part of a potential 'crewed' launch system for commercial spaceflight. The Emergency Detection System monitors key systems parameters and provides warnings and crew instructions on failures. Several potential crewed space craft providers are interested in using the Atlas V with their spacecraft.

The NASTAR Center has trained over 220 spaceflight participants and researchers for upcoming commercial space flights. NASTAR's space training programs are safety approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Brienna Henwood, Director of Space Training Programs and Research at the NASTAR Center remarked, "We are proud to team with SAS on this high profile research opportunity. The data and information collected will provide insight for commercial space players as to how the Atlas V can be used to provide safe, reliable flights."

"The data collected exceeded our expectations. The flight profiles and simulated launch and flight duration experiences were in family with existing human rated launch systems. STS will utilize this crucial data to provide better crew interaction times with ULA's EDS and offer system solutions for future spacecraft", said Tim Bulk, Director of Technical Operations for Special Aerospace Services.

ЦитироватьNASA expects a gap in commercial crew funding[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: October 11, 2010

PRAGUE -- Some companies could see a gap in funding between the first and second rounds of NASA's procurement to help develop commercial crew transportation services for low Earth orbit, according to the agency's top exploration official.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/14608.jpg)
SpaceX is preparing a Dragon capsule for an unmanned test flight in November. Credit: Michael Rooks/SpaceX
 
NASA plans to release a request to industry for proposals in a second round of the commercial crew development, or CCDev, program on or about Oct. 25, the agency said in an announcement on the Federal Business Opportunities website.

Doug Cooke, the associate administrator for NASA's exploration directorate, said payments to the firms under the current CCDev procurement cycle are based on milestones. That means money from the last fiscal year, which concluded Sept. 30, will remain available through December, when the final milestones are scheduled, according to Cooke.

But the Oct. 1 notice of a second CCDev contest indicates the next awards will not come until March 2011. Proposals will be due approximately 45 days after the solicitation, according to NASA.

"There may be a little bit of a gap before we get more money out to industry," Cooke told Spaceflight Now at the 61st International Astronautical Congress in Prague.

Only companies receiving awards in both rounds of CCDev funding would see a gap. The new competition will be open to all companies, not just firms already collecting money from NASA.

NASA unveiled the five companies receiving the first round of CCDev funding Feb. 1, the same day the White House released its fiscal year 2011 budget request. The budget called for the hastened development of commercial crew transportation to take over the job of moving astronauts to and from the International Space Station.

The February space act agreements distributed $50 million in stimulus funds to the five winners.

The CCDev procurement is structured in space act agreements, agile mechanisms that allow NASA to invest in the work of private companies on designs for commercial spaceships or enabling technologies.

The Obama administration requested $3.3 billion for commercial crew services over the next three years, but a so-called compromise bill forged in the Senate slashed the proposal in half. After months of heated contention, the House of Representatives finally agreed to the Senate authorization bill in late September, calling for $1.6 billion for the commercial program.

President Obama signed the authorization act into law on Monday.

Appropriations legislation will ultimately set next year's NASA budget, but passage of a spending bill will wait until after this year's mid-term elections in November.

Cooke said $1.6 billion through 2013 will "present some challenges with funding, but that's OK."

"We're going to make the most effective use of that money," Cooke said. "It's in the positive direction of commercial crew."

He insisted the scaled-back approach to commercial crew transportation would still foster a viable market, at least for NASA's mission of staffing the space station.

It will be up to industry to put up any additional required funds and build the commercial space sector with other destinations in orbit, including private space stations like those being designed by Bigelow Aerospace.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/14609.jpg)
Artist's concept of Boeing's CST-100 crew capsule approaching the International Space Station. Credit: Boeing
 
There should be enough funding in the authorization bill to support three or four CCDev candidates early in the program, then a downselection to two providers, according to Elon Musk, founder and CEO of SpaceX.

Musk forecasts expenditures between $800 million and $1 billion to outfit SpaceX's Dragon capsule and Falcon 9 rockets for human flights. Some of that money could be deferred beyond 2013, the planning horizon in the current NASA bills.

Several industry sources say NASA must provide more funding in the fourth and fifth years of the commercial crew development cycle, before the privately-developed vehicles are flying on operational missions. That money should be separate from firm contracts for crew rotation missions to the space station, according to officials in the private sector.

Two companies, Boeing Co. and Sierra Nevada Corp., from the first CCDev selections are actually designing new commercial spaceships under their agreements with NASA. Three other winners received space act agreements to develop new spacecraft subsystems for human spaceflight.

Boeing's CST-100 crew capsule is a back-to-basics design specifically geared for shuttling crews back and forth to space stations, including both ISS and potential Bigelow complexes.

A Boeing spokesperson said the company is not commenting on the authorization act's implications for its commercial crew prospects. Boeing also considers the projected development cost of the CST-100 as competition sensitive.

Industry officials say the final cost of a privately-built human-rated spacecraft will depend on NASA's stringent safety and oversight requirements, implying more flexible standards would reduce costs.

Alluding to that concern, Cooke said NASA is considering several contractual alternatives to introduce more flexibility and efficiencies for revenue-oriented companies.

In a media teleconference Sept. 15, Boeing officials said they were hoping for fresh funding by Nov. 1 to keep the CST-100 design team in place. Without such money, Boeing's target to begin operational flights of the capsule by 2015 could be in jeopardy, according to John Elbon, the vice president and program manager of the company's commercial crew transportation system.

Boeing managers and executives have repeatedly cited NASA's turn to commercial crew services as the deciding factor in the business case for the CST-100.

Between 80 and 100 employees are working on the CST-100 project, which is being financed through Boeing capital and NASA's $18 million investment in the CCDev program.

Edmund Memi, a Boeing spokesperson, last week said the company is "assessing whether we can fund internally during this gap, but we have not made the final decision at this point to do so."

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/14610.jpg)
Artist's concept of a Dream Chaser spacecraft. Credit: Sierra Nevada
 
Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser is receiving $20 million in CCDev funding, the largest award in the first round of the program.

The Dream Chaser is a lifting body spaceship based on the NASA-designed HL-20 spaceplane. It would launch vertically on an Atlas 5 rocket and return to Earth for landing on a runway. Sierra Nevada expects the Dream Chaser's first flight in 2014.

Sierra Nevada's SpaceDev division was already working on the Dream Chaser before NASA's commercial crew program. The winged craft was competed for NASA's commercial cargo initiative, but the agency ultimately selected SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. for the job.

SpaceX was not one of the winners in the first round of CCDev, but the firm could stand a better chance at federal funds in round two, which will be targeted at maturing technologies.

"NASA intends to solicit proposals from all interested U.S. industry participants to further advance commercial crew space transportation system concepts and mature the design and development of elements of the system such as launch vehicles and spacecraft," the Oct. 1 CCDev announcement said.

ЦитироватьNASA expects to award roughly $200 million next year to multiple contractors seeking to refine designs for launchers and spacecraft that would transport astronauts to and from low Earth orbit destinations on a commercial basis, the agency announced Oct. 25.

"Multiple awards are expected to be announced by March 2011 for terms of up to 14 months," NASA said in an Oct. 25 news release, adding that money available for the effort will depend on congressional approval of funds anticipated in a 2011 omnibus appropriations bill in the coming months.

Under the CCDev 2 effort, contractors are expected to submit proposals to refine designs for subsystems or components that could "accelerate the availability of an identified element" of a commercial transportation system, NASA said in a solicitation posted to the agency's procurement website Oct. 25.

"For example, work on items such as life support systems, launch abort systems, or rendezvous sensors would meet the goals of this Announcement if shown to accelerate the development of a participant or team member's proposed spacecraft," the Announcement for Proposals states. Another example would be work on items such as emergency detection systems, main engines or propellants that could accelerate launch vehicle development.

However, proposals to work on subsystems or components not tied to a specific commercial vehicle designs would not meet CCDev 2 goals, the document states.

NASA expects to award Space Act Agreements to winning bidders by March, with CCDev 2 milestones to be completed no later than May 2012. A full-scale development program for commercial crew taxis is expected to follow.

The deadline for submitting proposals is Dec. 13.

ЦитироватьNASA launches next round of commercial crew program[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: October 25, 2010

NASA formally released a tender Monday for the second round of competition for privately-developed spacecraft to carry U.S. astronauts to orbit by the middle of the decade, supplanting the agency's reliance on Russian contractors.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/14839.jpg)     
Artist's concept of Boeing's CST-100 crew capsule on top of a Delta 4 rocket. Credit: Boeing
 
About $200 million will be available to winning U.S. bidders this round, four times the figure awarded in February to five companies. The $50 million for the first commercial crew development, or CCDev, competition came from the Recovery Act of 2009.

NASA is seeking proposals to "further advance commercial crew space transportation concepts and mature the design and development of system elements, such as launch vehicles and spacecraft," the agency said in a press release.

The CCDev program is aimed at fostering a new commercial space industry to eventually take over human transportation duties to and from low Earth orbit, partially filling the void left after the retirement of the space shuttle. Until such providers are available, NASA astronauts can only get to space on Russian Soyuz spacecraft.

Proposals are due Dec. 13 and the agency expects to announce the winners in March 2011 for terms of up to 14 months. The CCDev 2 awards will be structured as funded space act agreements, agile contracting mechanisms that allow NASA to invest in the work of private companies on designs for commercial spaceships or enabling technologies.

NASA says $200 million is expected to be available to dole out to the next series of winners, but the exact figure depends on the passage of stalled appropriations legislation in Congress. Lawmakers will pass new federal budget bills after reconvening following the upcoming mid-term elections, but the timing of such legislation is uncertain.

Congress passed this year's NASA authorization bill in September and President Obama signed the legislation into law Oct. 11. The authorization act provides guidelines for the agency's new budget, calling for $1.6 billion for commercial crew development efforts through 2013.

There are no limitations on the pending procurement. Companies that did not receive space act agreements in February will be eligible for awards next spring. Firms already working on technologies under the CCDev program are not guaranteed more funding in the second round.

But programs kicked off under the CCDev procurement in February will run out of NASA money by the end of December, likely forcing some companies to either continue development using their own capital or temporarily halt design work and testing.

Industry officials say they do not expect any significant federal funds beyond Jan. 1 until new awards are announced in March.

The payments are structured based on milestones, meaning companies receive fresh funding as they accomplish key objectives and tests.

The winners of the two largest slices of the CCDev funding pie this year were Sierra Nevada Corp. and Boeing Co. with $20 million and $18 million, respectively.

Sierra Nevada is designing a lifting body spaceship named the Dream Chaser for launch by 2014 on an Atlas 5 rocket.

Boeing's CST-100 capsule should be ready to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station by 2015, according to project officials.

Between 80 and 100 employees are working on the CST-100 spacecraft, according to Boeing.

SpaceX was not one of the winners in the first round of CCDev, but the firm could stand a better chance at federal funds in round two, which will be targeted at maturing technologies.

According to the announcement, NASA will again consider proposals highlighting on enabling technologies that would help accelerate another spacecraft. The first round of CCDev agreements included funding for a life support system, launch abort system and a rocket emergency detection system.

Those technologies could be included again in CCDev, along with main engines, propellants and rendezvous sensors, according to NASA.

ЦитироватьTue, 8 February, 2011
Astrium, ATK Team Up on CCDev-2 Bid[/size]
By Peter B. de Selding and Amy Svitak

    PARIS and WASHINGTON — The prime contractors for Europe's Ariane 5 heavy-lift rocket and the U.S. space shuttle's solid-rocket boosters have agreed to design a rocket to carry crew and cargo into orbit in a bid to win a contract under NASA's Commercial Crew Development-2 (CCDev-2) procurement, the two companies announced Feb. 8.

    Under the agreement, whose technical and cost details have yet to be fully calculated, Astrium Space Transportation would provide a derivative of the Ariane 5 main cryogenic stage to Minneapolis-based Alliant TechSystems (ATK), which would place the European stage atop an ATK-built five-segment solid-rocket first stage.

    The companies said they could field a vehicle, dubbed Liberty, quickly enough for a 2013 inaugural flight, with a second flight in 2014.

    "This team represents the true sense of international partnership in that we looked across borders to find the best for our customers," Blake Larson, president of ATK Aerospace Systems Group, said in a Feb. 8 statement. "Together we combine unique flight-proven systems and commercial experience that allows us to offer the market's most capable launch vehicle along with flexibility to meet a wide variety of emerging needs. Liberty provides greater performance at less cost than any other comparable launch vehicle."

    Silvio Sandrone, vice president of business development at Les Mureaux, France-based Astrium Space Transportation, said the first step in the collaboration will be a detailed study of the feasibility of placing the Ariane 5 main stage atop the ATK stage. One key difference for the Astrium-provided stage would be that, in the ATK configuration, it would be ignited in orbit, not on the ground as it is for Ariane 5 launches.

    A second key development parameter will be to "human rate" the Ariane 5 stage so that it meets NASA's safety criteria for transporting astronauts. While the initial Ariane 5 design was for a human-rated vehicle — Europe had envisioned its own space shuttle at the time — the current version would require several modifications to be deemed acceptable for human transport.

    In a Feb. 8 interview, Sandrone said the political obstacles to the ATK-Astrium Liberty vehicle may be more difficult than the technical work. While the U.S. government regularly uses the Atlas 5 rocket, whose first-stage engine is Russian-built, the future NASA crew-transport rocket will have "a higher visibility" and may therefore generate opposition in the United States due to its non-U.S. content, he said.

    Astrium, for its part, has informed the French space agency, CNES; the French arms-procurement agency, DGA; and the 18-nation European Space Agency of its discussions with ATK and anticipates no difficulties in securing the requisite export licenses.

    Sandrone said Astrium has not given detailed price estimates to ATK. Nonetheless, he said, the idea of using an existing rocket stage, with a reliable flight history and existing six- or seven-unit annual production run, should enable the ATK-Astrium team to propose prices that fit within NASA's requirements.

ЦитироватьSafety system tested for Atlas and Delta rockets[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: February 13, 2011

WASHINGTON -- United Launch Alliance is seeking funding from NASA this year to finish designing a key safety system for potential commercial crew launches on its Atlas and Delta rocket fleet, officials said last week.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/16685.jpg)
Artist's concept of the Atlas 5 rocket with a Boeing CST-100 crew capsule. Boeing says its commercial crew spacecraft will be operational in 2015. Credit: Boeing
 
The company is human-rating the Atlas 5 and Delta 4 rockets to launch astronauts inside privately-built spacecraft. NASA is partnering with ULA and spacecraft builders to carry U.S. astronauts into orbit by 2015.
After receiving $6.7 million from NASA last year, ULA kicked off the design of a health-monitoring computer to identify rocket failures in time to save crews.
George Sowers, ULA's vice president of business development, said the company developed a prototype Emergency Detection System last year and tested the design in a high-fidelity simulation lab in Denver.
The company, a joint venture between Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp., invited NASA officials and astronauts to participate in flight simulations of the Emergency Detection System, or EDS. The system is a computer designed to recognize an impending mishap and trigger an abort to pull astronauts away.
The goal, Sowers says, is to have the EDS ready to go when spacecraft builders start launching manned missions on the Atlas 5 or Delta 4.
"Most of our spacecraft are talking 2014 at the earliest for crewed flight, so we're trying to protect that 2014 date," Sowers said.
ULA is revamping its existing rockets to launch commercial manned payloads. Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corp. have already issued subcontracts to ULA to begin studying how to launch their proposed spacecraft.
Boeing is designing a seven-person capsule named the CST-100, and Sierra Nevada is working on a lifting body space plane called the Dream Chaser. Orbital Sciences Corp. is also interested in launching its proposed Prometheus space plane on an Atlas 5 rocket.
Sowers said ULA is working with every potential spacecraft provider except for SpaceX, which plans to launch the manned Dragon capsule on its own Falcon 9 rocket.
Orbital and Boeing claim their spacecraft will be ready to launch by 2015. Sierra Nevada says 2014 is the earliest the Dream Chaser will be operational.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/16686.jpg)
File photo of a Delta 4-Heavy rocket launching in November 2010. Credit: Pat Corkery/United Launch Alliance
 
Speaking to commercial space pioneers and executives assembled here Thursday, ULA's top executive called for advancing the availability of all commercial transportation systems to 2014.
"I think we need to stretch our goals to have commercial crew service operating by 2014," said Michael Gass, ULA's president and CEO.
Gass said ULA will be ready to meet that schedule.
ULA officials do not expect making any major changes to the Atlas 5 and Delta 4 rockets, which have amassed a combined 38 flights and enjoy a reliable track record.
The EDS is the most significant modification required for either launch vehicle, Sowers said.
"We think the rocket we already have will meet NASA's requirements," Sowers said. "We haven't proven that yet. We have to go through that process with NASA and do all the certification."
Changes to ground infrastructure might be needed to accommodate a higher flight rate and give crews access to board their spacecraft.
The most likely manned payload for the Delta 4 rocket will be the government-owned Orion capsule. Now considered to be a space station lifeboat and potential deep space exploration vehicle, the Orion could launch atop Delta boosters from modified space shuttle facilities at the Kennedy Space Center.
Commercial operators are gravitating toward the Atlas 5, which ULA hopes to keep flying from launch pad 41, the home of its unmanned satellite missions.
The EDS is the centerpiece of ULA's commercial crew program, which encompasses about 40 employees.
"The Emergency Detection System, just like its name says, is there to perceive an emergency with the rocket," Sowers said. "It sends a command to the spacecraft, which would initiate the launch abort system."
Spending a mix of private and public funds, ULA developed and demonstrated prototype EDS crew displays monitored by NASA mission control teams during a real Atlas 5 launch in August.
The EDS passed a major milestone Dec. 8 with an abort demonstration inside ULA's simulation lab, a computer-controlled system that gauges how systems respond to failures. ULA announced the milestone this week in conjunction with the FAA Commercial Space Transportation conference here.
The Dec. 8 demo included four failure scenarios, including a fast- and slow-developing anomaly in Atlas 5's first and second stages.
"It's fun to do these simulated failures," Sowers said. "We haven't had an Atlas failure since 1993, and in one day we had four simulated fast and slow failure modes in the first and second stage phases of flights -- a fast failure being something like sudden loss of thrust and a slow failure being something like a degradation of pressure. The system was able to detect all four of those failures and abort in time."
ULA is partnering with NASA and other firms to usher in an era of commercial space travel. After the retirement of the space shuttle, NASA plans to move away from government-run space transportation and purchase services from industry.
"I think we can easily beat the objective of providing crew and cargo support to the space station for less than 50 percent of the cost of the shuttle," Gass said.
NASA is investing in private partners with the Commercial Crew Development, or CCDev, program to provide government funds to companies designing and building human-rated rockets and spacecraft. Last year's $6.7 million award was part of the first round of the CCDev competition.
Sowers said private firms are closely looking at launches on the Atlas 5 rocket in its so-called "402" configuration, which features two RL10 upper stage engines and no solid rocket boosters.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/16687.jpg)
Simulated view of a Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser space plane and the Centaur upper stage of an Atlas 5 rocket. Credit: United Launch Alliance
 
Engineers can program the Atlas 5 rocket's Russian main engine to throttle, limiting launch accelerations to about four times gravity.
Jeff Ashby, a former space shuttle astronaut, strapped into a centrifuge at the National Aerospace Training and Research center in Philadelphia to experience what it would be like to blast off on an Atlas 5 booster.
Ashby weathered the ride well, offering design inputs on the placement of checklists, control panels and switches in the cockpit of commercial vehicles.
NASA approved an extension of ULA's ongoing work through April, several months later than the development's original end date in December.
In the meantime, NASA is on the verge of awarding about $200 million to private companies in the second CCDev competition. The agency expects to announce the CCDev 2 winners in late March.
ULA hopes to spend its winnings on further design of the emergency computer, which is about the size of a microwave oven. The company will also seek a supplier to build the EDS, Sowers said.
The EDS will have to be put through checkouts to make sure it will survive the launch environment, then ULA plans to put the computer on unmanned rocket launches for flight testing.
"Fundamentally, it's about a three-year design and development process," Sowers said. "We've done one year and we need a couple of more years before we actually put it on a rocket."

ЦитироватьMon, 4 April, 2011
CCDev-2 Awards Expected to Total Roughly $270 Million[/size]
By Amy Svitak

    WASHINGTON — NASA expects to award roughly $270 million April 6 to multiple contractors seeking to refine designs for launchers and spacecraft that would transport astronauts to and from low Earth orbit on a commercial basis, according to government and industry sources.

    The space agency is still awaiting congressional action on its 2011 budget request, which proposed spending $500 million on commercial crew initiatives this year. Absent a congressional appropriation in the current budget year, however, NASA announced in October that it expected to award just $200 million in its second round of Commercial Crew Development (CCDev 2) agreements this spring.

    With the latest in a series of stopgap spending measures designed to keep the federal government operating set to expire April 8, the budget picture remains unclear. However, the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, which U.S. President Barack Obama signed into law in October, recommended appropriating $312 million for commercial crew efforts in 2011, providing a level of support for upping the ante on the CCDev 2 awards, industry and government sources said.

    NASA in February contacted eight companies that had submitted bids for CCDev 2 money: Alliant Techsystems, Blue Origin, Boeing, Excalibur Almaz, Orbital Sciences Corp., Sierra Nevada Corp., Space Exploration Technologies and United Launch Alliance. The companies were invited to NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston to discuss the proposals they submitted in December.

    NASA is expected to name at least four winners in the latest round of CCDev 2 agreements, according to industry sources.

    NASA started the CCDev program in 2009 with $50 million in seed money awarded to a mix of five new and established aerospace firms including Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and United Launch Alliance. The companies used the funding to refine technologies in support of Obama's plan to nurture a private market for transporting astronauts to low Earth orbit.

ЦитироватьDate Released: Monday, April 4, 2011
Source: Commercial Spaceflight Federation

Commercial Spaceflight Federation Responds to Recent Aerospace Corporation White Paper on NASA's Commercial Crew Program[/size]

Washington, D.C., April 4, 2011 - The Commercial Spaceflight Federation released the following statement on the Aerospace Corporation's Space Launch Projects Group/Launch System Division's recent white paper on the business case of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, entitled "The Financial Feasibility and a Reliability Based Acquisition Approach for Commercial Crew":

NASA's Commercial Crew Program is a critical program for NASA's future, serving as the fastest way to regain an American capability to fly astronauts to the Space Station and resulting in significant savings to US taxpayers. While the Commercial Spaceflight Federation agrees with the Aerospace Corporation's Space Launch Projects Group on its recognition of the importance of commercial spaceflight to NASA, the Commercial Spaceflight Federation finds many of the model inputs, assumptions and assertions in the white paper to be incorrect or inaccurate, and strongly disagrees with the white paper's resulting conclusions.

As the authors of the white paper state, "The model and the results cannot validate the detail [sic] financials of any one commercial enterprise." Without appropriate inputs and assumptions, models cannot and should not be interpreted as generating real-world findings.

The white paper authors did not consult with industry in the course of their work, resulting in significant inaccuracies in the model inputs and assumptions. The white paper authors did not seek out real-world cost data, business case financials, or market assessments from potential commercial crew providers, such as United Launch Alliance, Sierra Nevada Corporation, SpaceX, Blue Origin, or others, nor did they contact the Commercial Spaceflight Federation. The white paper authors likewise did not consult any of the private investors who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars into the commercial spaceflight industry based on this proprietary information. As a result, many of the model inputs and assumptions used in the white paper are erroneous, contributing to conclusions that are incorrect and inaccurate.

The white paper primarily focuses on hypothetical spacecraft that are unlike those actually being developed. The white paper findings almost entirely revolve around the business case for spacecraft that have 4 seats, while most of the leading contenders for the Commercial Crew Program are developing vehicles with a capacity of 7 seats, including Boeing, SpaceX, and Sierra Nevada Corporation. For a given launch cost, a 7-seat capacity results in a significantly lower cost when compared with a 4-seat capacity.

The white paper assumes that commercial providers would sell seats to space tourists at a loss, but gives no explanation as to why a commercial business would sell its products or services at a loss. The commercial spaceflight industry categorically rejects this notion. Industry further rejects the white paper's additional notion that commercial providers would then increase rates to the government to subsidize that loss. The Commercial Spaceflight Federation strongly disagrees with any of the white paper's conclusions arising from these inexplicable assumptions.

The white paper ignores cases where sales of seats to other customers would actually decrease the per-seat cost to NASA. As one example, the white paper ignored the case where NASA purchases 4 seats on board a spacecraft that has a capacity of 7 seats. Should no other customers participate, those three seats would fly empty, and NASA would pay the full cost of the flight. However, if those empty seats are sold to other parties, the increased revenue from the flight could decrease the per-seat cost to NASA. Alternatively, the extra volume and payload mass could be sold to NASA as room for additional cargo, generating additional revenue.

The white paper assumes a large fixed cost of $400 million per year per company, but gives no basis for this number. This assumed fixed cost, which would be in addition to the marginal cost of a given flight, is a primary driver for many of the resulting findings of the white paper. Industry believes this number to be a significant over-estimate. By comparison, SpaceX's total expenditures over eight-and-a-half years as a company since it was founded are less than $800 million. That includes the cost of developing two new launch vehicles from scratch (Falcon 1 and Falcon 9), developing the Dragon spacecraft, conducting seven launches, including an orbital test flight of Dragon, and building out the infrastructure for two separate launch sites. It is highly unlikely that an additional $400 million per year in fixed costs would be required to conduct human spaceflight missions. The Aerospace Corporation typically uses cost models based on historical costs of government systems, and is not equipped to do cost analysis for commercially developed systems, such as with the NASA Commercial Crew and COTS Cargo development programs.

The large assumed fixed cost appears to include significant double counting. Launch vehicle fixed costs are distributed between all launch vehicle customers, including: DoD and intelligence community national security missions, NASA science missions, commercial satellite missions, NASA technology demo missions, and unmanned cargo missions. It is unclear if the white paper author's fixed-cost number accounts for these effects. In addition, this fixed-cost number is assumed to be a constant $400 million per company even when there are multiple winners, despite the fact that multiple winners may share launch vehicles, launch site infrastructure, training and medical facilities, recovery vessels, or other major components of fixed-cost estimates.

The white paper ignores the possibility of reductions in cost due to reusability. The Boeing CST-100, the SpaceX Dragon, and the Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser have all been explicitly designed to be reusable, which would result in a significant reduction in the marginal cost of each mission. The white paper made no effort to include this additional source of cost reductions.

The white paper ignores the "sovereign client" market entirely. The "sovereign client" market is well-established, and is defined as the sale of seats to other space agencies, other national governments, or similar entities. By some estimates, this market could be equal to or larger than the orbital space tourist market. Since 1978, the United States and Russia have flown almost 100 guest astronauts representing 30 countries, either in exchange for in-kind services or for payment. There remains significant pent-up demand for additional spaceflight missions within these countries, and almost 150 nations have never had a citizen fly in space. At least eight countries have active duty astronauts who have yet to fly in space and who are not currently manifested to fly on the Space Shuttle or Soyuz. An example of this international interest is represented by the work of Bigelow Aerospace, which has already signed a number of MOUs with national space agencies, government entities, and companies in a diverse array of countries including the United Arab Emirates, Japan, and the Netherlands.

The white paper likely underestimates the demand for orbital space tourism to a significant degree. According to at least one study (Futron Space Tourism Market Study, 2002), the white paper authors significantly underestimate the demand for space tourist seats. For example, the white paper assumes only 20 people in the world are willing to pay $30 million per seat. There are currently approximately 30,000 people in the world worth $100 million or more who could purchase such a ticket. Given that past experience shows people are willing to spend a significant fraction of their personal net worth in order to fly in space, such a minute market penetration seems unrealistic.

The white paper assumes a NASA demand of only 8 seats per year, which may significantly underestimate NASA's demand over the long term. By comparison, NASA's current demand for seats is approximately 40 seats to space per year, either through flights of the Space Shuttle or through Soyuz seat purchases. It is reasonable to expect that with a robust, cost-effective U.S. commercial crew capability with large seat capacities, the government may in the future seek to restore NASA's astronaut flights to 2010 levels in order to fully utilize the Space Station, to ensure a return on the $100 billion investment made in its construction, and to retain the national prestige that comes with having a vibrant astronaut corps.

The white paper ignores the potential for multiple winners to significantly keep development and operations costs low. The white paper does not model how competition in the market place would result in lower prices and work to prevent the significant cost overruns and schedule slips that have been the historic norm for government programs with a single winner. The virtuous cycle of increased demand from NASA and other governments that would then result from these lower costs is likewise not modeled.

The white paper underestimates the rate of price increases by the Soyuz. The white paper assumes Soyuz prices are increasing at the rate of 5% per year and will have an average price of only $70 million per seat over 10 years of operations. In reality, Soyuz prices have recently increased at the rate of 9-13% per year. Even at steady (linear) increases of seat prices, current increases indicate an average price over 10 years of $87 million, a price level 24% higher than the price assumed by the white paper.

The white paper refers to the EELV's as "government developed systems", yet these systems were in fact commercially developed under a program structured almost identically to COTS and Commercial Crew. The EELV's were developed using Other Transaction Authority (OTA) agreements, with a fixed investment by the U.S. Air Force supplemented by private investment in order to meet government requirements. Both EELVs, have had a distinguished record of success, with Atlas V having launched 24 of 24 flights successfully and Delta IV having launched 15 of 15 successfully.

In conclusion, any model that does not make use of appropriate assumptions or real-world data will be of limited use. Given that the commercial spaceflight industry finds many of the model inputs, assumptions and assertions in the white paper to be incorrect or inaccurate, no findings or conclusions from the white paper's analysis should be considered accurate or of significance in any real-world setting without significant further review and industry input.

About the Commercial Spaceflight Federation

The mission of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF) is to promote the development of commercial human spaceflight, pursue ever-higher levels of safety, and share best practices and expertise throughout the industry. The Commercial Spaceflight Federation's member companies, which include commercial spaceflight developers, operators, spaceports, suppliers, and service providers, are creating thousands of high-tech jobs nationwide, working to preserve American leadership in aerospace through technology innovation, and inspiring young people to pursue careers in science and engineering. For more information please visit www.commercialspaceflight.org or contact Executive Director John Gedmark at john@commercialspaceflight.org or at 202.349.1121.

ЦитироватьCommercial Crew Market Study Generates Small Firestorm[/size]
By Amy Svitak

    WASHINGTON — NASA is downplaying the significance of a recent study by the Aerospace Corp. that concludes the agency could pay up to $20 billion over 15 years to foster private development and operation of a single, viable commercial crew transportation system.

    According to the federally funded research group's findings, presented Feb. 28 to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, Deputy Administrator Lori Garver and Associate Administrator Christopher Scolese, the agency's out-of-pocket cost to ferry astronauts between Earth and the international space station aboard privately developed space taxis could exceed $100 million per seat — significantly more than the agency currently pays to fly astronauts to the orbiting outpost aboard Russian Soyuz spacecraft.

    NASA spokesman Michael Braukus said the Aerospace Corp. analysis, paid for by the agency's Independent Program and Cost Evaluation office, led by Michael Hawes, is one of many commissioned to assess the business case for private space taxis.

    "The Aerospace Corporation used their own assumptions for many of the inputs to the analysis; they did not use proprietary data inputs from companies developing commercial crew systems or from NASA, which makes their analysis of limited use," Braukus said in a April 5 email, one day after a set of Aerospace Corp. briefing charts on the study surfaced on NASA Watch.

    The Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF), an advocacy group here, blasted the report's assumptions as not based in reality, and said many of its findings are flawed.

    "Given that the commercial spaceflight industry finds many of the model inputs, assumptions and assertions in the white paper to be incorrect or inaccurate, no findings or conclusions from the white paper's analysis should be considered accurate or of significance in any real-world setting without significant further review and industry input," the group said in a lengthy rebuttal issued April 4.

    Specifically, the CSF said the Aerospace study is focused on hypothetical spacecraft rather than vehicles currently in development; assumes private tickets for seats aboard space taxis would be sold at a loss; uses an arbitrary fixed-cost estimate of $400 million per company; ignores potential cost savings that could result from vehicle reusability; underestimates both commercial and NASA demand for seats aboard privately built spacecraft; fails to account for the increasing per-seat cost of Soyuz flights; and characterizes the U.S. Air Force's Atlas 5 and Delta 4 rockets as government-developed systems. The CSF said the program under which those vehicles were developed has more in common with commercial initiatives like NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program.

    Los Angeles-based Aerospace Corp., in an undated explanation of the study and its methodology, said the analysis was merely intended to develop a modeling tool that could be applied to a variety of data.

    "The results shown to NASA and Congress recently were not intended to represent any specific real world scenario," the company said in a memo obtained by Space News. "We modeled a scenario utilizing data from as long as 10 months ago in order to demonstrate the tool's viability, not the viability of any specific commercial crew transportation system."

    Aerospace Corp. said it initiated the work on its own in late 2009. Some time later Hawes' office asked for, and funded, an expanded and refined analysis of the initial work, which relied on historical data to develop its business-case model.

    "The results were not expected to reflect what the commercial community has been developing," the Aerospace memo says, adding that different assumptions could be used "to produce significantly different results."

    Meanwhile, Braukus said, NASA is wrapping up a much more comprehensive commercial market analysis that was called for in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010. "The Aerospace report was a completely different type of analysis than what was requested in the Authorization Act for the Commercial Market Assessment," Braukus said in the email. "The objective of the Aerospace work, as it was described in the report, was 'to provide ballpark results for what it would take to make a stand alone private enterprise business case close.'"

    Braukus said the objective of the congressionally mandated assessment is to examine the potential nongovernment market for commercially developed crew and cargo transportation systems and capabilities.

    "Thus, NASA does not intend to incorporate any results from the Aerospace work into the Commercial Market Assessment," he said. "However, we will compare its findings to other studies or analyses of the business case for commercial crew," such as those performed by Futron Corp. and SAIC, he said.

ЦитироватьMon, 18 April, 2011
CCDev Awards Expected Today[/size]
By Amy Svitak

    WASHINGTON — NASA expects to award nearly $300 million in Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) agreements to multiple providers April 18 to continue work on launchers and spacecraft capable of transporting astronauts to and from low Earth orbit on a commercial basis.

    NASA announced last October that it expected to make the CCDev 2 awards this spring. In February the agency invited eight companies to the Johnson Space Center in Houston to discuss proposals they submitted in December: Alliant Techsystems (ATK), Blue Origin, Boeing, Excalibur Almaz, Orbital Sciences Corp., Sierra Nevada Corp., Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and United Launch Alliance (ULA).

    A callback is no guarantee of an award; NASA is expected to name at least four winners of second-round, CCDev 2 agreements, according to industry sources.

    Announcement of the awards was expected April 6, but government and industry sources said that was put on hold until Congress approved a stopgap spending measure April 14 that will fund federal agencies, including NASA, through the end of the fiscal year Sept. 30. The 2011 appropriation, known as a continuing resolution, includes $3.8 billion for NASA's exploration systems development office, which funds commercial crew initiatives.

    NASA started the CCDev program in 2009 with $50 million in seed money awarded to a mix of five new and established aerospace firms, including Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and ULA. The companies used the funding to refine technologies in support of U.S. President Barack Obama's plan to nurture commercial services for transporting astronauts to low Earth orbit.

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

ЦитироватьНАСА выделяет 270 млн долларов частным американским космическим подрядчикам[/size]
(02:24) 19.04.2011

Американское космическое агентство НАСА выделило очередную порцию грантов четырем компания, работающим по программе развития американской пилотируемой космонавтики. Четыре компании, в том числе Boeing и SpaceX, получили в общей сложности 270 млн долларов. Согласно данным НАСА, больше всего денег - 92,3 млн долларов - получила компания Boeing, которая недавно начала вторую часть программы по созданию коммерческого пилотируемого корабля CCDev2.

Компания Sierra Nevada Corp, ведущая разработки собственного космического шаттла DreamChaser, получила 80 млн долларов из госбюджета США. Еще 75 млн долларов получила компания SpaceX, недавно завершившая испытания по выведению своей космической капсулы Dragon. Напомним, что компания на собственной ракете-носителе вывела Dragon на околоземную орбиту, после чего Dragon обогнула нашу планету по кругу и приземлилась в Тихом океане.

Наконец, 22 млн долларов получила компания Blue Origin, также работающая по программе развития частной космонавтики.

"Эти соглашения чрезвычайно важны для НАСА. Они позволяют сохранить присутствие Америки на околоземной орбите в ближайшие годы, тогда как само НАСА сконцентрируется на подготовке программ межпланетных полетов", - сказал директор космического агентства Чарльз Болден.

Напомним, что находящимся более 30 лет в эксплуатации космическим шаттлам осталось совершить всего два полета - в апреле (шаттл Эндевор) и и июне (шаттл Атлантис), после чего американские астронавты будут доставляться на МКС на российских "Союзах" и в будущем, возможно, на частных американских пилотируемых аппаратах.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

NASA. Year 2000

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17870.jpg)

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

NASA. Year 2000

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17870.jpg)

Тоже мне, "нетрадиционно"... :)
(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/213.jpg)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

NASA. Year 2000

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17870.jpg)

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

ЦитироватьПорадовало с самого начала :lol:
(http://s58.radikal.ru/i162/1104/d3/2350ff479232t.jpg) (http://s58.radikal.ru/i162/1104/d3/2350ff479232.jpg)

ЦитироватьNASA Provides Seed Money For CCDev-2[/size]

Apr 19, 2011
 
By Frank Morring, Jr.

NASA has dished out generous helpings of seed money to four companies for work on commercial crew vehicles in the second round of its Commercial Crew Development (CCDev-2), advancing a total of $269.3 million to mature concepts for private spacecraft to carry astronauts to the International Space Station and other low-Earth-orbit destinations.

Boeing was the big winner in CCDev-2, getting $92.3 million on top of the $18 million it won last year. Sierra Nevada Corp., last year's top winner, will get $80 million to go with the $20 million it received in 2010.

Space Exploration Technologies Inc. (SpaceX), which already has flown its Dragon cargo capsule to orbit and back, has been granted $75 million to develop a launch abort system and other hardware so the Dragon can carry crew. Blue Origin, the secretive startup organized by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, was allotted $22 million to continue work on its vertical takeoff and landing craft.

"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," stated NASA Administrator Charles Bolden in the April 18 press release announcing the awards. "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."

Boeing has produced its first test article for the CST-100 capsule it is building with CCDev-1 and -2 funds, matched with corporate money. Similarly, Sierra Nevada is building composite structures for its Dream Chaser lifting body vehicle. Both can be launched on a variety of launch vehicles.

SpaceX is using its own Falcon 9 rocket to launch the Dragon, while the Blue Origin's New Shepherd vehicle uses internal engines after the fashion of the old DC-XA testbed.

Losing out in the selection were Orbital Sciences, which like SpaceX is under contract to build a commercial cargo vehicle — Cygnus — to supply the ISS, and has started a separate lifting-body effort for commercial crew. ATK, which had teamed with Europe's EADS Astrium to propose a vehicle dubbed Liberty that would use the five-segment solid-fuel first stage developed for the defunct Ares I rocket and an Ariane 5 main stage conversion as its upper stage, also lost out.

"The next American-flagged vehicle to carry our astronauts into space is going to be a U.S. commercial provider," stated 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."

ЦитироватьMon, 18 April, 2011
NASA Announces CCDev 2 Awards[/size]
By Warren Ferster

    WASHINGTON — Boeing Co. garnered the largest of four NASA Space Act Agreement awards designed to nurture the development of commercially operated astronaut transport systems, landing a deal worth $92.3 million to refine the design of its CST-100 crew capsule, the U.S. space agency announced April 18.

    The other winners of NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) 2 awards are: Blue Origin, $22 million; Sierra Nevada Corp., $80 million; and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), $75 million. The awards are intended to help the companies refine their concepts for transporting astronauts to and from the international space station on a commercial basis.

    With the exception of SpaceX, all of the selected companies received NASA funding under the first round of CCDev awards, made in 2009. SpaceX is already under contract to develop and provide a commercial logistics service for the space station.

    NASA received 22 CCDev 2 bids from industry in December. Among the bidders not selected for second round awards are: Alliant Techsystems, Orbital Sciences Corp., United Launch Alliance and United Space Alliance.

    "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 in a prepared statement. "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."

    Ed Mango, manager of NASA's commercial crew program, said in a statement that the space agency will support the development of multiple U.S. astronaut transport systems that will be available to government and commercial customers.

    In a press release, Boeing said it would use the CCDev 2 funding to reduce risk on its Crew Space Transportation (CST) -100 capsule. "We are combining lessons learned and best practices from commercial airplanes, satellites and launch systems with those from human spaceflight programs such as the space shuttle and the International Space Station to design, deliver and fly the CST-100 in 2015," John Elbon, vice president and program manager, Boeing Commercial Crew Programs, said in a prepared statement.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьГэри Хадсон выложил презенташку своей концепции, которая сегодня проиграла конкурс. Выглядит довольно любопытно и можно сказать нетрадиционно.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24859.0

NASA. Year 2000

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17870.jpg)

Тоже мне, "нетрадиционно"... :)
(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/213.jpg)

Вообще, это форма ГЧ МБР на раннем этапе развития.
 "Юбка" обеспечивает стабилизацию при входе в атмосферу, а сферический нос уменьшает тепловую нагрузку.

ЦитироватьА чо это он в "Соколе"?

Цитировать3) The nominal ISS mission re-entry landing point is set as US West Coast, about 20 KM offshore.  This eases FAA permitting.  Helos stage from California, and perform the recovery.  If they miss, the spacecraft lands in the water, which requires it be rebuilt at the factory.  If the capture is successful, it is air-towed (stably, I might add, with high ride comfort unlike capsules) to shore where it is deposited in a cradle for easy crew egress.  If it overshoots and comes down on land, the airframe is scrapped, but the crew survives due to the fabric seats.  Finally, there is a crew bailout option that extracts the crew on a "stick" with survival gear should the mains become fouled or failed.

ЦитироватьИ какие тут перегрузки?

ЦитироватьYes, it trims naturally at about 12 degrees AoA.  We also used a trick of mounting batteries and certain other heavy items on a track that could be adjusted fore and aft, allowing on-the-fly trimming of Cg.  Entry control is via roll-to-bank, so only roll thrusters are fired, as necessary.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьИ какие тут перегрузки?

ВЫ НЕ ПОВЕРИТЕ: МЕНЬШЕ 2-Х ЖЕ!!!!!! Этот гвоздик летит с углом атаки 12гр.

ЦитироватьYes, it trims naturally at about 12 degrees AoA.  We also used a trick of mounting batteries and certain other heavy items on a track that could be adjusted fore and aft, allowing on-the-fly trimming of Cg.  Entry control is via roll-to-bank, so only roll thrusters are fired, as necessary.

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьИ какие тут перегрузки?

ВЫ НЕ ПОВЕРИТЕ: МЕНЬШЕ 2-Х ЖЕ!!!!!! Этот гвоздик летит с углом атаки 12гр.

ЦитироватьYes, it trims naturally at about 12 degrees AoA.  We also used a trick of mounting batteries and certain other heavy items on a track that could be adjusted fore and aft, allowing on-the-fly trimming of Cg.  Entry control is via roll-to-bank, so only roll thrusters are fired, as necessary.

Я тоже удивился. Но Гэри потом сказал, что оборотные кресла все равно нужны, на всякий пожарный.

В любом случае жаль, что он проиграл Маскам и Эбронам. Вполне достойная система была бы. Но как я понял, NASA хотело больше разнообразия, а капсул и так много. Поэтому дали денег ДримЧейзеру.

ЦитироватьТканевые сидения в 10 раз легче кресел шаттла и легко убираются на орбите.
(http://s03.radikal.ru/i176/1104/9f/9c218f0722d3t.jpg) (http://s03.radikal.ru/i176/1104/9f/9c218f0722d3.jpg) (http://s53.radikal.ru/i141/1104/e8/875dc5bbd144t.jpg) (http://s53.radikal.ru/i141/1104/e8/875dc5bbd144.jpg)

ЦитироватьFour firms plan to get the most out of NASA investment[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: April 25, 2011

The four companies granted almost $270 million by NASA last week face an orchestrated series of hardware tests, design milestones and government reviews of their privately-developed spacecraft over the next year, according to documents released by NASA.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17927.jpg)
Artist's concept of Boeing's CST-100 spacecraft approaching the International Space Station. Credit: Boeing
 
 Each firm will receive their funding in payments at specific milestones set by the company and agreed to by NASA. The milestones include achievements like engineering reviews, propulsion testing and assembly of prototype hardware through May 2012.

Boeing received the largest Commercial Crew Development award, an agreement valued at $92.3 million, to finish the preliminary design of the CST-100 capsule, a back-to-basics spacecraft solely designed for up-and-down trips to the International Space Station and other destinations in low Earth orbit.

The aerospace giant plans to select a rocket to launch the capsule, which Boeing says will weigh up to 13 metric tons, or more than 28,000 pounds. Boeing will also test the craft's parachutes in an airborne drop and fire a lightweight abort engine built by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne.

Engineers at the Langley Research Center in Virginia will drop a mock-up of the CST-100 into a landing pit to check the strength of the craft's airbags. Boeing and NASA already accomplished some drop testing, but engineers will add horizontal velocity this year to simulate windy landing conditions.

A scale model of the spacecraft and launch vehicle will be put through wind tunnel testing to check aerodynamic characteristics, and a propellant tank will be fabricated and tested, according to Boeing.

Other demos on tap soon include the construction of a CST-100 structural test article made of aluminum, testing pyrotechnics to sever connections between the crew and service modules, and evaluating a new thruster design fueled by non-toxic propellant.

John Elbon, Boeing's commercial crew program manager, said he expects Boeing's workforce dedicated to the CST-100 development will increase to between 200 and 250 employees this year. Most of the workers will be based in Houston and Huntington Beach, Calif. Some employees will contribute from Florida and Alabama.

With an early investment from NASA last year, Boeing built a CST-100 pressure shell, verified its weld-less manufacturing processes, constructed a mock-up to test human factors and crew accommodations, fired a prototype abort engine, and developed an automated rendezvous and docking simulator.

"That's all behind us," Elbon said. "We accomplished that with $18 million of NASA investment. We put in a like amount. It was incredible the amount we were able to get done with that amount of money in the environment we're in today."

Elbon said Boeing's $92.3 million CCDev 2 award was close to the company's request.

With room for up to seven astronauts, the CST-100 has a diameter of nearly 15 feet and features just enough capability to deliver a crew to orbit and return them safely to Earth.

The battery-powered capsule can only fly for about two days on its own, but it could stay plugged into the International Space Station's power for more than a half-year. The CST-100 is designed to be reusable for up to 10 missions.

Boeing's yearlong agreement with NASA will conclude with a preliminary design review, a significant step in the development of any spacecraft where the tentative design is confirmed to meet requirements.

If NASA provides more funding, a tall order in the current spending climate, Boeing could make headway toward the CST-100's critical design review, when the specifics of the spacecraft's components are typically frozen.

On the current schedule, Boeing forecasts orbital flight tests by 2014 and an initial operational capability in 2015.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17928.jpg)
Artist's concept of Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser space plane launching on an Atlas 5 rocket. Credit: Sierra Nevada
 
 Sierra Nevada Corp., a Colorado-based firm, also plans to reach a preliminary design review for its reusable Dream Chaser space plane by May 2012.

The company took the second-largest sum in NASA's commercial crew announcement, garnering $80 million to take the Dream Chaser from the drawing board to the cusp of flight testing.

Sierra Nevada received $20 million in the first CCDev competition in February 2010, using that funding to develop manufacturing tooling, fire a Dream Chaser maneuvering engine and deliver parts of a structural mock-up of the spacecraft. Sierra Nevada also dropped a scale model of the Dream Chaser from an altitude of 14,000 feet.

Engineers also made progress in the Dream Chaser's guidance, navigation and control system, along with significant aerodynamic analysis to reduce risk in the craft's development and performance.

The Dream Chaser is based on the aerodynamic shape of NASA's HL-20 lifting body, a concept studied by the Langley Research Center as a safer, less expensive option for human space transportation. Although the HL-20 never flew, its design was borrowed from the Soviet Union's BOR-4 space plane that was tested in Earth orbit in the 1980s.

Sierra Nevada updated the HL-20 concept with a composite structure and a hybrid rocket motor.

Launching on an Atlas 5 rocket, the seven-person Dream Chaser would fly to the space station, deliver astronauts and supplies, and return to Earth for a gliding touchdown on a conventional runway.

With the $80 million awarded last week, Sierra Nevada plans to conduct more detailed aerodynamic assessments to select the final shape of the Dream Chaser's air fins. Engineers will also build and activate a full cockpit flight simulator, a flight control integration laboratory and an avionics testbed.

Sierra Nevada says it will finish construction of a full-scale engineering test article and verify the performance of the Dream Chaser's separation system. Company officials will also select several major subcontractors to provide software, a life support system and other components.

With more money, Sierra Nevada says it can proceed toward landing gear drop testing, a piggyback test flight of the Dream Chaser test unit, and eventually a free flight ending with a runway landing by the spring of 2012.

SpaceX, the growing space transportation firm started by Elon Musk, will invest its $75 million from NASA in the design and testing of a side-mounted launch abort system, a miniature rocket engine that would quickly carry a spacecraft away from a failing launch vehicle.

The company's engineering team will also further development of cockpit controls and crew seating for the interior of the Dragon spacecraft, which has already been tested in orbit without passengers. The Dragon is being built first to resupply the space station starting next year.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17929.jpg)
Artist's concept of SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft in orbit. Credit: SpaceX
 
 According to Musk, SpaceX can outfit the Dragon for crewed missions for $1 billion within three years if the project is given a steady stream of funding. SpaceX is the only company publicly disclosing total development cost projections for its reusable commercial crew system.

SpaceX was not part of the first CCDev awards, partly because the Dragon and Falcon 9 rocket were already on the verge of unmanned flight tests, several years ahead of the other competitors. Last year's CCDev agreements focused on fundamental developments of technologies and processes that would lead to a piloted spacecraft.

Ken Bowersox, SpaceX's vice president of astronaut safety and mission assurance, said much of the company's activity over the next year will be adding bells and whistles to the Dragon to make it safe for humans.

"Our plan is to take the current cargo Dragon concept and then evolve it," Bowersox said.

Bowersox said engineers have worked on cockpit designs in computers, but the NASA funding will accelerate translating that work into seat and control panel models for astronauts to get a feel for during visits to SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, Calif.

The Dragon's side-mount launch abort system will be designed and built to the point of a full-duration engine firing on the ground by next May. SpaceX selected the novel side-mount design because the abort thrusters can be used in orbit and during landing if they are not needed to respond to a launch emergency.

"The first thing we have to do is build the launch abort system, which we are currently envisioning as a system of thrusters on the side of the vehicle that uses the orbital maneuvering fuel to carry the vehicle away from the booster in the event of a problem," Bowersox said.

SpaceX's ultimate objective is to use the abort engines for a rocket-assisted precision touchdown of the Dragon.

Established by Jeff Bezos, the wealthy founder of Amazon.com, Blue Origin snatched $22 million from NASA last week to continue designing and testing systems for the company's New Shepard biconic spaceship. Blue Origin is also working on a concept for a reusable booster, but the firm plans its first orbital test flights to launch on Atlas 5 rockets.

Blue Origin conducts much of its testing in secret at a sprawling West Texas ranch, but its proposal for government funding required the company to share its vision and development plans.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/17930.jpg)
Artist's concept of Blue Origin's New Shepard space capsule. Credit: Blue Origin
 
 The New Shepard's complement of up to seven crew members puts it on par with the other commercial crew winners. The craft can stay at the space station up to seven months at a time and serve as a lifeboat, according to Blue Origin's proposal.

A fraction of Blue Origin's $22 million award will go toward settling on a basic design for the New Shepard, including picking its heat shield, defining its exact shape, and setting specific requirements.

Blue Origin will spend the bulk of the government money on testing the company's unique pusher escape system, which has a similar purpose as a launch abort system, and advancing development of a cryogenic hydrogen-fueled engine capable of producing up to 100,000 pounds of thrust. The engine will help power Blue Origin's reusable booster into space, according to documents released by NASA.

The hardware demos include a ground firing of the pusher escape system motor, then a test in which the system will simulate escaping a rocket on the launch pad. Blue Origin also plans to test the liquid-fueled cryogenic engine's thrust chamber assembly.

The company foresees a series of incremental test flights, starting with suborbital missions to the edge of space before pressing on to more challenging ventures into low Earth orbit.

ЦитироватьFive Vehicles Vie To Succeed Space Shuttle[/size] (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2011/04/25/AW_04_25_2011_p24-313867.xml&headline=Five%20Vehicles%20Vie%20To%20Succeed%20Space%20Shuttle&next=0)
 Apr 25, 2011

  By Frank Morring, Jr.
Washington

U.S. spacecraft engineers with federal funding will pursue at least five different ways to replace the space shuttle in the next few years, from capsules that harken back to the 1960s to a spaceplane and a vertical-takeoff-and-landing craft that flies to orbit on a reusable booster.

Breakup of the year-long political logjam over funding for NASA this month cleared the way for the agency to announce the next phase of its Commercial Crew Development effort (CCDev-2) and gave Lockheed Martin a clear path to shift its old Orion crew exploration vehicle prime contract over to the new Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle effort ordained in the three-year NASA authorization bill President Barack Obama signed last year.

"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," states NASA Administrator Charles Bolden. "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."

Bolden's statement refers to the CCDev-2 awards, which went to Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada Corp. and Space Exploration Technologies Inc. (SpaceX).

Lockheed Martin began work on Orion in 2006, when it beat out a Northrop Grumman/Boeing team for the prime contract (AW&ST Sept. 4, 2006, p. 22).

Procurement documents released with the CCDev-2 announcement give a first look at the work that has been underway at Blue Origin, a secretive start-up company based in Kent, Wash., that operates a remote test site in West Texas. The company plans to develop a reusable launch vehicle to carry its biconic seven-seat capsule to low Earth orbit, following an interim stage when it will offer suborbital tourist and scientific flights in a three-seat version.

Blue Origin received $22.005 million in CCDev-2 funding, exactly the amount it requested to hasten its development work, according to the procurement documents. Although it was the smallest award of the four granted, the agency apparently made it in the hope that the deep pockets of Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos, who also founded Amazon.com, may open up an alternative to the approaches under development by Boeing, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX.

In its CCDev-2 proposal, Blue Origin says it will mature its seven-seat "Space Vehicle" through system requirements review, ground- and flight-test the pusher escape system it started under CCDev-1, and begin testing the 100,000-lb.-thrust liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen engine for its "Reusable Booster System" (RBS).

"Each one-time use of current expendable booster technology represents a prime opportunity for cost reduction," the company states. "Blue Origin's RBS employs deep-throttling, restartable engines to perform vertical-takeoff, vertical-landing [VTVL] maneuvers for booster recovery and reuse."

The company plans to launch its Space Vehicle initially on a human-rated Atlas V and transition later to the reusable booster. The vehicle apparently will use VTVL technology tested on an unpiloted vehicle dubbed New Shepard, which traces its heritage to the Air Force and NASA DC-X and -XA testbeds flown in the 1990s. It will return to Earth on dry land "to minimize the costs of recovery and reuse."

According to its proposal, Blue Origin is conducting integrated testing of a "suborbital booster" that will carry a three-seat "suborbital capsule"—now in final assembly—to the edge of space.

"The suborbital vehicle will be fully reusable and capable of flying three or more astronauts to an altitude of over 328,000 ft. (above 100 km) for science research and adventure," the Blue Origin proposal states.

Blue Origin plans to use its CCDev-2 funds to accelerate its work toward a full-up end-to-end space transportation system, including advancing the design of the Space Vehicle by completing "key system trades," designing the thermal protection system in partnership with NASA's Ames Research Center, defining the capsule's biconic shape, and conducting the reviews necessary to generate "a baseline definition architecture and system requirements."

In addition to Ames, Blue Origin has partnered with NASA's Stennis Space Center to test engine thrust chambers; United Launch Alliance to integrate the Space Vehicle on the Atlas V; Aerojet for solid rocket motors and test facilities; Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control High Speed Wind Tunnel in Grand Prairie, Texas, for Space Vehicle testing; and the Air Force High Speed Test Track near Alamogordo, N.M., to test the pusher escape system.

More is known about the other three CCDev-2 winners. Boeing has a pressure test article for its CST-100 capsule, which was on display at the National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs in mid-April. Machined from two pieces of aluminum for strength, the article is a pathfinder for a second version that will be built of lighter-weight 7075 aluminum alloy under the CCDev-2 phase.

Boeing received $92.3 million in CCDev-2 funding, the largest among the four recipients. Other tasks that will be carried out with the funding include evaluation of a lighter-weight engine for its pusher-type launch abort system, evaluation of the parachute and airbag-inflation systems for water landings, and full-scale tests of the pyrotechnics that will separate the CST-100 capsule from the service module prior to reentry.

The service module uses batteries instead of solar arrays for power, so the Boeing vehicle's nominal flight profile calls for docking at the International Space Station (ISS) on the day of launch. However, it will have enough battery life to accomplish a second-day docking, if necessary. After that, it is designed to remain at the station for as long as seven months in a lifeboat role, drawing power from the ISS grid.

The company is still in the process of selecting a launch vehicle for its test flights and early missions and is designing the CST-100 to be able to handle loads on several candidate launchers.

"We've got four test flights scheduled," says John Elbon, Boeing's commercial crew development program manager at Boeing. "There's a pad abort test in '13, and in '14 we have three tests that require launch vehicles: an uncrewed orbital flight test, so we'd fly in an automated way and spend a couple of days in orbit testing out the systems; an ascent abort test which would exercise the abort system at maximum dynamic pressure—Max-Q—and then finally a crewed flight test where we put a couple of test pilots in there and launch it, and then we'd be ready for operations."

Sierra Nevada, like Boeing, was one of the big winners in the $50 million CCDev-1 competition, drawing $20 million to begin work on its Dream Chaser spaceplane, which would be launched on an Atlas V. It is essentially a composite version of NASA's HL-20 lifting body that in turn was derived from the Russian BOR-4 test vehicle which flew in orbit four times, according to the Sierra Nevada CCDev-2 proposal.

Power is provided by the same hybrid propulsion technology used on the Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne and SpaceShipTwo suborbital spaceplanes, with a runway landing under the control of a pilot or autopilot. The company plans to use its $80 million in CCDev-2 funding to reach preliminary design review for the orbital vehicle and atmospheric drop tests of the engineering test article that has undergone structural testing.

Last year, SpaceX tested its Dragon capsule to orbit and recovery at sea in the cargo configuration it developed under NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation System (COTS) effort (AW&ST Dec. 13, 2010, p. 22). With its $75 million CCDev-2 award, the company plans to speed development of its side-mounted pusher-type launch abort system, including static testing, and prepare its initial design for crew accommodation in the Dragon for NASA astronauts to evaluate.

Phil McAlister, acting director of commercial spaceflight development at NASA headquarters and the selecting authority for CCDev-2, says the goal of the CCDev effort is to seed a commercial industry that can fly crews to the ISS by "approximately the mid part of this decade." The second round is designed to mature designs that have a chance of growing into a full-scale system, which will be addressed in a third round of awards to be covered under an $850 million request for fiscal 2012.

For now, he says, the idea is to use the federal funds—plus the 10-20% the companies are required to post toward the development—to support "significant progress on maturing the design and development of elements of the system" or systems that ultimately will fly, with a conscious effort to back different approaches in a competitive approach.

"I would say at this stage of the game, competition is a very important part of our strategy," says McAlister. "It incentivizes performance. It incentivizes cost effectiveness. We also believe that having skin in the game is also important."

McAlister was executive director of the panel headed by former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine that found the old Constellation program of human exploration vehicles "unsustainable." But one of those Constellation spacecraft, the Orion crew exploration vehicle, will continue in development as the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Congress ordered as a backup to the commercial crew vehicles for space station trips, and as a NASA-owned deep-space vehicle for exploration crews.

To simplify and save money in the tricky transition, Lockheed Martin has cut out an entire test article for the MPCV effort, doubling up test objectives for the remaining articles to try to keep the vehicle within the tight schedule set by Congress.

By combining trials with particular test articles, the company plans to send an Orion capsule into orbit on its first test flight in 2013, says Cleon Lacefield, the company's program manager. The first capsule produced is now being prepared for ground tests at company facilities near Denver, and once those are over that test capsule will be reinstrumented to fly on the first ascent abort test in 2014. Using the same test article in two trials will enable the company to start work on the test capsule that will fly to space for the first time.

"With the funding changes, the program realignments . . . we've been able to preserve the core of this test program and . . . make it more than it would have been by combining a bunch of tests into single articles," says Jim Kemp, director of assembly, test and launch operations for the new spacecraft.

During the debate over NASA's future direction Lockheed Martin kept working on the Orion capsule using Constellation funding available under appropriations language that prohibited NASA from terminating the program. The initial test article was built at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, where it underwent pressure testing before being sent here for a more rigorous workout.

New instrumentation is being installed to test how it will hold pressure with a lot of its internal systems installed, including an instrumented window to measure how the glass flexes under pressure. Acoustic testing will follow, using generic acoustic loads that should cover any of the potential launch vehicles NASA chooses for the vehicle's flight-test program. Kemp points out that the Orion was designed to launch on the Ares I rocket, which was under development by Constellation before the program was terminated.

That launch vehicle used a five-segment space shuttle solid-fuel booster rocket as its first stage, which would have generated acoustic loading beyond that produced by the liquid-fueled candidates for a test-flight launch vehicle.

If all goes according to schedule, piloted operations of the Orion could begin as early as 2016, Lockheed Martin says.

"[Last year,] we redefined the program to focus on a couple of things," Lacefield says. "One of them is the first vehicle development for the flight test. It's an orbital flight test where we really try to wring out 11 of the top 13 risk items on the vehicle. One of those we look at is the thermal protection system, so we're doing high-velocity reentry to prove out its capabilities early in the vehicle development cycle."

Testing of some MPCV systems could begin as early as May 1, when the space shuttle Endeavour is tentatively scheduled to dock with the ISS for the last time before its retirement. Nestled in next to the orbiter's docking system will be the Sensor Test for Orion Relative Navigation Risk Mitigation payload, which will gather data on how the Orion navigation sensors will perform in an approach to the station.

Цитироватьhttp://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/meeting_news/media/2011/may/Alexander.pptx
Интересное чтиво.

ЦитироватьКонечно! У всего что носом вперед взлетает (на ракете) и носом вперед садится (не на ВПП) должны быть поворотные кресла. ИМХО

ЦитироватьВзлет
(http://s58.radikal.ru/i162/1104/d3/2350ff479232t.jpg) (http://s58.radikal.ru/i162/1104/d3/2350ff479232.jpg)
Посадка
(http://s53.radikal.ru/i141/1104/e8/875dc5bbd144t.jpg) (http://s53.radikal.ru/i141/1104/e8/875dc5bbd144.jpg)
Вот здесь астронавты повисли на ремнях :lol:
(http://s49.radikal.ru/i123/1104/73/f514d6253885t.jpg) (http://s49.radikal.ru/i123/1104/73/f514d6253885.jpg)
Для этого аппарата есть одно исключение-САС (посадка задом наперед)
(http://s39.radikal.ru/i086/1104/4c/927af462f997t.jpg) (http://s39.radikal.ru/i086/1104/4c/927af462f997.jpg)

ЦитироватьThe evaluation and selection were conducted using a four-step process.

 Step 1-Initial Evaluation
 Step 2 -Due Diligence
 Step 3 -Portfolio Selection
 Step 4 -Finalize Space Act Agreements

 Step 1 was an evaluation of each proposal that passed the acceptance screening and on its Business Information and Technical Approach sections on a stand-alone basis without comparison to other proposals. The voting members of the Participant Evaluation Panel (PEP) first read each proposal to determine whether it met the intent of the requirements and goals of the Announcement. If, after reading the entire proposal, it determined that the proposal failed to meet the intent of the Announcement in either the Technical Approach or Business Information sections, then it received a red level of confidence rating for that section. Proposals that received a red rating in either Business Information or Technical Approach were eliminated from further evaluation.

In Step 2, the PEP conducted face-to-face due diligence meetings with participants whose proposals were most favorably evaluated. During these meetings, participants presented their overall CCDev proposed approach, responded to the initial evaluation findings and questions submitted to them by NASA, and resolved issues associated with draft Space Act agreements and their proposed performance milestones. After completion of the due diligence meetings, the PEP reconvened to modify or amend the consensus evaluation findings based on any new information obtained that may have impacted the initial evaluation results and assigned final level of confidence ratings based on the final consensus findings.

ЦитироватьThere are five Level of Confidence color ratings:

Blue: Very High Level of Confidence -The proposal section is very highly effective and there is a very high likelihood of successful execution.
Green: High Level of Confidence -The proposal section is highly effective and there is at least a high likelihood of successful execution.
White: Moderate Level of Confidence -The proposal section is moderately effective and there is at least a moderate likelihood of successful execution.
Yellow: Low Level of Confidence -The proposal section has low effectiveness or there is a low likelihood of successful execution.
Red: Very Low Level of Confidence -The proposal section has very low effectiveness or there is a very low likelihood of successful execution.Source: spaceref.com (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=36765)

Цитировать______________________________ | Initial Evaluation | Due Diligence
 ________________________________| Tech  | Buss..  | Tech  | Buss..  
 ___________ ATK Aerospace Systems | Yellow | Yellow | Green | Green|
 ______________________ Blue Origin | Yellow | White. | White. | White
 _______ The Boeing Company | White | Yellow | Blue... | Green |
 _______ Excalibur Almaz Incorporated | Yellow | Yellow | White. | -----  
 ________ Orbital Sciences Corporation | White | White.. | Green. | -----  
 __________Sierra Nevada Corporation | White. | White. | ------- |Green

 _____________ United Launch Alliance | White. | White. | White. | -----  
 ___ Space
 _ Exploration Technologies Corporation | White. | Green | Green | Blue

Цитировать______________________________ | Initial Evaluation |
 ________________________________| Tech  | Buss..  |
 __ Transformational Space Corporation | Red... | Red... |
 ________ Orbital Space Transport, LLC | Red.. | Red ... |
 __________________Planetspace, Inc. | Red... | Red ... |

Цитировать...как менялись оценки

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

Цитировать...как менялись оценки

А еще более интересно - как менялись реальные расходы. От картинок до реальных расходов.
Вы будете в шоке от реальных расходов и будете недоумевать - как так и почему реальные расходы в 1000 раз круче нарисованных оценок в картинках.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

Цитировать...как менялись оценки

А еще более интересно - как менялись реальные расходы. От картинок до реальных расходов.
Вы будете в шоке от реальных расходов и будете недоумевать - как так и почему реальные расходы в 1000 раз круче нарисованных оценок в картинках.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

Цитировать...как менялись оценки

А еще более интересно - как менялись реальные расходы. От картинок до реальных расходов.
Вы будете в шоке от реальных расходов и будете недоумевать - как так и почему реальные расходы в 1000 раз круче нарисованных оценок в картинках.

ЦитироватьЛев, я в курсе, что суммы, которые эти конторы получат от NASA значительно меньше, чем будет израсходовано на эти проекты.

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

ЦитироватьЛев, я в курсе, что суммы, которые эти конторы получат от NASA значительно меньше, чем будет израсходовано на эти проекты.

С чего Вы взяли? Пока что прибыль Маска (не доход а прибыль) от декларированных пусков не покрывает и десятка процентов от расходов. Т.е. Маск работает на госденьги. А госденьги и не надо окупать.

ЦитироватьЯ вообще не о доходах говорил,

Цитироватьа о том, как менялись оценки бизнес плана участников конкурса

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ вообще не о доходах говорил,

Т.е. про доходы потихоньку говорить перестали. :D

ЦитироватьНу а если нет доходов то за счет чего живет Маск? :)

Цитировать

Цитироватьа о том, как менялись оценки бизнес плана участников конкурса

А Вы не видели бизнес-планов участников. Фигню нести изволим? :D
Валерич, Ваши посты даже в защиту Маска которому я симпатизирую - всегда редкосный бред. И работают скорей против а не за.

ЦитироватьОн живет в долг.

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

ЦитироватьОн живет в долг.

:D  :D  :D

ЦитироватьЯ Вам сделаю оценки от которых Вы впадете в экстаз. Однако потом Вы будете в шоке от реальных расходов и будете недоумевать - как так и почему реальные расходы в 1000 раз круче нарисованных оценок.

ЦитироватьИнтересно, какие еще есть подводные камни.

ЦитироватьНапример, сертификация РН для пилотируемых пусков. Как бы Маску не пришлось эту штуку делать через Роскосмос... :D

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ Вам сделаю оценки от которых Вы впадете в экстаз. Однако потом Вы будете в шоке от реальных расходов и будете недоумевать - как так и почему реальные расходы в 1000 раз круче нарисованных оценок.

Было бы здорово, если бы вы для нас сделали небольшой экскурс, по пунктам, что вы думаете про реализуемость каждого из участников и насколько их оценки близки к реальности.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

ЦитироватьОн живет в долг.

:D  :D  :D

Размер долга знаем? :D И за чей счет долг? И кто будет в случае чего платить по долгам? Как бы не как всегда рядовой американский налогоплательщик...
Мавроди тихо отдыхает в дальнем углу... :D

ЦитироватьНо сейчас он нашел себе специалиста по IPO! Следовательно не только я считаю, что с финансами у него сейчас все совсем не плохо, но и признанные эксперты фондового рынка. Такие специалисты традиционно получают свое вознаграждение в виде опциона на какое-то количество акций, которые они размещают.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНо сейчас он нашел себе специалиста по IPO! Следовательно не только я считаю, что с финансами у него сейчас все совсем не плохо, но и признанные эксперты фондового рынка. Такие специалисты традиционно получают свое вознаграждение в виде опциона на какое-то количество акций, которые они размещают.

Нашел специалиста по IPO. И почему из этого следует, что у него с финансами все совсем не плохо? Не вижу связи одного с другим

ЦитироватьПо Закону.

IPO нельзя производить, если предприятие на ладан дышит.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПо Закону.

IPO нельзя производить, если предприятие на ладан дышит.

Да что Вы говорите. По какому закону и какие там ограничения?

ЦитироватьТак, для общего развития - в нормальной стране Законы "действуют", в нашей - "применяются".

Первая задача специалиста по IPO при начале работы - заказать финансовый аудит, результаты которого перед IPO будут опубликованы. В процессе IPO задействовано много людей и организаций, для которых их репутация в прямом смысле их капитал, подкупить их никаких денег не хватит. Я уже просто не говорю о том, что манипуляции здесь уголовно наказуемы.

ЦитироватьТак, для общего развития - в нормальной стране Законы "действуют", в нашей - "применяются".

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТак, для общего развития - в нормальной стране Законы "действуют", в нашей - "применяются".

Во дает. И какая разница между закон действует и закон применяется?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПервая задача специалиста по IPO при начале работы - заказать финансовый аудит, результаты которого перед IPO будут опубликованы. В процессе IPO задействовано много людей и организаций, для которых их репутация в прямом смысле их капитал, подкупить их никаких денег не хватит. Я уже просто не говорю о том, что манипуляции здесь уголовно наказуемы.

Еще раз. Какая связь между наймом специалиста по IPO и выводом о финансовом благополучии Маска?

ЦитироватьКакие бы результаты финансового аудита не были, что мне мешает вывести акции моей фирмы на рынок?
Какой закон мне запретит это сделать?

ЦитироватьТам, где Закон действует - он просто действует, всегда и везде, без затей. Там, где Закон "применяют" - могут и не применять, как показала практика.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЕще раз. Какая связь между наймом специалиста по IPO и выводом о финансовом благополучии Маска?

Прямая. Только урегулировав свои отношения с кредиторами Маск может вывести свои акции на рынок. В ситуации, когда он близок к банкротству, IPO просто запрещено. То, что Маск нанимает специалиста по IPO, означает, что теперь банки ему дают "оборотные средства", что он договорился, например,  расплатиться с ними пакетом акций после IPO.

ЦитироватьВ общем случае это означает, что в глазах банков его предприятие после проведенных испытательных полетов стало стоить дороже.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьКакие бы результаты финансового аудита не были, что мне мешает вывести акции моей фирмы на рынок?
Какой закон мне запретит это сделать?

Начнем с конца. Предположим, вам удалось обмануть закон и провести IPO в предбанкротном состоянии. Какой дурак купит ваши акции в этом случае?

ЦитироватьАкции Маска - это не производные финансовые инструменты. народ знает, что он запустил два Фалькона-9 и один Дракон. И IPO Маск сделает после того, когда добьется очевидного для всех успеха.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

ЦитироватьОн живет в долг.

:D  :D  :D

Размер долга знаем? :D И за чей счет долг? И кто будет в случае чего платить по долгам? Как бы не как всегда рядовой американский налогоплательщик...
Мавроди тихо отдыхает в дальнем углу... :D

ЦитироватьВот именно. Тут вопрос о частоте применяемости закона и последствиях этого применения.
Валерий Вы путаете понятия. Не действие закона - это когда не выполняется решение суда. Где у нас не выполняется решение суда в том контексте на который Вы намекаете?

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЕще раз. Какая связь между наймом специалиста по IPO и выводом о финансовом благополучии Маска?

Прямая. Только урегулировав свои отношения с кредиторами Маск может вывести свои акции на рынок. В ситуации, когда он близок к банкротству, IPO просто запрещено. То, что Маск нанимает специалиста по IPO, означает, что теперь банки ему дают "оборотные средства", что он договорился, например,  расплатиться с ними пакетом акций после IPO.

Никакая не прямая. Урегулирование отношений с кредиторами может означать, что он пытается обосновать им свою платежеспособность фактом проведения IPO в будущем.

ЦитироватьДля этого он профильного специалиста и нанял. Но этот факт НИКАК не говорит о его финансовом благополучии в настоящем

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВ общем случае это означает, что в глазах банков его предприятие после проведенных испытательных полетов стало стоить дороже.

Может быть, но на данный момент это не подкрепленно никакими ликвидными активами.
В лучшем случае, банкиры заинтересованно наблюдают что будет дальше.
Валерий, Вы по Маску который раз делите шкуру неубитого медведя и несетесь впереди паровоза

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьКакие бы результаты финансового аудита не были, что мне мешает вывести акции моей фирмы на рынок?
Какой закон мне запретит это сделать?

Начнем с конца. Предположим, вам удалось обмануть закон и провести IPO в предбанкротном состоянии. Какой дурак купит ваши акции в этом случае?

Для обоснования эффективности перед акционерами данной процедуры я найму профессионала по подготовке IPO  :wink:  :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьАкции Маска - это не производные финансовые инструменты. народ знает, что он запустил два Фалькона-9 и один Дракон. И IPO Маск сделает после того, когда добьется очевидного для всех успеха.

Акционерам пофигу что и куда запустил Маск. Хоть на Вашу любимую Луну. Акционерам нужна гарантия получения дивидентов в будущем. А на данный момент для Маска это только большие гос. заказы, которые дадут возможность не только их выполнить, но и получить прибыль. И где они?

ЦитироватьМожет прежде чем фантазировать наперегонки с Валерием просто послушать что говорит сам Маск: :?

(http://savepic.org/1840364.jpg)

P.S Т.е у него достаточно средств на расширение производства  поступающих по текущим контрактам, без всяких займов и IPO.

ЦитироватьА вы поинтересуйтесь рейтингами России и Штатов по удобству ведения бизнеса и по коррупцияонности.

ЦитироватьОн должен сначала урегулировать вопросы с кредиторами, а уже потом объявить IPO. Банку выгодно обслуживать (в том числе кредитовать) работающее предприятие, а у Маска есть крупные выполняемые заказы - с этим вы будете спорить?

ЦитироватьПервое, что должен сделать специалист по IPO - заказать аудит. Так как проведение IPO запланировано, минимум, на конец следующего года, результат аудита, проведенного в начале этого года вовсе не обязательно публиковать, но он покажет реальное положение дел.

Кстати, аудит перед IPO для Маска сможет провести только одна из крупнейших и известнейших аудиторских фирм. Иначе его акации не пустят на серьезную биржу. Хоронить свой бизнес аудиторы ради Маска не станут.

ЦитироватьРоман, для венчурных банков самый надежный залог - работающий эффективный, растущий бизнес. Работа у них такая. А то, что У маска есть такой залог - проверено электроникой (с) не я.

ЦитироватьИ этот известный профи мирового класса, имеющий за спиной десяток проведенных ранее IPO, стоящий сотни миллионов долларов (если не миллиарды), зарабатывающий на каждом честном IPO десятки и сотни миллионов долларов, должен похоронить свою репутацию и все свое будущее, вполне реально надолго присесть и потерять все свое состояние - и все это только для того, что бы провести для Маска левое IPO? Не смешите мои тапочки!

ЦитироватьКосмос, это Льву и Роману не поможет. Они не верят утверждениям Маска, они обвиняют его в мошенничестве.

ЦитироватьКосмос, это Льву и Роману не поможет. Они не верят утверждениям Маска, они обвиняют его в мошенничестве.

Цитировать

Цитировать... а у Маска есть крупные выполняемые заказы - с этим вы будете спорить?

Да, буду! Нет у него крупных заказов. Так, мелочь, на пару сотен моллионов

ЦитироватьThe contract is for a guaranteed minimum of 20,000 kg to be carried to the International Space Station. The firm contracted value is $1.6 billion and NASA may elect to order additional missions for a cumulative total contract value of up to $3.1 billion.

ЦитироватьДа, буду! Нет у него крупных заказов. Так, мелочь, на пару сотен моллионов

ЦитироватьВ третий раз. Какая связь между наймом специалиста по IPO и Вашим выводом о финансовом благополучии Маска? Мало ли что там выдаст аудит, это их работа. Этот специалист может там работать еще несколько лет и отслеживать текущее финансовое положение и выдавать рекомендации по моменту входа на рынк акций. С чего Вы взяли, что факт наймаего на работу говорит о финансовом благополучии?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьРоман, для венчурных банков самый надежный залог - работающий эффективный, растущий бизнес. Работа у них такая. А то, что У маска есть такой залог - проверено электроникой (с) не я.

Нет у Маска растущего бизнеса, в части космической тематики. С точки зрения потенциальных акционеров НЕТ. У него есть перспективный проект, который в будущем, возможно, может принести девиденты и это будет зависить как от экономических так и от политических факторов. Так что пока все в тумане

ЦитироватьДа не будет никакого IPO пока. Валерий, успокойтесь. Еще раз. Вы делите шкуру неубитого медведя и несетесь впереди паровоза. Человека взяли на работу для того чтобы он вел мониторинг текущей ситуации. Возможно, это будет продолжаться еще на протежении нескольких лет

Цитировать

ЦитироватьКосмос, это Льву и Роману не поможет. Они не верят утверждениям Маска, они обвиняют его в мошенничестве.

Во даёт  :lol:

ЦитироватьКак насчет Cargo Resupply Services (CRS) contract : :?

ЦитироватьThe contract is for a guaranteed minimum of 20,000 kg to be carried to the International Space Station. The firm contracted value is $1.6 billion and NASA may elect to order additional missions for a cumulative total contract value of up to $3.1 billion.

http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20081223

ЦитироватьПовторю, IPO запланировано на конец будущего года, если будут серьезные проблемы - то на год позже. Полтора года на подготовку IPO - вполне нормальный срок. Не много, но и не мало. Деньги нужны, что бы доделать пилотируемый Дракон.

ЦитироватьРоман, вы действительно не понимаете, что обвиняете Маска в мошейничестве?

ЦитироватьРоман, вы действительно не понимаете, что обвиняете Маска в мошейничестве?

ЦитироватьЯ извиняюсь, поясните, возможно у меня трудности с переводом, им платят 1,6 млрд. за доставку 20 тонн на МКС?

ЦитироватьНет конечно. Вся прибыль Маска возникает из того что Государство дает ему заказ. Госзаказ. Прибыль Маска - из государственных денег.
Нет госзаказа - нет Маска.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНет конечно. Вся прибыль Маска возникает из того что Государство дает ему заказ. Госзаказ. Прибыль Маска - из государственных денег.
Нет госзаказа - нет Маска.

И без госзаказа у Маска были иные возможности, он это показал. Видимо, менее выгодные ему.

ЦитироватьХорошо, когда так легко найти ответ.

Занятные тут завсегдатаи, полагают, что лучше МИТ или NASA разбираются в любых вопросах. До свидания, было не любопытно.

ЦитироватьПоэтому повторяю - сейчас Маск живет в долг.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПовторю, IPO запланировано на конец будущего года, если будут серьезные проблемы - то на год позже. Полтора года на подготовку IPO - вполне нормальный срок. Не много, но и не мало. Деньги нужны, что бы доделать пилотируемый Дракон.

Валерий, да мы с Вами практически к консенсусу пришли. Через полтора года или больше можно говорить о финансовом благосостоянии Маска, так?
А пока ведутся работы, чтобы этого достичь, так?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьРоман, вы действительно не понимаете, что обвиняете Маска в мошейничестве?

Неа, не понимаю, и главное Хде я его в этом обвиняю ?  8)

ЦитироватьБлагополучие" Маску нужно примерно через год, что бы к концу года, когда планируется IPO

ЦитироватьValerij писал(а):

ЦитироватьРоман, вы действительно не понимаете, что обвиняете Маска в мошенничестве?

Нет конечно. Вся прибыль Маска возникает из того что Государство дает ему заказ. Госзаказ. Прибыль Маска - из государственных денег.
Нет госзаказа - нет Маска.

ЦитироватьЭто прямое обвинение в мошенничестве.

ЦитироватьИ еще, на досуге, поинтересуйтесь почему на Букахах (667Б) появился 5-бис отсек.

ЦитироватьЛев, у Маска есть еще вариант заработать денежку.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ извиняюсь, поясните, возможно у меня трудности с переводом, им платят 1,6 млрд. за доставку 20 тонн на МКС?

Да, согласно CRS, доставив 20 т (минимум) за 12 рейсов (Драконами)  SpaceX заработает  $1.6 млрд.  Орбитал получит  $1.9 млрд за 8 рейсов Сигнуса. Причем деньги уже выделяются. Так до конца текущего фин. года запланировано финансирование в объеме  $466 млн именно по статье CRS.

ЦитироватьВ последнем номере НК опубликован манифест пусков Маска. Там кроме пусков к  МКС есть и коммерческие пуски.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВ последнем номере НК опубликован манифест пусков Маска. Там кроме пусков к  МКС есть и коммерческие пуски.

Лев, официальный текущий манифест Маска вот здесь:  http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВ последнем номере НК опубликован манифест пусков Маска. Там кроме пусков к  МКС есть и коммерческие пуски.

Лев, официальный текущий манифест Маска вот здесь:  http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

Посмотрел по ссылке. Вот как Вы сами думаете, в этом году Маск сделает 5 пусков?
Планы, планы ...

ЦитироватьСтоимость. На месте ЦСКБ я бы очень и очень много подумал. А подумавши уменьшил накладные расходы

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСтоимость. На месте ЦСКБ я бы очень и очень много подумал. А подумавши уменьшил накладные расходы

В 2 раза минимум

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСтоимость. На месте ЦСКБ я бы очень и очень много подумал. А подумавши уменьшил накладные расходы

В 2 раза минимум

Я бы осторожно сказал что в 1,5 легко. Просто у меня нет информации.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСтоимость. На месте ЦСКБ я бы очень и очень много подумал. А подумавши уменьшил накладные расходы

В 2 раза минимум

Я бы осторожно сказал что в 1,5 легко. Просто у меня нет информации.

Вот интересно, Поповкин будет заниматься этим бардаком? Хотелось бы что бы он там капнул через своих уполномоченных лиц

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЛев, официальный текущий манифест Маска вот здесь:  http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

Посмотрел по ссылке. Вот как Вы сами думаете, в этом году Маск сделает 5 пусков?
Планы, планы ...

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЛев, официальный текущий манифест Маска вот здесь:  http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

Посмотрел по ссылке. Вот как Вы сами думаете, в этом году Маск сделает 5 пусков?

ЦитироватьА у нас никогда сроки никогда не ползли "вправо"?

ЦитироватьТак сколько пусков в этом году сделает Маск? Заявил 5

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТак сколько пусков в этом году сделает Маск? Заявил 5

Там примечание есть. "Target date indicate hardware arrival at launch site"  :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьА у нас никогда сроки никогда не ползли "вправо"?

А что это Вы сразу на российскую космонавтику стрелы переводите? Ее на данном форуме тоже критикуют. Тут тема не про нее.
Так сколько пусков в этом году сделает Маск? Заявил 5

ЦитироватьДумаю, три или четыре. Но для первых запусков новой ракеты и корабля, для относительно недавно созданной небольшой фирмы это ну очень не плохо.

Да, я сравниваю с нашими теперешними темпами.
.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьДумаю, три или четыре. Но для первых запусков новой ракеты и корабля, для относительно недавно созданной небольшой фирмы это ну очень не плохо.Да, я сравниваю с нашими теперешними темпами.

А я говорю, что ОДИН. Вот и посмотрим  :wink:

ЦитироватьОдин он уже сделал.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПосмотрел по ссылке. Вот как Вы сами думаете, в этом году Маск сделает 5 пусков?

Не сделает. Сделает два: первый - комби бывших N2 и N3, второй - для MDA, фактически испытательный пуск для обтекателя. Ну может быть если очень напряжется, то 29-го Декабря первый CRS, но думаю, что вряд ли. А Orbcomm пойдет вместе с ним.

ЦитироватьBoeing plans to conduct test flights in 2014 and 2015 to support operations beginning in 2015.

ЦитироватьСтранно это, я видел флоучарт с вводом в строй в 2016-м. Неужели сдвинули влево? Неслыханно.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьДумаю, три или четыре. Но для первых запусков новой ракеты и корабля, для относительно недавно созданной небольшой фирмы это ну очень не плохо.

Да, я сравниваю с нашими теперешними темпами.

А я говорю, что ОДИН. Вот и посмотрим  :wink:

ЦитироватьNASA, ULA to Announce New CCDev Agreement on Monday[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on July 15, 2011, at 1:23 pm
in CCDev, NASA, News and United Launch Alliance

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/19088.jpg)
United Launch Alliance's configurations for launch commercial crew vehicles on Delta IV and Atlas V vehicles. (Credit: ULA)

NASA PR – NASA and United Launch Alliance (ULA) managers will hold a news conference on Monday, July 18, at ULA headquarters in Centennial, Colo., to announce a new Commercial Crew Development agreement.

The news conference will begin at 11 a.m. MDT in the first floor conference center.

The briefing participants are:

– Ed Mango, NASA Commercial Crew Development program manager
– Dan Collins, chief operating officer, ULA
– Dr. George Sowers, vice president, ULA business development[/size]

ЦитироватьWhat Next For U.S. Human Spaceflight?[/size]

Jul 16, 2011
 
By Frank Morring, Jr.
Washington

Once the smoke clears from the three-year debate over U.S. space policy ushered in by the return of a Democratic administration to the White House, NASA's human-spaceflight activities will look a lot like those planned and started under the preceding Republican administration.

As was the case then, astronauts will fly to the International Space Station (ISS) on Russian Soyuz vehicles while they wait for a new capsule/launch vehicle combination that owes more in basic design and operation to Apollo and its predecessors than to the space shuttle. And NASA will be working on a heavy-lift rocket comparable to the Saturn V, hopeful that it will take humans beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) someday.

Perhaps the biggest difference in the old approach and the new will be the time lost while the politicians and contractors sorted out the details. And only time will tell if the new approach is faster—and cheaper, as NASA's leaders promise.

The initial operational capability of the Constellation program's Orion/Ares I crew-launch stack endorsed by former President George W. Bush was a moving target. Its ambitious schedule slipped as the inevitable technical issues arose without adequate funding to fix them.

To date, the commercial replacements for Orion/Ares I favored by President Barack Obama have not hit major technical challenges like the thrust-oscillation issue that slowed Ares I. But that could be because they have not gotten far enough along in development to run into real trouble. Like Constellation, they are working to optimistic time lines, but they started later.

After Obama took office in 2009, his space-policy team surprised Congress with a budget request that terminated the Constellation program outright, including both the Ares I crew launcher and the planned Ares V heavy-lifter. The new plan handed to the private sector the job of transporting cargo and crew to the ISS. The budget request, delivered without preamble or detail to lawmakers accustomed to a more collaborative approach to working with the executive branch, triggered a strong negative reaction from senators and representatives.

Among them were influential members such as Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Rep. Ralph Hall (R-Texas) with serious constituent interests in maintaining the publicly backed jobs Constellation provided, and other members from both parties who had given their good-faith endorsement to the old program.

The 2011 NASA budget request, and the administration's ham-handed approach to dealing with the negative congressional reaction, added to the "gap" in U.S. human spaceflight capabilities that already was an issue on Capitol Hill. The dispute culminated in the compromise NASA Authorization Act of 2010, a three-year measure enacted and signed by Obama in December 2010. Under the legislative process, funding would be covered in a separate appropriation.

The reauthorization legislation essentially called for a shift of funds from the open-ended technology-development program NASA wants to fast-track development of a heavy-lift rocket able to launch 130 metric tons. The technology program, part of Obama's original request, is designed to advance readiness levels for a wide range of technologies that will be needed to send humans on exploration missions beyond LEO. The heavy-lift Space Launch System (SLS) and a Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) derived from Constellation's Orion capsule are intended to place enough hardware into LEO to move beyond it.

That is pretty much where the government side of human spaceflight remains today. Funding for the authorization act lagged as Congress fought out larger issues before handling fiscal 2011 appropriations in a series of continuing resolutions that essentially maintained spending at fiscal 2010 levels. As a result, the Constellation program was not officially terminated until June 10.

Today NASA spaceflight chief William Gerstenmaier's main concern is transporting enough cargo to the ISS to sustain a six-person crew. He cannot do it with anything flying after the shuttle, so he pushed hard for the STS-135 mission on Atlantis that is now under way to carry one final load of supplies to the ISS and buy time for the commercial companies to finish their cargo carriers.

Right now it looks like Space Exploration Technologies Inc. (SpaceX) has the best chance of doing that with its Falcon 9/Dragon cargo variant. The idiosyncratic private startup has used the dot-com deep pockets and business savvy of founder Elon Musk—plus the lion's share of NASA's $500 million Commercial Orbital Transportation System (COTS) effort to establish a space-transportation industry—to orbit a Dragon from Cape Canaveral and recover it off the California coast.

That was a private-sector first. But SpaceX's finances and the exact technical status of its vehicles remain hidden from view. The public-sector Ares I and Orion developments were more transparent until Obama terminated them as "unsustainable," in the words of the outside panel headed by former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine commissioned by Obama to study the issue. That transparency left the projects open to criticism, not all of it constructive or even objective.

There's a little more visibility into Orbital Sciences Corp.'s (OSC) effort to combine the COTS seed money with its own technical skills and funding, and those of an international array of subcontractors, to develop the Taurus II/Cygnus combination for cargo deliveries to the ISS. A team that includes 50-60 Ukrainian engineers and technicians is laboring at Wallops Flight Facility, Va., to meld the Ukrainian-built main stage with surplus NK-33 Russian rocket engines; an ATK solid-fuel upper stage; a capsule built in Turin, Italy; and an Orbital-built service module into a vehicle that can fly from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport on Wallops Island, Va.

Like SpaceX, the company had planned to meet its COTS milestone and deliver cargo this year. But an acceptance-test fire caused by a fuel leak in the plumbing feeding a flight-ready AJ26 engine, as Aerojet designates the NK-33s it has modified, has thrown that schedule into doubt (AW&ST June 27, p. 42).

Gerstenmaier intends the final shuttle mission to deliver enough supplies to avoid reducing the station crew size before Dragon and Cygnus begin cargo deliveries. But cargo is only part of the story. NASA also is funneling seed money into commercial human-rated spacecraft that it hopes eventually will reduce the need for U.S., European, Canadian and Japanese astronauts to reach the station on the Soyuz capsules.

Under the second round of its Commercial Crew Development (CCDev-2) program, the agency has distributed $269.3 million to help add maturity to concepts for private spacecraft to carry astronauts to the ISS. Boeing was the big winner in CCDev-2, awarded $92.3 million on top of the $18 million it received in last year's CCDev-1 competition. Sierra Nevada Corp., last year's top winner, will get $80 million to go with the $20 million it received in 2010.

SpaceX will receive another $75 million to develop a launch abort system and other hardware so the Dragon capsule can carry crew. Blue Origin, the secretive startup organized by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, will receive $22 million to continue work on its vertical-takeoff-and-landing spacecraft.

Boeing is building a capsule designated the CST-100, which would use batteries rather than solar arrays for power on quick trips to the space station. Plans call for enough power storage in the CST-100 service module to enable two docking attempts, and the capsule is being designed to stay at the station for as long as seven months as a lifeboat once it is connected to the station grid.

SpaceX is using its CCDev-1 award to develop a side-mounted pusher-type launch abort system and begin designing crew accommodations for a human-rated Dragon. OSC, NASA's other commercial cargo-delivery provider, decided not to pursue human flight when its reusable spaceplane design did not pass muster in CCDev-2.

NASA is continuing to invest in Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser lifting-body vehicle as a potential replacement for the shuttle's runway-landing capability. The composite spaceplane is based on NASA's HL-20 experimental vehicle, derived from the Russian BOR-4 test vehicle that flew in space four times.

Blue Origin plans to advance its otherwise unnamed "Space Vehicle" by using the CCDev-2 funding to complete "key system trades," work with NASA's Ames Research Center to design the vehicle's thermal protection system and conduct the reviews necessary to generate, in the words of its CCDev-2 proposal, "a baseline definition architecture and system requirements."

Work on the four spacecraft with the CCDev-2 funding is just starting. Blue Origin and SpaceX have held "kickoff meetings" on spending the new federal money, according to a NASA progress report. Boeing completed a system definition review on May 19, NASA says, and Sierra Nevada met its systems requirements review milestone by delivering 10 documents June 1, including its human-rating plan.

By comparison, the MPCV that NASA started as the Orion crew exploration vehicle under Constellation is the most advanced crew carrier in the lineup. Lockheed Martin kept working on Orion after Obama called for cancellation of Constellation under appropriations language that prohibited NASA from terminating the program and its contracts.

According to NASA Program Manager Mark Geyer, Orion has cost the government $5 billion to date. With its portion of that money, Lockheed Martin has built and pressure-tested the initial Orion development vehicle and moved it from its fabrication facility at the Michoud plant in New Orleans to the Lockheed Martin spacecraft factory near Denver for acoustic and other ground tests. It has also developed a telescoped flight-test program using existing launch vehicles that it says could see the vehicle ready to carry crews of four to orbit in 2016. But NASA is slowing that plan to bring Orion development into sync with the heavy-lift SLS Congress has ordered NASA to build (AW&ST May 30, p. 30).

Thus, none of the planned human spacecraft has a human-rated launch vehicle to carry it to space. Boeing has yet to pick a launch vehicle for its CST-100, Sierra Nevada and Blue Origin plan to use the Atlas V and SpaceX will use its Falcon 9.

Meanwhile, Congress and NASA continue to spar over how fast the agency is moving on the heavy-lift rocket ordered in the reauthorization act. Administrator Charles Bolden insists NASA cannot meet its 2016 congressional deadline, no matter how much money Congress appropriates for the task, while lawmakers like Hutchison and Nelson insist that the law is the law. Sen. John D. Rockefeller, 4th, (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, used a subpoena threat to pry loose permission for his staff to see preliminary versions of the SLS reference design, but only if they visited agency headquarters to do so.

That design, selected by Bolden on June 14 and forwarded to the White House for final approval, calls for a heavy-lift rocket that uses liquid hydrogen fuel and liquid oxygen for main- and upper-stage propulsion. Early versions of the rocket would use three surplus space shuttle main engines (SSME) each to power the main stage and the J-2X upper-stage engine started under Constellation for the upper stage. For added thrust during liftoff and early ascent, the vehicle would use a variant of the solid-fuel booster rockets that performed the same task for the space shuttle.

Once the 15 SSMEs in NASA's stockpile are expended, the plan calls for a shift to the reusable RS25E variant that Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne has proposed. To "evolve" toward the 130-metric-ton capability, and satisfy Shelby and the senators from California with some potential jobs for their constituents, the plan would hold a competition for kerosene-fueled strap-on boosters as more powerful replacements for the shuttle-derived solids.

Aerojet says it already is working in California on an upgraded version of the 340,000-lb.-thrust AJ26 that would generate about 500,000 lb. of thrust at sea level and has entered an agreement with Teledyne Brown Engineering to build the hardware in Huntsville, Ala.

To put it mildly, that work is in its early stages. As technicians at Kennedy Space Center prepare the space shuttle orbiters for transfer to museums in Virginia, California and—once Atlantis lands—just outside the KSC gates, the U.S. human spaceflight program is arguably less defined than it was in November 2008, when the national election upended it.

Inevitably that will change, as test flights and on-going political negotiations play out for good or ill. The gap in U.S. human spaceflight capability continues, with less technical clarity on how it will be closed.

As Atlantis cranks out the final orbits of the shuttle decades, we explore what comes next in the U.S. space program and offer expert commentaries on the value of the shuttle in bringing the U.S. this far. NASA Shuttle Program Manager John Shannon outlines what the money and lives spent on this "incredible learning tool" have given the space program. Michael Griffin, who planned for the shuttle retirement as NASA administrator, discusses why it is time to move on. [/size]

ЦитироватьULA-NASA CCDev Announcement — Live Blogging[/size]

Posted by Doug Messier
on July 18, 2011, at 10:17 am
in CCDev, NASA, News and United Launch Alliance

11:01 a.m. Here we go....

Chris Chavez — ULA Communications
Ed Mango, NASA Commercial Crew Development program manager
Dr. George Sowers, vice president, ULA business development

George Sowers

– very busy week and year at ULA — 52 consecutive launches — latest one a GPS satellite on Saturday
– five science launches this year — capped off by Mars Science Lab....

Details:

an unfunded Space Act Agreement to collect technical information from ULA on the use of Atlas V for commercial crew....NASA will provide feedback on human space mission requirements.....

Unfunded SAA — both sides will make own contributions, no funds from NASA to ULA or from ULA to NASA

program will last through the end of the year...

ULA putting a significant amount of money into it....potential for a lot of jobs at various ULA sites in Colorado, Alabama and Florida depending upon what happens in Washington......CCDev program....

Mango:

NASA will be creating a team on its side to work on the project....create an integrated team...

NASA team will include 30 engineers, 4-6 full-time....contributions from Marshall, Ames, KSC and JSC....

QUESTIONS:

Will ULA have a certified rocket by the end of the process?

Mango: No. We will have a sense of the risks and requirements involved in using Atlas. Need certification of the entire system.

Can emergency detection system be used for Delta IV and other rockets?

Sowers: As part of this agreement, will continue development of the emergency detection system. NASA and Lockheed Martin are considering Delta IV for Orion launches both unmanned and with crews.

Mango:  Want to have two systems certified to fly to ISS by the middle of the decade.

How much modification is required to Atlas V?

Sowers: Mods to the Atlas V are pretty minimal. The major one involves the emergency detection system, which was funded under CCDev 1.

Other modifications are at the launch site for emergency egress in the event of an emergency.

Will you stay with RD-180? Produce it in United States?

Sowers: For initial commercial crew, would go with same RD-180 Russian supplied engine that has worked successfully in previous flights.

Is this the same work you wanted to do on CCDev 2?

Sowers: It's a subset of that amount. Will not go into as much depth.

How long is the agreement?

Mango: Work will take six to nine months.

How long will certification take?

Mango: Will be longer than the CCDev 1 (one year) and less than 2 to 3 years. Depends upon what proposals are provided by companies.

Sowers: NASA's certification will be on the full system level — rocket, spacecraft, etc.

What does Atlas V bring to the table?

Sowers: We feel that demonstrated reliability is critically important. We've learned the hard way that analyses have a difficult time assessing the rigors of the flight environment. Need to fly. Having 26 successful missions under our belt means that we have a reliable vehicle that can be used for crew.

Mango: Flight history is very important. You think you are safe but then you have to look under the rock to make sure you won't get caught.

 What version of Atlas? And why Delta IV?

Sowers: Atlas V is choice of commercial crew industry. Would use lower end of the Atlas V performance.

When would it be ready to launch humans?

Sowers: We believe that Atlas V can be ready by the time any spacecraft can be ready. Within 3 or 4 years.

Mango: Middle of the decade is the goal. That's a bit of a soft target.

What type of analysis will it be?

Sowers: Don't need to do more testing on the launch vehicle since it's flown 26 times. Will review the testing that has been done on the Atlas V and the flight history and comparing it to NASA's human flight requirements.

What is vaule of NASA's contribution to agreement?

Mango: Thirty individuals involved, about 4-6 full time. Engineers at Marshall, JSC, KSC and Ames.

How would Atlas V certification help with Delta IV certification?

Would need to go through a similar process with the Delta IV. Being considered for an unmanned flight of MPCV. Would not need human certification for that flight.

What's the next step?

Mango: CCDev 2 is focused on spacecraft development. CCDev 3 that will start next year will be an integrated process involving rockets and spacecraft analyzing missions and flights.[/size]

ЦитироватьMon, 18 July, 2011
ULA To Support Commercial Crew Efforts[/size]
By Dan Leone

    WASHINGTON — United Launch Alliance (ULA) will support NASA efforts to assess the potential of the company's Atlas 5 rocket for launching astronaut crews bound for the international space station under a partnership agreement with the space agency announced July 18.

    In a press release, ULA, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin Joint venture, characterized the arrangement as an unfunded Space Act Agreement under which NASA will collect technical data on the Atlas 5 to assess its feasibility for launching crew-carrying space vehicles.

    ULA was not among the companies that in April were awarded NASA funding under a second round of contracts designed to nurture the development of privately operated astronaut transportation services. The Commercial Crew Development (CCDev-2) awards went to companies designing crew-carrying spacecraft rather than rockets.

    ULA's agreement with NASA "will look at the Atlas 5 to understand its design risks, its capabilities, how it can be used within the context of flying our NASA crew, and maturing ULA's designs for the Emergency Detection System (EDS) and launch vehicle processing and launch architectures under a crewed configuration," Ed Mango, NASA's Commercial Crew Program manager, said in the press release.

    "We believe this effort will demonstrate to NASA that our systems are compliant with NASA requirements for human spaceflight," George Sowers, ULA's vice president of business development, said in the release.

    The Atlas 5 is one of the two main vehicles offered by ULA to launch U.S. government payloads. ULA also offers the Delta 4 rocket, which is similar in capability to the Atlas 5 but has yet to be ordered by NASA, and the smaller Delta 2, which is out of production and bound for retirement.

    Boeing Co., which won $92.3 million in CCDev-2 funding, is working on the CST-100 capsule that could be used to bring astronauts to the international space station, and to fly fee-paying tourists into space. Other recipients of CCDev-2 funding are Sierra Nevada Corp., which received $80 million to continue developing its seven-person Dream Chaser space plane; Space Exploration Technologies Corp., which received $75 million for work on a crew-carrying version of its Dragon cargo capsule; and Blue Origin, which received $22 million.

    The Atlas 5 and the Delta 4 are the only U.S. rockets in operation today that could launch the crew vehicles that Boeing and Sierra Nevada are working on. Neither company has officially selected a launch vehicle for its proposed astronaut taxi.

    In 2009, ULA got $50 million under NASA's CCDev-1 program, funding for which was made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. According to industry sources, ULA used those funds to design an EDS, an important safety feature and that is considered necessary before a rocket can be used to launch astronaut crews.[/size]

ЦитироватьNASA, ULA Enter Partnership on Atlas V Commercial Crew[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on July 18, 2011, at 12:56 pm
in CCDev, NASA and United Launch Alliance

ULA's Atlas V

NASA PR — DENVER — Through a new agreement, United Launch Alliance (ULA) will provide technical information to NASA about using the Atlas V rocket to launch astronauts into space. The announcement was made Monday at the agency's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

"I am truly excited about the addition of ULA to NASA's Commercial Crew Development Program team," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said. "Having ULA on board may speed the development of a commercial crew transportation system for the International Space Station, allowing NASA to concentrate its resources on exploring beyond low Earth orbit."

NASA and ULA's unfunded Space Act Agreement (SAA) requires ULA to provide data on the Atlas V, a flight-proven expendable launch vehicle used by NASA and the Department of Defense for critical space missions.

NASA will share its human spaceflight experience with ULA to advance crew transportation system capabilities and the draft human certification requirements. ULA will provide NASA feedback about those requirements, including providing input on the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of NASA's proposed certification approach.

"This unfunded SAA will look at the Atlas V to understand its design risks, its capabilities, how it can be used within the context of flying our NASA crew and maturing ULA's designs for the Emergency Detection System and launch vehicle processing and launch architectures under a crewed configuration," said Ed Mango, NASA's Commercial Crew Program manager.

The majority of the work will be completed by the end of this year. As part of the agreement, NASA will:

– participate in milestone and technical review briefings and provide technical feedback on milestone completion
– assist in identification of risks and possible mitigation strategies

ULA will:

– continue to advance the Atlas V CTS concept, including design maturation and analyses
– conduct ULA program reviews as planned
– perform a Design Equivalency Review
– develop Hazard Analyses unique for human spaceflight
– develop a Probabilistic Risk Assessment
– document an Atlas V CTS certification baseline
– conduct Systems Requirements Review

"We believe this effort will demonstrate to NASA that our systems are fully compliant with NASA requirements for human spaceflight," said George Sowers, ULA's vice president of business development. "ULA looks forward to continued work with NASA to develop a U.S. commercial crew space transportation capability providing safe, reliable, and cost effective access to and return from low Earth orbit and the International Space Station."

In 2010, NASA awarded $6.7 million to ULA to accompany its own $1.3 million investment to develop an Emergency Detection System prototype test bed. The EDS will monitor critical launch vehicle and spacecraft systems and issue status, warning and abort commands to crew during their mission to low Earth orbit. EDS is the sole significant element necessary for flight safety to meet the requirements to certify ULA's launch vehicles for human spaceflight.[/size]

ЦитироватьMassive Fight Brewing Over NASA Changes to CCDev Contracting[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on July 22, 2011, at 4:34 pm

NASA wants to change its contracting process for the future rounds of the Commercial Crew Development program, a development that has a lot of commercial crew proponents up in arms. First, the details from Space News:

    Breaking from the strategy it used in the first two rounds of its commercial crew development (CCDev) program, NASA said it intends to use a traditional procurement process governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulations to fund its contribution to the next phases of work on privately owned human spaceflight systems.

    NASA awarded Space Act Agreements (SAA) for the first and second phases of CCDev. Under those arrangements, companies developing launch or crew transportation systems are paid upon meeting self-imposed milestones developed with NASA input.

    But NASA said SAAs may not be suitable for the next phase of commercial crew development because the agency wants that effort to yield an integrated transportation system, comprising a rocket and a crew-carrying vehicle, that NASA would then certify as safe for ferrying astronauts to the international space station.

    As part of the certification process, NASA would have to dictate some safety design requirements to its industry partners. NASA does not have that authority under the SAA framework, according to former astronaut Brent Jett, deputy program manager for the agency's commercial crew program.

And now, this reaction from Charles Lurio in today's edition of The Lurio Report:

    Update, July 21 – 'Commercial Crew' Fatal Management Error Imminent

    At a forum on 20 July, NASA revealed its plans to indeed control the program tightly and fatally after CCDev 2.  The scope apparently went beyond the worst I'd anticipated in my June 28 issue ("Intervention Required _Now_ to Save 'Commercial Crew'  From 'Death by Management'").

    From Blue Origin to SpaceX to Bigelow Aerospace and others, industry firms and entities were stunned.  Only two weeks (to August 3) are allowed for formal responses, but twitter feeds from the meeting indicated the strength of their initial protests.

    It seems that the NASA proposals are based on an inverted world where the Space Act Agreements (SAAs) used during the COTS program are suddenly legally questionable, where their accomplishments may not have really been accomplishments, and where rules that didn't and can't exist have suddenly become holy writ.  Such weasel words are a flimsy tissue attempting to cover up a retreat to NASA's traditional FAR contracting, the same procedures that gave us standing armies from factory floor through operations and costs that can never go down.  It makes plausible speculation that this has been engineered by traditional NASA sectors and contractors in revenge for COTS's SAAs showing just how overpriced they've been.

    The basic justification is, of course, perpetuation of the "magical thinking" that only NASA can create "safe" human spaceflight; the thesis that the Harry Potter books are nonfiction is plausible by comparison.

    NASA is counting on OMB and other higher elements of the Executive Branch being so distracted by larger national issues that they can be "played the fool" and taken in by this, rather than overriding it.  If that happens or if NASA doesn't change plans on its own, I think that commercial crew beyond the present CCDev phase should be defunded rather than turn into another farce.

    (Footnote: Evidently officials, management, and other groups within the Agency are each pointing at the other as responsible for "requiring" a retreat back to costly traditions.  A perfectly illogical circle, but one that's also hanging together.)

This will be a battle royale. I can't help thinking that CCDev is going to be a constant battle right up to time of the first launch or the moment it collapses into a giant scrap heap.[/size]

Цитироватьhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8647257/Nasa-reaches-agreement-to-send-commercial-rocket-to-ISS.html

НАСА планирует использовать Atkas-V для пилотируемых полетов, поскольку начиная с 2002г 100% пусков были удачными.

ЦитироватьSeveral companies competing to partner with Nasa to build a successor to the space shuttle – like Sierra Nevada Corp. and Blue Origin – have already chosen the Atlas V to launch future commercial payloads

ЦитироватьNewSpace 2011: Orbital Spaceflight and Beyond[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on July 28, 2011, at 11:23 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/19360.jpg)
A Boeing CST-100 crew module docks at a Bigelow Aerospace space station. (Credit: Boeing)

Moderator:

    Dennis Stone: Manager, Program Integration, NASA Commercial Crew and Cargo Program

Panel:

    Brent Jett — Deputy Manager, NASA CCDev (JSC)
    Garrett Reisman — Project Manager for CCDev 2, SpaceX
    Mark Sirangelo — Chairman, Sierra Nevada Space Systems
    Gerard Szatkowski — SmallSat Project Manager, United Launch Alliance

 Brent Jett
NASA CCDev

    There is a lot of angst in the community concerning contracting setup for CCDev 3 and beyond
    Agrees with Lori Garver comment — keep our feet to the fire
    Some people feel that Space Act Agreement is the ONLY way to do commercial crew; others feel that a cost-plus contract is the only way to assure crew and mission safety
    lawyers are telling them what the can and can't do
    Committed to minimizing overhead, using fixed payments and incentives, etc.
    The key to being successful is not the type of contracting agreement used
    The key is to control requirements, costs, etc.
    What we really need is money and support from Congress and the Executive Branch. We know we have it from the Executive Branch, but support in Congress depends upon who you talk to
    House Markup bill — flat at $312 million — only about 1/10 of amount spent on SLS and Orion Multiple Crew Vehicle
    If that number holds, it will be very challenging to maintain multiple partners and reach goal of flying people by mid-2010s
    "At some point we're going to have to spend more than a couple of hundred million per year" to get to orbital flights
    Partners (Sierra Nevada, Boeing, etc.) want to fly quicker than NASA has the money to spend — NASA budget for commercial crew is a limiting factor.

 Garrett Reisman
SpaceX

    The buzz around STS-135 launch (final shuttle flight) was all doomy and gloomy
    Believes we're on the edge of a golden age for space marked by commercial innovation
    if we F-up the commercial crew effort, then all that doomy and gloomy stuff will be true
    need to find a way to make it work or the U.S. will no longer be a human space-faring nation
    House bill ($312 million for commercial crew) is less than 2 percent of NASA's total budget — for people worried about U.S. leadership in space, why not provide more funds?
    NASA and industry are communicating on requirements and contracting matters — confident that they will find a way forward — need to find the funds for it
    We have the technology to do this
    When he first went to SpaceX, was "blown away" by the capability the company has to produce rockets
    SpaceX had conceptual design review on escape system just two days ago. Will have a PDR in September.
    Our vice presidents are purely technical, leading an incredibly enthusiastic group of young engineers who are having the time of their lives

Mark Sirangelo
Sierra Nevada Space Systems

    The House bill ($312 million for commercial crew) was actually a good thing — last year they tried to zero out the budget entirely....
    now have a floor of $312 million and a ceiling of $850 million (President's budget)
    Confident that they will get there...
    His view is that the issues concerning contracting methods will be resolved
    NASA is our partner — we are privileged to be given funding to go do this
    Bigger issue — making sure we have enough money to make this happen

Gerard Szatkowski
United Launch Alliance

    Need to human rate the Atlas V and Delta IV vehicles
    We don't see this as a great technology problem, it's straight forward engineering
    ULA Rideshare Capabilities — secondary payloads program for low-cost access to space
    can do suborbital, orbital and Earth escape (lunar-type) missions

QUESTIONS

Q. Govt. is the primary customer and investor for COTS, CCDev, anchor tenancy, etc. How do we get from that to a more fully-commercial environment in LEO?

Szatkowski: Lowering the recurring costs. Producing payloads that are already contained so get costs down for ULA.

Reisman:  It is a partnership. NASA is a great source of expertise in knowing what to do and what not to do. COTS is working great. This is happening. It's very cost effective.  SpaceX has spent $800 million total since it was founded. With business as usual, would cost a lot more. For Falcon 9, would have cost $4 billion with traditional methods.

Brent Jett: NASA needs to set requirements but not get too much into design. Another key: other destinations in LEO. Bigelow has private space station plans. Partnerships on destinations in Earth orbit would be crucial.

Q: What are plans for recruiting commercial astronauts?

Reisman: My boss at SpaceX was my boss at NASA — astronaut Ken Bowersox. (Reisman is an ex-astronaut, too). Need to work out who will do initial flights. Will it be NASA astronauts? SpaceX astros? A combination of both? Those questions are still open now.

Sirangelo:  Agreed with Reisman on most of what he said. One model: take a page from the maritime industry.  Commercial companies take ships around the world, but there is a harbor master that bring the ships into port. Could be a mixed system blending NASA and private industry. Private companies launch vehicle, NASA docks it.

Q: Difference in paperwork, complexity between Space Act Agreements and Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) contract?

Sirangelo:  Under FAR, the complexities of joint partnership investments could become a problem. Thinks that can be worked out. Other issue: when NASA asks for a change in the vehicle. Need to be analyzed carefully. Where does the money come from under a fixed-price contract?  Other issue is time and cost of paying personnel.

One option: do CCDev 3 under Space Act Agreement leading to the final round being done under FAR.

Reisman:  We want to continue successful Space Act Agreement of fixed-price, milestone based program done for COTS and CCDev 1 and 2. There are a lot of accounting issues under FAR. NASA has said it would provide an exemption to cost accounting. Need to hire a lot of extra accountants. Big culture change at SpaceX; our people don't fill out time cards. That saves us several man-days per person. Space Act Agreement might have a dozen requirements in that area; FAR might have 50. Need to hire people to make sure you are in compliance.

Made all of these concerns known to NASA people, who are working very hard to accommodate them.

Jett:  Can provide an exemption to cost accounting and work on other requirements. An SAA could meet the requirements for moving forward. However, if it doesn't, then we will try to develop the most flexible approach to meet NASA's needs and limit overhead and make the program feasible.[/size]

ЦитироватьMusk Applauds Senate's Approval of $500 Million for Commercial Crew[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on September 15, 2011, at 2:28 pm

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20139.jpg)
SpacX Founder Elon Musk

Elon Musk, SpaceX CEO and Chief Technology Officer, issued the following statement:

"The United States needs alternatives for carrying American astronauts, and we need them as soon as possible," said SpaceX CEO and chief rocket designer Elon Musk. "The investments made by this legislation will accelerate efforts to return America to launching astronauts and reduce our dependency on Russia. With the failure of the Soyuz booster last month, this effort is more important than ever.

"NASA's Commercial Crew Development Program is the most fiscally responsible means to rapidly advance human spaceflight. It has protected taxpayer dollars with fixed-price, pay-for-performance contracts. It fosters competition that forces companies to compete on reliability, capability and cost. And it leverages private investment – making taxpayer dollars go further.

"SpaceX applauds Chairwoman Mikulski, Ranking Member Hutchison and the Members of the Subcommittee for recognizing the value of the program. With the support of Congress, American companies will soon be able to end the flow of tax dollars to Russia and instead invest in high-tech American jobs."

Editor's Note: The Senate's bill is $350 million less than the $850 million requested by the Obama Administration. It is higher than the House spending bill, which leaves spending flat at $312 million. Those numbers will have to be reconciled in conference committee, but it's unlikely the CCDev budget will rise above a half billion dollars next year.

Musk's view appears to be that this is sufficient, although other NewSpace supporters are likely to vehemently disagree.  I'm disappointed that after forcing NASA to build a massive heavy lift vehicle that the Senate couldn't find extra money to fund CCDev at or at least near what the space agency says it needs. Especially after the recent Soyuz launch exposed the vulnerability of relying on a single crew launch system. That would have been a good bargain, but it was not to be.

It's a bit too early to fully evaluate the impact of the Senate's decision. Officials from CCDev companies have said that any cuts in the proposed CCDev budgets could lengthen development times and raise overall costs down the road. That could endanger efforts to get commercial crew up and running by the middle of the decade.

Boeing, for example, is projecting the first test flight of its CST-100 vehicle in 2015, with an operational flight in 2016.  Other companies are projecting flights earlier, contingent upon sufficient funding. Any delays mean paying the Russians some $63 million per seat (or more) to send our astronauts to the International Space Station. And it leaves ISS dependent solely upon the Soyuz.

The other possible impact is that NASA funds fewer systems than it might otherwise support with a larger budget. NASA is looking for at least two systems to fund to completion to give it options.  My guess is the space agency will stick with at least two but might not be able to fund three.

One thing to keep in mind: it's not unusual to ask for a larger budget and expect Congress to provide less, especially in the current fiscal climate.  So, NASA was probably expecting to run the program on less money, although perhaps not this much less.[/size]

ЦитироватьNASA to Abandon Goal of Funding Multiple Commercial Crew Systems[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on September 20, 2011, at 11:06 am

Congressional stinginess with NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) budget is forcing the space agency to abandon a key goal of the effort: to obtain multiple, redundant access to low Earth orbit with price competition between providers.

According to the CCDev draft request for proposal released yesterday, NASA will ultimately select only one system to fund to completion:

    The acquisition will be conducted as a two-phased procurement using a competitive down-selection technique between phases. In this technique, two or more contractors will be selected for Phase 1. It is expected that the single contractor for Phase 2 will be chosen from among these contractors after a competitive down-selection. [my emphasis added]

The space agency is currently funding four companies to build spacecraft: Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada Corporation, and SpaceX. The first three companies plan to use United Launch Alliance's Atlas V rocket to launch their spacecraft into orbit. SpaceX would use its own Falcon 9 booster. NASA's goal had been to fund at least two fully integrated rocket-spacecraft systems to full completion.

The key issue appears to be funding: while the Obama Administration has proposed spending $850 million on CCDev in FY 2012, the Senate would provide $500 million while the House has proposed $312 million.  Congress has been much more enthusiastic about funding the Space Launch System and Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle, which will receive around $3 billion next year.

The issue affects not only NASA but also private space station operators such as Bigelow Aerospace who want multiple options and competition in launching crews and cargo. Bigelow plans to launch two space stations into orbit by the end of the decade if commercial transport options become available. The company will need more than 20 launches per year of cargo and crew to support its facilities.[/size]

ЦитироватьAccording to the CCDev draft request for proposal released yesterday, NASA will ultimately select only one system to fund to completion:  

Цитировать"Notwithstanding paragraph (a), the competition in Phase 2 may result in the award of multiple contracts if budget allows."

ЦитироватьОдновременно также объявлено о дополнениях к контрактам в рамках программы CCDev2  - Sierra Nevada Corp. получит дополнительно $25.6 млн (общая стоимость контракта составит $105.6 млн.), Boeing получит дополнительно  $20.6 млн. (общая стоимость -  $112.9 млн.)

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/sep/HQ_11-312_CCDEV_Announ.html

ЦитироватьДумаю, победит Боинг. NASA не решится доверить транспортировку людей малоопытным фирмам. Поигрались с мелкими частниками - и хватит.

ЦитироватьNASA упорно и неуклонно продолжает развивать средства для туристической ПК

ЦитироватьNASA-Backed Space Taxi To Fly Test Mid-2013[/size]

 Oct 12, 2011
 
By Irene Klotz/Reuters
CAPE CANAVERAL

A seven-seat space taxi backed by NASA to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station will make a high-altitude test flight next summer, officials said on Tuesday.

Sierra Nevada Corp's "Dream Chaser" space plane, which resembles a miniature space shuttle, is one of four space taxis being developed by private industry with backing from the U.S. government.

For the unmanned test flight, it will be carried into the skies by WhiteKnightTwo, the carrier aircraft for the commercial suborbital passenger ship SpaceShipTwo, backed by Virgin Galactic, a U.S. company owned by Richard Branson's London-based Virgin Group .

The test flight was added after privately held Sierra Nevada got a $25.6-million boost to its existing $80 million contract with NASA.

The test flight will take place from either Edwards Air Force Base in California's Mojave Desert, or from the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, Ed Mango, manager of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, said at a community briefing at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

With the retirement of the space shuttles this summer, NASA is now dependent on Russia to fly astronauts to the space station, at a cost of more than $50 million per person.

The agency hopes to turn over crew transportation services to one or more commercial firms before the end of 2016, Mango said.

In addition to Sierra Nevada, NASA is funding spaceship development work at Boeing, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and Blue Origin, a start-up firm owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.

"Having only one way to get crew to the station is a limitation," NASA astronaut Mike Fossum, who is currently living aboard the outpost, said during an in-flight interview last week.

The station, a $100 billion project of 16 nations, was finished this year after more than a decade of construction 225 miles (350 km) above the planet. The outpost, which is about the size of a five-bedroom house, supports a variety of scientific research and technology demonstrations.

Along with helping to develop commercial space taxis, NASA is working on a heavy-lift rocket and capsule to fly astronauts and cargo to asteroids, the moon, Mars and other destinations beyond the space station's orbit.

Drawing heavily on equipment originally built for predecessor programs, including the space shuttle and the canceled Constellation moon exploration initiative, the new rocket, called the Space Launch System or SLS, is scheduled to debut in 2017.

That unmanned test flight would be followed in 2021 by a trial run with astronauts, said Kennedy Space Center director Bob Cabana.[/size]

ЦитироватьBoeing CST-100 Wind Tunnel Tests Nearly Complete[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier on October 12, 2011, at 3:20 pm

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20605.jpg)
A scale model of Boeing's CST-100 spacecraft undergoes wind tunnel tests at NASA Ames Research Center. (Credit: Boeing)

By Edward Memi
Boeing PR

Boeing is nearing completion of wind-tunnel testing for a new spacecraft to ferry people and cargo to the International Space Station.

Engineers have been testing the spacecraft, called the Crew Space Transportation (CST)-100, since Sept. 17 at NASA's Ames Research Center in California. The test team is using a 12-inch-wide, 14-inch-long aluminum model that is about 1/14th the size of the operational space capsule that Boeing plans to build. Testing is scheduled to conclude by the end of October.

Using hundreds of pinhole-sized sensors, the wind-tunnel tests measure how air flows across the model. Boeing engineers plan to test the model in more than 20 different positions to mimic the different phases of an aborted landing.

"As engineers, we like data and numbers, and you can take all of this and make something meaningful out of it," said Boeing engineer Dustin Choe. "We can reduce it down and provide a clearer picture of what we will experience in flight."

The wind-tunnel tests help ensure the spacecraft is structurally sound and can be controlled safely. Engineers will tweak CST-100's design based on the data collected.

The wind-tunnel activity is part of a series of planned tests for CST-100. Boeing and teammate Bigelow Aerospace recently dropped a mock capsule off a moving truck to test the external airbags the real spacecraft would deploy to cushion a landing on Earth.

CST-100 will transport up to seven people or a mix of people and cargo to low-Earth-orbit destinations, such as the International Space Station and Bigelow Aerospace's planned space station.

Boeing is one of four companies competing under NASA's Commercial Crew Development program to develop crew vehicles to restore the United States' capability to provide access to the International Space Station by 2016.[/size]

ЦитироватьУ той же SpaceX ещё впереди обеспечение требований котракта по COTS, так что могут и успеть.
Sierra Nevada - вряд ли, но должен же кто-то подхватить падающее знамя разработки крылатых многоразовиков.

ЦитироватьЛишний год использования российских космических кораблей обойдется США в 450 млн долларов[/size]

ЛОС-АНДЖЕЛЕС, 21 октября. /Корр. ИТАР-ТАСС Алексей Качалин/. В 450 млн долл обойдется США лишний год доставки американских астронавтов и грузов российскими космическими кораблями на Международную космическую станцию /МКС/. Об этом сообщила в четверг заместитель Национального управления США по аэронавтике и исследованию космического пространства /NASA/ Лори Гарвер на проходящем в штате Нью- Мексико международном симпозиуме, посвященном одиночным и коммерческим полетам в космос.

В новом финансовом году, который начался 1 октября, правительство США запросило у Конгресса одобрения финансирования программы разработки средств доставки людей и грузов на орбиту и в космос в размере 850 млн долларов. Если сенат и палата представителей урежут размер этих ассигнований, то способность государства прекратить пользоваться российскими кораблями в 2016 году будет поставлена под угрозу, заметила Гарвер. "А один лишний год пользования услугами русских обойдется Соединенным Штатам в около 450 млн долларов", - заметила Гарвер.

Заместитель главы NASA обратила внимание на то, что США оказались перед выбором. Или заложить указанную сумму /450 млн долл/ в проект расходов на 2016 год, или "выбить" эти средства сейчас и присовокупить их к расходам в рамках программы создания собственных средств транспортировки в космос. Последний сценарий "предоставляет нам наилучший шанс" сменить иностранные средства доставки на собственные до наступления 2016 года. "Таков выбор", - резюмировала она.

Гарвер сообщила, что ожидаемая экономическая отдача от стимулирования коммерческих запусков в космос "должна возрасти". Согласно докладу Федерального авиационного управления от января 2011 года, в 2009 году деловая активность коммерческого сегмента космической индустрии и связанных с ней отраслей в стоимостном выражении превышала 208 млрд долл при доходах на уровне более 53 млрд долл.

По данным NASA, в марте доставка одного американского астронавта на российской ракете на МКС и обратно на Землю обходилась в 63 млн долл. Космическое ведомство США израсходовало порядка 388 млн долл на стимулирование разработки пилотируемых кораблей нового поколения, которые придут на смену флоту шаттлов, снятых с эксплуатации минувшим летом.[/size]

ЦитироватьNASA's 60-Day Progress Report on CCDev Milestones[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on October 23, 2011, at 10:17 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20773.jpg)
CST-100 airbag drop test. (Credit: Boeing)

NASA Return on Investment 60 Day Report
Commercial Crew Development Industry Partners Continue Progress

NASA PR – Over the last two months, NASA's industry partners demonstrated substantial progress toward achieving crewed spaceflight in the middle of the decade by completing six more Space Act Agreement milestones. In just six short months since the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 partners were selected, they have completed 21 of the 57 planned milestones.

The Sierra Nevada Corporation completed their functional Vehicle Avionics Integration Laboratory (VAIL), which will be used to test Dream Chaser computers and electronics in simulated space mission scenarios. Initially, the VAIL will be utilized for developmental testing, and then later as a key tool for Dream Chaser certification.

Blue Origin LLC successfully completed two technical reviews. Their space vehicle Mission Concept Review(MCR) identified proposed mission objectives as well as the design concepts to meet them. Also, in preparation for their Reusable Booster System (RBS) engine component testing next year, Blue Origin presented their test plan and test article interface data to NASA experts.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20774.jpg)
CCDev milestone progress as of Oct. 21, 2011. (Credit: NASA)

Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) successfully completed a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) of their Launch Abort System propulsion components. This review demonstrated that SpaceX is ready to proceed with detailed design, fabrication, assembly, integration, and testing of the component test articles.

United Launch Alliance completed a Design Equivalency Review (DER), which presented their Atlas V requirements and certification process development to NASA technical experts for feedback.

Together with their Bigelow Aerospace teammates, Boeing successfully completed a series of drop tests in the Mojave Desert to measure the performance of prototype landing airbags for their CST-100 commercial crew spacecraft. When returning from space, the CST-100 will descend on three parachutes. To further cushion the land-based landings, the capsule's heat shield will drop away at about 5,000 feet and six airbags will inflate.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20775.jpg)
CST-100 airbag drop test. (Credit: Boeing)

To test these bags under real conditions, the team used a unique, one-of-a-kind mobile rig built from a semi-truck with a trailer-mounted crane to simulate landings with both a horizontal and vertical component to landing velocity. At over 11 feet high, the crane provided a vertical drop speed of 18 mph, which is equivalent to the planned rate of descent under the CST-100's parachutes. The truck provided horizontal speeds up to 20 mph.

The primary purpose of the drop tests, which were performed as part of Boeing's Commercial Crew Development Space Act Agreement, was to collect engineering data on the impact loads and bag performance to help refine design tools. "These tests allowed us to do early computer simulation models and begin validating those models," said John McKinney, the Landing and Recovery System lead for Boeing's Commercial Crew Development program.

These computer models are now being used to refine the CST-100 airbag designs. More drop testing using the truck-mounted crane will continue in Nevada, leading up to a test of the latest bag designs as part of a fully integrated parachute drop test early next year.

A summary schedule showing all completed and planned CCDev2 milestones can be found at[/size]

http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/commercial

ЦитироватьNASA Astronauts Deploy to Assist CCDev Competitors[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on October 24, 2011, at 5:18 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/20786.jpg)
NASA crew members evaluating the CST100 mockup. (Credit: NASA)

NASA PR – NASA is engaging technical experts of all kinds from across the agency to help our commercial partners mature their crew transportation capabilities during Commercial Crew Development Round 2. As a key element of this support, NASA has assigned experienced NASA astronauts to work closely with our partners to help them develop and demonstrate crewed spacecraft systems. NASA's crew members evaluate the partners' designs, and provide them feedback and recommendations based on lessons learned from their real experiences living and working in space.

"NASA's 50-plus years in human spaceflight has resulted in a wealth of experience among a wide range of disciplines, including engineers, flight directors, flight controllers, and astronauts," says astronaut Lee Archambault. "NASA is now leveraging this expertise by placing several of its astronauts on the partner integration teams assisting the commercial partners in their development activities."

The NASA astronauts assigned to work with commercial partners are:

    Blue Origin – Tim Kopra, Colonel USAF (ret), Mission Specialist on ISS Expedition 20
    Boeing – Mike Foreman, Captain, USN, Mission Specialist on STS-123 and 129
    SpaceX – Tony Antonelli, Commander, USN, Pilot on STS-119 and STS-132
    Sierra Nevada – Lee Archambault, Colonel, USAF, Pilot on STS-117, Commander on STS-119
    United Launch Alliance – Stan Love, Ph.D., Mission Specialist on STS-122
    ATK – Scott Tingle, Commander, USN, selected as a NASA astronaut in 2009, graduate of  Astronaut Candidate Training.[/size]

ЦитироватьCommercial Crew Initiative Called Underfunded[/size]

Oct 24, 2011
 
By Mark Carreau

HOUSTON — Funding for NASA's commercial crew space transportation services initiative appears headed for funding problems that could undermine the agency's efforts to regain the independent U.S. human launch capability that lapsed with the shuttle program's retirement earlier this year, members of NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) warned Oct. 21.

President Barack Obama's 2012 budget request seeks $850 million in annual funding for the initiative through 2016, though the overall program cost has not been identified. In the meantime, Congress has yet to agree on an agency spending plan that anticipates flat funding of $18.72 billion annually through the same period, despite new pressures from the Space Launch System and the over-budget James Webb Space Telescope.

"If America wants a solid space program, it has to be a priority," says Joseph Dyer, the retired U.S. Navy vice admiral who chairs the eight-member panel. The ASAP met at the Johnson Space Center this week for briefings on the agency's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) 2 initiative and other safety concerns.

The panel notes CCDev is transitioning away from the initial Space Act Agreements that brought emerging providers, along with traditional aerospace participants, to the program and toward more traditional development contracts. Those agreements, while giving NASA greater insight into the development, will in turn transition into service agreements intended to initiate launches of astronauts to the International Space Station by late 2016.

But the goals of establishing reliable transportation with adequately managed risk at a competitive price depend on multiple service providers. Without sufficient funding, NASA will be forced to delay its development objectives or refocus the funding it has on a single provider, undermining reliability and cost effectiveness, ASAP member John Marshall says.

The current program includes funded participants Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX, as well as two unfunded participants, ATK and United Launch Alliance.[/size]

ЦитироватьTue, 25 October, 2011
NASA Lauds Progress of Commercial Space Companies Ahead of Hearing[/size]
By Dan Leone

    WASHINGTON — On the eve of a congressional hearing on its effort to nurture privately owned vehicles for ferrying astronauts to the international space station, NASA issued a report saying four companies receiving federal funding under the agency's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) 2 program are making "substantial progress toward achieving crewed spaceflight in the middle of the decade."

    "In just six short months since the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 partners were selected, they have completed 21 of the 57 planned milestones," NASA said in the Oct. 25 report. The milestones, representing a total of $32.4 million in federal funding, include airbag drop tests of Boeing's proposed CST-100 capsule and various technical reviews of other planned crew-carrying vehicles.
    In addition to Boeing Space Exploration of Houston, the companies receiving CCDev 2 funding are Blue Origin, Kent, Wash.; Sierra Nevada Corp., Sparks, Nev.; and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, Calif. All signed funded Space Act Agreements with NASA in April.

    NASA began issuing progress reports on the CCDev program during the summer. The latest coincides with a scheduled Oct. 26 hearing of the House Science Committee, whose Republican leadership has been critical of the effort. The witness list includes top executives from all of the CCDev 2 participants, in addition to NASA human spaceflight chief William Gerstenmaier and NASA Inspector General Paul Martin.

    The hearing's charter, released Oct. 25, included a long list of questions about the commercial crew program's progress to date, and its viability in the constrained budget environment gripping Washington.

    The charter also revealed that NASA on Oct. 17 awarded an unfunded Space Act Agreement to Excalibur Almaz, a company based in the Isle of Man that submitted a CCDev 2 proposal to NASA. Details of that proposal have not been made public, but the company has access to Soviet-era space hardware.

    "We're providing limited technical support consistent with the purpose of the CCDev 2 activity, which is to advance orbital commercial transportation concepts enabling significant progress on maturing the design and development of the system," NASA spokesman Michael Braukus wrote in an Oct. 25 response to questions about the Excalibur Almaz agreement.

    Phil McAlister, director of commercial spaceflight development at NASA headquarters here, would not provide any details about the agreement with Excalibur Almaz, except to say that "they have a credible concept."

    Excalibur Almaz has acquired several previously flown Soviet-era Almaz space capsules and plans to offer spaceflights to private passengers. The company, which did not reply to a request for comment, includes among its senior leadership former NASA officials and astronauts, as well as former Russian cosmonauts.

    Rocket maker United Launch Alliance (ULA) of Denver and rocket-motor manufacturer ATK Aerospace Systems of Magna, Utah, were also mentioned in NASA's commercial crew progress report. Both companies have unfunded Space Act Agreements to human rate rockets that could one day be used to launch crew carrying vehicles. ULA's candidate vehicle is the proven Atlas 5;  ATK has designed a rocket dubbed Liberty, a concept that was passed over for CCDev 2 funding in April.

    Space Act Agreements are a means of providing the private sector with federal funds or access to NASA documents and expertise without having to draw up complex government contracts subject to federal acquisition regulations. The first two rounds of CCDev were funded via Space Act Agreements.

    The next phase of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, known as the integrated design contract, will require bidders to propose architecture designs that include a spacecraft and launch vehicle. All of the CCDev participants except Space Exploration Technologies plan to pair their crew vehicles with an Atlas 5 for this phase of the competition.

    Despite the objections of some commercial spaceflight hopefuls, the integrated design contracts will be administered under the federal acquisition regulations.

    NASA requested $850 million for its commercial crew program in 2012 and has warned that, unless the effort is fully funded in that and subsequent years, the agency will have to continue relying on Russian vehicles to fly astronauts beyond 2017, the target date for availability of commercial crew taxis. [/size]

ЦитироватьSoviet Hardware Enters NASA CCDev Initiative[/size]

Nov 4, 2011
 
By Mark Carreau

HOUSTON — Excalibur Almaz, Inc., a Houston-headquartered space tourism company distinguished by its plans to use refurbished Soviet-era military space station hardware for adventure travel and commercial research, has become the seventh participant in the second round of NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) initiative.

EAI joins the NASA-fostered effort to develop U.S. commercial spacecraft capable of carrying astronauts to and from the International Space Station under an unfunded Space Act Agreement. The agreement will permit NASA participation in a series of systems requirements, launch vehicle, test plan, design compatibility, test and operational systems reviews through May 2012, according to NASA.

Earlier this year, the six-year-old company unveiled its unique hardware at its facilities on the Isle of Man, including a pair of Almaz military space stations and four three-person Reusable Re-entry Vehicles. The equipment was developed by the Soviets as military versions of the Salyut series of space stations. Seven Salyut and Almaz versions were launched between 1971 and 1982 (Aerospace DAILY, June 21).

The company plans an unmanned flight test of a refurbished and upgraded RRV as soon as 2014, with manned orbital flights of an RRV with an expendable habitable service module to follow soon after.

The launch of a commercial Almaz station would depend on the demand for orbital missions.

EAI brings flight-tested vintage RRV hardware to the CCDev competition, including a crew escape system and the capability to touch down on land as well as water. The company is assessing commercial launch vehicle options, according to NASA.

In April, NASA awarded a total of $270 million to Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX for further development of commercial crew space transportation services that could be operational in the 2015-16 time frame. United Launch Alliance and Alliant Techsystems are participating as unfunded participants[/size].

ЦитироватьNASA Should Get Moving on Commercial Crew, ULA Chief Says [Florida Today][/size]

    United Launch Alliance (ULA) President and Chief Executive Michael Gass believes NASA shouldn't waste time awarding its contract for private companies to deliver astronauts to the international space station, saying a speedy decision would provide much-needed budget certainty, Florida Today reported Dec. 7.

    Three of the four companies in the competition — Boeing, Sierra Nevada and Blue Origin — have proposed using ULA's Atlas 5 rocket. (The fourth, Space Exploration Technologies, is building its own.) That means ULA, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture, can't favor one partner and doesn't have a motive to invest in a single entry, Gass said in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington.

    "Why would you continue to invest when one of three of your investments could only be the potential winner?" he said. "So making a decision earlier is really helpful."[/size]

ЦитироватьGass, whose customers include NASA, also urged the civil space agency to move more swiftly in its selection of a commercial vehicle for ferrying astronauts to the international space station. Four companies — Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) — are studying commercial crew taxi concepts with NASA money awarded earlier this year. Atlas 5 is the launcher of choice for three of the companies, the exception being SpaceX, which plans to use its own rocket.

Noting that Congress gave NASA less than half of the $850 million it requested next year for commercial crew development, Gass said the agency needs to make a quick selection of at least one concept. "Atlas 5 is the choice of three of the four teams, has flown successfully many, many times, and could achieve human-rating in relatively short order," he said in his statement. "We believe Atlas 5 to be the most logical choice to plug the human spaceflight gap in the shortest order."[/size]

ЦитироватьBudget cuts in a program to spur commercial space taxis will likely keep the United States dependent on Russia to fly astronauts to the International Space Station until 2017, NASA's head of space operations said on Thursday.[/size]

But the newly revamped program, intended to provide a commercial alternative following the recent retirement of NASA's space shuttles, comes with a silver lining: NASA is abandoning plans for traditional fixed-price contracts and instead will use less expensive and more flexible partnering agreements.

"It's one small step for Commercial Crew," said Bigelow Aerospace attorney Michael Gold, referring to NASA's space taxi development program. "And one giant leap for common sense."

The switch was spurred by the halving of NASA's $850 million Commercial Crew program budget request for the year that began October 1 and by NASA's determination to keep at least two space taxi designs in the running for the agency's future business.

"We would like to carry two providers at a minimum, actually more," NASA associate administrator Bill Gerstenmaier said during a conference call with reporters. "We think competition is a key piece."

Currently the agency is funding work at four firms: Boeing, Space Exploration Technologies, Sierra Nevada Corp., and Blue Origin, a start-up owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.

Other aspiring space transportation companies, including Stratolaunch Systems, the recently announced start-up backed by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, are not seeking or have not been awarded NASA funds to assist with spaceship development.

"Our investment helps to ensure that this capability gets done in as timely a manner as we can actually make it occur," Gerstenmaier said.

A solicitation for the next phase of the program was due to be released on Monday, but will be delayed until the first quarter of 2012, Gerstenmaier said. The selection of companies, however, should remain on schedule for next summer.

NASA, which has $406 million to spend on the program this year, is uncertain how much money it will receive to see the development effort through the planned 21-month period.

"We want to get enough work behind us that we've got a very solid design that we can then start taking into a certification," Gerstenmaier said.

The agency had hoped to have an alternative by 2016 to sending its astronauts into space aboard the Russian Soyuz capsule, which costs more than $60 million per person per ride.

"We got an increase in the budget in fiscal year '12, which was a good thing, but it wasn't quite the funding level that we anticipated. That moved the potential service capability at least into 2017," Gerstenmaier said.

MORE LAUNCHES, LESS LAWYERING

The alternative contracting arrangement, called Space Act Agreements, has been used in a related program to develop commercial U.S. cargo ships to fly to the space station, a $100 billion research laboratory built in partnership with Russia, Europe, Japan and Canada that flies about 240 miles above Earth.

Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, is preparing for its trial cargo run to the station in February, launching a Falcon 9 rocket carrying a Dragon cargo capsule. A second company, Orbital Sciences Corp. is expected to follow suit with its cargo craft later in 2012.

"Space Act Agreements yield amazing results, we need only look at the Dragon spacecraft and Falcon 9 rocket," SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell, wrote in an email to Reuters.

"We applaud NASA's decision to use Space Act Agreements for the next round of Commercial Crew and look forward to the competition," she said.

The difference between traditional government contracting and Space Act Agreements is night and day, added Gold, who oversees business growth for Bigelow Aerospace, which is developing commercial orbital habitats for research, government and business lease.

"It's the difference between a 30-page contract and one that could involve 3,000 pages of regulations," Gold said. "Even understanding what you're up against can take months of review by lawyers. If you want to spend more money on lawyers and less on launches, FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) is a terrific way to proceed."

Gerstenmaier said the alternative partnering arrangement would not allow NASA to get as involved technically in the space taxis' design, but "essentially we can enable them."

ЦитироватьНАСА пересматривает механику контрактов
NASA rethinks mechanics for commercial crew contracts[/size]
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1112/15commcrew/

ЦитироватьСлава богу, хоть какой-то просвет. А то совсем мафия Маршалла и горстки сенаторов зарвалась. Думают, что Президент и Администратор им не указ, не говоря уж о воле Конгресса в целом, отображенной в Space Act. Я полагаю, что Болдену следует их всех к ногтю - уволить с позором, пока железо горячо. Сенаторов, конечно, не уволишь, но с ниме разберется Tea Party.

ЦитироватьToday NASA announced two press briefings that will take place tomorrow, Tuesday, December 20.
 ....

The other is on a completely different topic -- a status report on NASA's commercial crew program (thanks to NASAWatch for publicizing it).   That "forum" will be held at Kennedy Space Center in Florida from 11:00 - 11:30 am EST (note that the original announcement incorrectly said it ended at 11:30 pm, but was later modified).  From the description, it sounds like a very brief recap of the announcement last week about the new commercial crew strategy.

ЦитироватьWed, 21 December, 2011
Commercial Crew Solicitation Expected in February[/size]
By Dan Leone

    WASHINGTON — NASA will solicit proposals in February for the third phase of a program aimed at developing commercially operated astronaut transportation systems, an agency official said Dec. 20.

    NASA wants to pick at least two winners by August, Ed Mango, NASA's Commercial Crew Program manager, said during a conference call.

    Mango described the next phase of NASA's commercial crew program as a "pretty big jump" from the previous two rounds, which focused on developing only individual components of crew transportation systems.

    "Obviously, this next phase has to be a lot bigger than element designs," Mango said on the Dec. 20 call.

    In the third phase of the program, NASA hopes to get at least two competing crew transportation systems ready to enter production. More details about the award will be discussed in advance of the solicitation on a public conference call tentatively set for early February, Mango said.

    With the U.S. space shuttle fleet retired, NASA is looking to get commercially operated successors up and running by 2017. In the interim, U.S., Canadian, Japanese and European astronauts will ride to the space station aboard Russian Soyuz craft at NASA's expense.

    NASA's commercial crew program has now switched gears twice in 2011.

    The agency was to have released a solicitation Dec. 19 for a "Commercial Crew Integrated Design Contract" — a 21-month fixed-price contract culminating in a critical design review of at least two proposed astronaut taxi systems. However, the agency announced Dec. 15 that because of budget uncertainty, it was scrapping that contracting vehicle in favor of a similar program funded by Space Act agreements, which are not bound by the Federal Acquisition Regulations that govern traditional government contracts. NASA says it can use Space Act agreements to fund development efforts — as then agency has done in previous rounds of the commercial crew program — but not to purchase hardware or services.

    In announcing the shift to Space Act agreements, NASA human spaceflight chief William Gerstenmaier said the strategy would save the government money, but that NASA would sacrifice its ability to manage the design and manufacturing processes. Space Act agreements do not give the agency legal authority to dictate requirements to industry, Gerstenmaier said.

    NASA requested $850 million for its commercial spaceflight activities in 2012 and received an appropriation of $406 million. The NASA Authorization Act of 2010, which made funding recommendations for the agency through 2013, authorized only $500 million for commercial spaceflight.

    It is not yet clear how much of the $406 million NASA received for commercial spaceflight activities in 2012 will be used for the third round of the commercial crew program.

    "It will not be $406 million, I can tell you that," Mango said. He added that "the vast majority" of the 2012 funding will be used to continue activities initiated under the Commercial Crew Development 2 program, which began in April and is set to wrap up next July.

    NASA has been encouraging — and funding — the development of privately owned astronaut taxis since 2009. Awards made in the first two rounds are worth a combined $365.5 million.

    Companies that have received NASA funds to work on crew transportation systems are Blue Origin, Kent, Wash.; Boeing Space Exploration Systems, Houston; Sierra Nevada Space Systems, Sparks, Nev.; Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, Calif.; and United Launch Alliance of Denver.[/size]

ЦитироватьATK Holds ISD Under CCDev 2 SAA[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on January 20, 2012, at 4:09 pm

NASA PR — One of NASA's industry partners, Alliant Techsystems Inc. (ATK) of Utah, successfully held a Launch System Initial Systems Design (ISD) Review of its Liberty Transportation System. This is the third milestone to be completed under ATK's unfunded Space Act Agreement (SAA) with NASA's Commercial Crew Program.

ATK has five milestones to meet under the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) agreement, which enables NASA and ATK teams to exchange technical information related to Liberty during the Preliminary Design Review phase of the program.
"This unfunded partnership with ATK on its Liberty systems brings expertise from around the globe and we are glad to contribute our more than 50 years of human spaceflight experience to this effort," said Ed Mango, NASA's Commercial Crew Program manager.

During the ISD, Liberty team members from ATK, its European-based partner, Astrium, and their subcontractors presented the status of Liberty's system level requirements, preliminary design and certification process to representatives from the Commercial Crew Program at Kennedy Space Center in Florida and other NASA centers.

"With the SAA in place we have been able to work closely with NASA's Commercial Program and receive valuable feedback as we develop the Liberty Transportation System," said Kent Rominger, ATK vice president and program manager for Liberty. "We continued to develop Liberty with the goal of providing the safest, most reliable, cost-effective and capable launch vehicle for crew transport."

The current SAA continues through at least March. The two milestones met earlier include a Requirements Status Briefing and a Technical Interchange Meeting for the Liberty Transportation System. Two additional milestones are scheduled to be completed under this SAA.

All of NASA's industry partners continue to meet their established milestones in developing commercial crew transportation capabilities that will ferry U.S. astronauts to and from the International Space Station, reducing the amount of time America is without its own system.[/size]

ЦитироватьMon, 23 January, 2012
Solicitation for Next Round of Commercial Crew Program Expected Feb. 7[/size]
By Dan Leone

 WASHINGTON — NASA plans to solicit proposals Feb. 7 for the third round of its commercial crew program and award at least two funded Space Act Agreements this summer that will run through 2014 and prepare competing astronaut transportation concepts for production.

NASA has rebranded this initiative as the "Commercial Crew integrated Capability" program, according to a procurement notice posted online Jan. 23. It was formerly known as the Commercial Crew Integrated Design Contract.

Continuing a drumbeat it has sounded since last summer, NASA cautioned that the next round of awards will depend heavily on funding availability. "NASA intends to select a portfolio of multiple [commercial crew concepts] that best meet the [program's] goals within the available funding," the procurement notice says.

The Commercial Crew integrated Capability program, being managed out of the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, is the successor to NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program, the second round of which will wrap up in July. Ed Mango, NASA's Commercial Crew Program manager, said CCDev 2 will consume the majority of NASA's $406 million commercial human spaceflight budget for 2012. NASA had requested $850 million for these activities in 2012.

CCDev 2 represents more than $300 million in federal financial aid. Four companies received funded Space Act Agreements under CCDev 2, which focuses on development of vehicles capable of ferrying astronauts to and from the international space station.

NASA decided late last year that it could not afford to use standard government contracts as previously planned for the upcoming phase of the commercial crew procurement unless it was willing to fund development of just one transportation system.

Space Act Agreements allow NASA to provide companies with federal funds and access to agency expertise without having to draw up a contract that complies with complex federal acquisition regulations. The first two rounds of CCDev were funded via Space Act Agreements.

The caveat with Space Act Agreements is that they do not permit NASA to dictate design requirements to the contractors.[/size]

ЦитироватьFri, 27 January, 2012
Panel Report Warns that Underfunding May Affect Commercial Crew Program[/size]
By Dan Leone

WASHINGTON — NASA safety watchdogs are warning that continued underfunding of the agency's commercial crew initiative could put astronauts at risk by increasing the temptation to cut corners in order to end U.S. dependence on Russia for accessing the international space station (ISS).

 Under the 2012 budget Congress enacted late last year, NASA will get less than half of the $850 million it requested to put at least two U.S. firms under contract this year to develop privately operated crew taxis.

 In a report released Jan. 25, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) — an outside group of experts chartered to sniff out NASA safety problems and recommend changes — says the $406 million Congress approved will not allow commercial crew transportation to the ISS by 2016.

 "In fact, if the new funding level continues into the future, it is the ASAP's belief that the program is in jeopardy, thus extending the current lack of a U.S. human spaceflight capability and resulting in no alternative to reliance on Russia to obtain access to the ISS," the ASAP wrote in its annual report.

 While the ASAP praised Russia's efforts to return its venerable Soyuz crew capsule to flight last fall following an August launch failure that destroyed a station-bound Progress cargo vessel, the panel noted its concern about continued U.S. reliance on Soyuz — a 40-year-old system, it said, "with an uncertain long-term future."

 NASA, seeking to end that dependence, is preparing to solicit proposals for a two-year effort to prepare competing astronaut transportation concepts for production.

 But the ASAP points out that NASA managers are worried about commercial crew funding going forward and consider "inadequate budget" to be "the top program risk."

 In ASAP's view, an inadequately funded commercial crew program threatens more than just spacecraft development timelines; it could also compromise safety.

 "The ASAP considers the lack of a credible and appropriately funded plan to develop a U.S. capability to launch its astronauts to the ISS to be an issue with significant safety implications," the report says. "If the development program is continued without adequate funding, it will increase the likelihood that safety-related testing and modifications to correct any design deficiencies would not be made."

 The ASAP also took issue with NASA's abrupt about-face on the use of Space Act Agreements for the next phase of the commercial crew development program, known at the time as CCDev. NASA disappointed would-be commercial crew providers last summer when it announced it would award conventional fixed-price contracts, rather than more-flexible Space Act Agreements, for the next round of CCDev awards. But after Congress halved the Commercial Crew Program's budget request in November, NASA announced Dec. 21 it would stick with Space Act Agreements.

 "Previously, NASA had made a strong safety case for using conventional contracting on the next phase of the CCDev Program, an approach that was viewed as well reasoned and appropriate by the ASAP," the report says. "The ASAP acknowledges NASA's assertion that the change is primarily driven by funding uncertainties and the need to maintain more than one provider for commercial crew transportation services. However, we believe that the sudden change in acquisition strategy in an effort to salvage the [Commercial Crew Program] may have significantly increased the risk to safety that the previous plan had begun to address."

 The ASAP report also flagged the international space station as an area of special concern. The panel said NASA managers had not yet shared a plan for safely deorbiting the outpost if it had to be abandoned before its planned end of life in 2020.

 Citing a briefing it received from NASA in May, the ASAP said the odds of a mission loss at some point in the space station's remaining on-orbit life are greater than 30 percent. A loss of mission, ASAP warned, might force NASA and its international partners to abandon the station, never to return.

 "One cannot escape the conclusion that the risk of an ISS [loss of mission] is more than an outside possibility," ASAP wrote. "While this possibility has been known for some time, NASA has not yet shared with the Panel an explicit plan to deal with this situation."

 The report urges NASA to begin seriously considering how to safely deorbit the 400 metric-ton space station.[/size]

ЦитироватьNASA Congrats to NASA's CCDEV 2 partner, Excalibur Almaz, for successfully completing their System Requirement Status Review yesterday!
32 мин назад
 

Цитировать"Неожиданный" поворот:

ЦитироватьNASA Congrats to NASA's CCDEV 2 partner, Excalibur Almaz, for successfully completing their System Requirement Status Review yesterday!
32 мин назад
 

PS Возможно это надо было в тему по Эскалибуру, но там вроде не было ничего о CCDEV.

ЦитироватьOne of NASA's industry partners, United Launch Alliance (ULA), successfully completed two milestones that could eventually lead toward the certification of its Atlas V launch vehicle for human spaceflight.

In December, ULA conducted a series of detailed reviews that reflected the culmination of efforts involving technical experts and representatives from NASA's Commercial Crew Program (CCP).

"ULA gave us an invaluable opportunity to get to know its Atlas V systems and subsystems through our unfunded partnership," said Commercial Crew Program Manager Ed Mango. "And we are happy to share our knowledge and expectations to keeping our crews safe."

The first review was a Tailored System Requirements Review (TSRR), which looked at how the existing, flight-proven Atlas V rocket could meet the intent of NASA's human spaceflight certification requirements. The team paid particular emphasis to requirements traceability, verification and certification planning.

"The TSRR was the result of an extensive effort with NASA and our commercial spacecraft partners during which we cooperatively reviewed the details of the Atlas V design, analyses and operations," said George Sowers, ULA's vice president of business development and advanced programs. "This was the first time that we were able to share detailed Atlas V design and flight data with NASA human spaceflight experts."

The second review was a Probabilistic Safety Analysis (PSA) Review, which evaluated safety-critical launch vehicle systems. This included the details of existing failure modes and effects analyses data, ULA's probabilistic risk assessment approach for CCP, explosion modeling analyses, system hazard analyses and fault coverage assessments. The PSA leveraged similar data developed in support of Atlas V launches of critical NASA missions including New Horizons, Juno and the Mars Science Laboratory.

"The PSA provided a firm foundation to show how the demonstrated reliability of the Atlas V offers significant benefits toward meeting NASA's stringent crew safety requirements," Sowers said. "We received invaluable insight from NASA's Commercial Crew Program while allowing us to provide the details behind the reliability and robustness of the Atlas V design."

Three of the four current NASA Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) partners have selected Atlas V as their launch vehicle.

All of NASA's industry partners continue to meet their established milestones in developing commercial crew transportation capabilities that will ferry U.S. astronauts to and from the International Space Station reducing the amount of time America is without its own system.

For more information about NASA's Commercial Crew Program, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew  

ЦитироватьOne of NASA's industry partners, Sierra Nevada Corp. (SNC), recently delivered the primary structure of its first Dream Chaser flight test vehicle to the company's facility in Louisville, Colo., where it will be assembled and integrated with secondary systems. This is one of 12 milestones to be completed under SNC's funded Space Act Agreement (SAA) with NASA's Commercial Crew Program (CCP).

"It's rewarding to see our partner's ideas and concepts come to fruition," said CCP Program Manager Ed Mango. "The company's delivery of its flight structure will allow them to make more strides toward launching NASA astronauts on American vehicles to the International Space Station."

The Dream Chaser flight test vehicle, a full-scale prototype of the company's planned winged spacecraft, will be used to carry out several remaining NASA Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) milestones, including a captive carry flight and the first free flight of the craft.

"SNC is proud to have met its schedule and cost targets in the delivery of our first flight structure as we continue to make preparations for our vehicle's first full-scale flight," said Mark Sirangelo, head of Sierra Nevada Space Systems. "The Dream Chaser Program is making great strides toward developing a safe and cost-effective space system that will provide our country with the capability to safely transport crew and critical cargo to and from the International Space Station."

The all-composite structure was designed by the SNC team and built in conjunction with SNC Dream Chaser team organizations AdamWorks of Centennial, Colo., Applied Composite Technology of Gunnison, Utah, and Scaled Composites of Mojave, Calif.

"Our team now includes more than a dozen heritage space companies and seven NASA centers whose combined strength has continued to allow us to exceed the program's expectations," said Jim Voss, SNC's vice president for Space Exploration. Voss is a former space shuttle astronaut and was a member of the second crew to live aboard the International Space Station.

Dream Chaser's CCDev2 flight tests will be conducted with the assistance of NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in Edwards, Calif., under a Reimbursable Space Act Agreement (RSAA). During the captive carry test, a Virgin Galactic White Knight 2 carrier aircraft will drop the Dream Chaser flight test vehicle to measure its performance. SNC flight operations will be managed by the program's Director of Flight Operations Steve Lindsey, who joined the Dream Chaser team in 2011. Lindsey is a veteran of five shuttle missions and was chief of NASA's Astronaut Office from 2008 until his retirement from the agency in 2011.

All of NASA's industry partners continue to meet their established milestones in developing commercial crew transportation capabilities that will ferry U.S. astronauts to and from the International Space Station reducing the amount of time America is without its own system.

ЦитироватьNASA poised to make further commercial crew investment[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: February 7, 2012

NASA officials said Tuesday they intend to award multiple companies up to $500 million each over the next two years to maintain private sector competition in the agency's commercial crew program and keep the effort on schedule to enable the resumption of U.S. human spaceflight by 2017.

The agency released an announcement for proposals to industry Tuesday, starting the third phase of the commercial crew program, which aims to invest in the development of spacecraft and launch vehicles capable of hauling astronaut crews to the International Space Station.

The commercial crew program is the key to ending NASA's reliance on Russian Soyuz spacecraft for human transportation to and from the space station since the retirement of the space shuttle. NASA officials expect commercial crew service to begin no later than 2017, based on current budget projections.

Ed Mango, manager of NASA's commercial crew program, said the space agency plans to award Space Act Agreements, or SAAs, to multiple contractors by August. The agreements will each be worth between $300 million and $500 million, and NASA will make payments as the companies accomplish predetermined milestones.

Brent Jett, NASA's deputy commercial crew program manager, said he is confident the agency will be able to award at least two companies agreements of that value.

Proposals are due March 23, according to the solicitation.

"What our overall approach is during this SAA is we are an investor, a technical investor and an investor bringing money to the table in order to get American industry to get to a crew demonstration capability," Mango said Tuesday at a forum with members of industry at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

The Commercial Crew integrated Capability, or CCiCap, phase of the program will mature the designs of combined space transportation systems, which include a spacecraft to carry at least four astronauts and a launch vehicle to safely dispatch the crews from Earth.

The objectives of the CCiCap agreements are to complete the design of the commercial spaceships and ready the vehicles for construction and certification.

"We need an integrated design," Mango said. "I can't emphasize that enough."

NASA planned to issue a commercial crew solicitation in December for fixed-price contracts, but the agency's fiscal year 2012 budget provided for $406 million for the commercial crew program, less than half the funding level requested by the White House.

The smaller budget, coupled with uncertain funding in future years, compelled NASA officials to revert to Space Act Agreements, which have been used in the first two phases of the commercial crew program.

NASA now has funded Space Act Agreements with Boeing Co., SpaceX, Sierra Nevada Corp. and Blue Origin worth a combined $316 million. Each company is working on a commercial crew spacecraft, and the agreements run through May.

"I can tell you that since November, the program has had to pivot because of a number of different things," Mango said. "The biggest is uncertainty in the future of our budget."

Fixed-price contracts require a more stable, higher budget. Space Act Agreements require NASA's commercial partners to inject private capital in their development efforts.

The Space Act Agreements will run at least 21 months from August 2012 until May 2014, roughly the same period the contracts would have covered.

"The overall net plan that we have in place will still mitigate the risks needed to understand certification in order to go fly crew safely," Mango said.

In the coming competition, the commercial partners will also be expected to demonstrate processes to analyze, quantify and understand safety risks, institute procedures and testing to reduce the risks, and propose criteria and plans to certify their spacecraft and rockets for human spaceflight.

NASA is requesting companies provide lists of optional milestones extending beyond May 2014, both at a fixed funding profile of $400 million per year and an optimum, more costly, profile with an accelerated schedule to begin commercial crew service by the middle of the decade.

"We think the most we might be able to give [the commercial partners] is about $400 million a year [each]," Mango said.

The optional milestones must outline continued development through a crewed orbital test flight, the final step before a transportation system is declared ready for round-trip service to the space station.[/size]

ЦитироватьНАСА объявило третий раунд отборов разработчиков частных кораблей[/size]

10:50 08/02/2012

МОСКВА, 8 фев - РИА Новости. НАСА открыло третью фазу конкурсного отбора коммерческих компаний, разрабатывающих пилотируемые космические корабли для доставки астронавтов на МКС - в рамках отбора предполагается выделить несколько грантов в размере от 300 до 500 миллионов долларов, говорится в сообщении космического агентства.

В рамках новой программы Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCIC) разработчики кораблей для доставки астронавтов на околоземную орбиту и, в частности, для полетов на МКС должны будут представить план действий на 21 месяц - от момента выделения гранта до мая 2014 года. За это время нужно представить полностью готовые к работе пилотируемый корабль, ракету-носитель, а также пусковой комплекс и систему управления полетом на земле. Кроме того, НАСА хочет видеть и приблизительный план дальнейших действий, кульминацией которого станет демонстрационный пилотируемый полет на околоземную орбиту.

Прием заявок от компаний завершится 23 марта, ожидается, что победители отбора будут объявлены летом 2012 года.

Частные пилотируемые космические корабли уже разрабатываются победителями первых двух фаз отбора в рамках программы Commercial Crew Development, стартовавшей в 2010 году. За это время компании-разработчики получили в общей сложности более 300 миллионов долларов. Победителями второго раунда отборов стали компании Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada Corporation, SpaceX и Boeing.

НАСА также с 2006 года осуществляет программу Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS), в рамках которой поощряются усилия частных фирм по созданию космических кораблей, способных доставлять грузы на околоземную орбиту и на МКС. В рамках этой программы компания SpaceX получит 396 миллионов долларов, а Orbital Sciences Corporation - 288 миллионов долларов за успешное завершение всех этапов создания космической транспортной системы. К настоящему моменту SpaceX выделено уже около 376 миллионов долларов, а Orbital - 261,5 миллиона.

Как сообщалось ранее, запуск новой экспедиции на МКС, намеченный на 30 марта, перенесен на 15 мая из-за проблем, возникших при испытаниях спускового аппарата российского пилотируемого корабля "Союз ТМА-04М", на котором должна была полететь новая экспедиция.

Руководитель программы МКС в НАСА Майкл Саффредини заявил журналистам, что НАСА не видит в проблемах с "Союзом" и аварии "Прогресса" в 2011 году серьезной системной проблемы и считает, что российские коллеги относятся к возникшим вопросам достаточно серьезно.[/size]

Цитировать09:16 08/02/2012
НАСА выделяет дополнительно 1 млрд долларов на разработку коммерческого корабля для доставки астронавтов к МКС[/size]

НЬЮ-ЙОРК, 8 февраля. (АРМС-ТАСС). Национальное управление США по аэронавтике и исследованию космического пространства (НАСА) намерено выбрать, как минимум, две частные компании, которые разработают и проведут тестовые испытания космических кораблей, способных доставлять астронавтов к Международной космической станции (МКС) и обратно. Об этом объявил руководитель программы коммерческих полетов НАСА Эд Манго, передает ИТАР-ТАСС.

По его словам, космическое ведомство выделит каждой из выбранных фирм от 300 до 500 млн долларов. Победители конкурса должны будут к маю 2014 года представить проект корабля, а уже к 2015 году быть готовыми провести тестовые полеты. Необходимый НАСА корабль должен вмещать не менее четырех астронавтов, достигать околоземной орбиты высотой не менее 370 км и находиться на ней не менее трех дней.

Ранее США доставляли своих астронавтов на МКС с помощью многоразовых транспортных космических кораблей (МТКК) "Спейс шаттл". Однако осенью прошлого года администрация Барака Обамы отправила в музеи три оставшиеся в распоряжении НАСА МТКК, чтобы высвободить средства для осуществления других проектов - полета на астероид к 2025 году и на Марс - в 2030-е годы. Согласно одобренной Обамой концепции, доставлять экипажи и грузы на МКС предстоит коммерческим кораблям и ракетам-носителям.

С 2010 года НАСА потратило на эти цели 365,5 млн дол. Корпорация "Боинг", получившая 130,9 млн дол, создает капсулу, которую планируется отправлять в космос на ракете "Атлас-5". Компания "Сьерра Невада", получившая от НАСА 125,6 млн дол, на этой же ракете намеревается запустить в космос корабль "Дрим чейсер". Компания "Спейс-Экс" за 75 млн дол планирует доработать свой грузовой корабль "Дрэгон", выводящийся на орбиту ракетой "Фэлкон-9", до пилотируемого варианта.

Пока же НАСА целиком зависит от российских партнеров. Полеты на "Союзах" обходятся американцам в настоящее время в 56 млн дол за место, а с 2014 года будут стоить 63 млн дол.[/size]

ЦитироватьWinners will develop an integrated system featuring a crew vehicle and launch vehicle, with work to be completed May 31, 2014.

ЦитироватьCurrently NASA is reliant on Russian Soyuz vehicles to deliver crews to the station, at a cost of $63 million per seat.

Цитироватьhttp://www.itar-tass.com/c19/337119.html
- Необходимый НАСА корабль должен вмещать не менее четырех астронавтов,

ЦитироватьAdministrator



One More Step on the Commercial Path to Low Earth Orbit Posted on Feb 07, 2012 05:26:20 PM | Administrator Charles Bolden | 0 Comments    |   

The past couple of years have seen NASA and its industry partners make tremendous progress on the commercial capability for delivering cargo and transporting crew to low Earth orbit (LEO). It's a path that will stop the out-sourcing of our missions to the space station and bring that work back home here to America by relying on U.S. companies to get the job done.


Our initial investments with the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program had two participants -- SpaceX and Orbital Sciences -- and our investments are paying off. From SpaceX's launch, orbit, and successful recovery of a Dragon capsule in December 2010 to this year's planned berthing of capsules at the International Space Station (ISS) by both SpaceX and Orbital, the milestones have been nothing short of historic.


Our commercial approach to space transportation has grown and now features partnerships with a diverse array of companies, both large and small, each with their own expertise and innovations. With the first two Commercial Crew Development rounds of awards, we've moved forward with partners who are working on different kinds of space transportation systems technologies -- all with the aim of providing future robust crew transportation capabilities for our nation to reach low Earth orbit. We look forward to more outcomes from these partners and others in the future.


Now, we've launched our call for the next phase of our ambitious program to develop an integrated system for transporting crew to LEO and potentially astronauts to the ISS. Earlier today, we released an announcement for proposals that asks U.S. companies to bring us their best plans to achieve a crewed orbital flight demonstration by the middle of the decade. The resulting space act agreement awards will range from $300 - $500 million, and we anticipate multiple awards.


President Obama is working hard to create an American economy built to last, and NASA's support of commercial innovation to reach low Earth orbit is helping to support these efforts by spurring new technological development and creating jobs and economic benefits for years to come.


Since the dawn of human space flight, private industry has been a critical partner in building the rockets and spacecraft that have helped NASA reach higher. But no longer can NASA afford to own and operate these expensive systems for travel to low Earth orbit. By handing this work off to U.S. industry, we are freed up to focus on the more difficult destinations including new missions of the future to asteroids and Mars. Also, we keep the work of transporting our astronauts to the ISS here in the United States and stop the outsourcing of this work to foreign providers.


The base period of the funded space act agreements of this next phase of our commercial space program are planned to start in August of this year and run to May 2014. Along with our ongoing work on a heavy lift rocket and Orion crew capsule to reach deep space, a recently graduated class of astronauts and a future class that has just submitted their preliminary applications, America's human space flight aspirations - and the hardware to make them reality -- are going strong.

For more information on the announcement and a pre-proposal conference Feb. 14, visit:


http://commercialcrew.nasa.gov/index.cfm

ЦитироватьNASA hopeful lawmakers will back commercial space plan[/size]
BY WILLIAM HARWOOD
STORY WRITTEN FOR CBS NEWS "SPACE PLACE" & USED WITH PERMISSION
Posted: February 14, 2012

The Obama administration has asked Congress for $830 million in fiscal 2013 to fund on-going development of new commercial manned spacecraft to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station. But NASA only got half of what it asked for in 2012, a cut that effectively pushed the first operational launch back one year to 2017, and program officials said Tuesday any similar cuts in 2013 and beyond could push the program to the brink of irrelevance.
    
(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/22772.jpg)
This artist's conception shows the Dream Chaser commercial crew spacecraft integrated with an Atlas 5 rocket. Credit: Sierra Nevada Corp.

 That's because the space station is the primary destination for private-sector spacecraft and the government currently is committed to operating the lab complex only through 2020. While NASA and its partners hope to keep the station going beyond that, funding is not assured.

If Congress significantly reduces funding for the commercial crew initiative again, if NASA only ends up with $300 million to $400 million per year for the next five years instead of the $800 million or so per year that's currently envisioned, "I would say it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do this program," said Phil McAlister, director of commercial spaceflight development at NASA headquarters.

"We couldn't get there," he told reporters at an industry conference in Cocoa Beach. "Just one test fight is going to be a couple of hundred million dollars, probably. So that's your whole year's funding, right? So it doesn't really make sense at that kind of funding level. If we felt like that's all we could get, we would definitely re-evaluate the program."

But he said he was hopeful it won't come to that.

"We're definitely seeing progress," he said. "We believe the 830 is achievable, the president's budget request sort of balanced all the things NASA's trying to do. We've got several months ahead of us to communicate with Congress the importance of that."

McAlister and other senior NASA managers met with their industry counterparts Tuesday in Cocoa Beach for a briefing on the requirements of the next round of contracts in the commercial crew initiative. Proposals are due by March 23 and two or more contracts are expected to be awarded by the end of summer.

Unlike two previous rounds, which focused on spacecraft, launcher or subsystem development, the goal this time is for industry to present proposals covering the spacecraft, rocket booster and ground systems.

"This time, we're looking for an integrated solution," said Ed Mango, the commercial crew program manager at the Kennedy Space Center. "We don't want a proposal that says I have a great spacecraft, NASA you figure out the launch vehicle. That's not acceptable. This time, we want a launch vehicle, spacecraft, a mission operations system that they plan to use and a ground operations system. All those combined say we now have a solution that the government would be very interested in purchasing in the future for service."

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/22773.jpg) (http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/images/large/2012-1012.jpg)
This poster illustrates the partners in the commercial crew effort: Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, SpaceX, ATK, Excalibur and ULA. Credit: NASA

 NASA hopes to award two or more Commercial Crew Integrated Capability Initiative contracts with values ranging from $300 million to $500 million each. The contracts will run for 21 months, through May 2014. NASA has asked competitors to include optional milestones beyond the initial contract period that could pave the way for a manned test flight.

"If we get the funding that's in the president's budget, likely by 2017 we'll be able to have an operational crew transportation system," McAlister said. "If we have less money than that, obviously it'll slip that date out a little bit further. So we hope to get it's soon as possible.

"We have a commitment to the ISS for lifetime to 2020, so that limits (a company's) return on investment. I think at NASA, we're hopeful the ISS lifetime will be extended, but we don't have the commitment from the government for that, so we've sort of got to work with what we've got. And so, we don't want to slip that out too far because then the business case becomes a little bit more difficult."

NASA's struggle to fund the commercial crew initiative is difficult for many in the agency to understand, especially given that delays due to budget shortfalls increase the number of seats aboard Soyuz spacecraft that NASA must purchase from the Russians to carry U.S. and partner astronauts to and from the space station.
    
(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/22774.jpg)
Credit: NASA

 The six seats that will be used this year cost NASA $51 million each. Six more will be needed in 2013, at a price of $55.9 million each, and 12 more will be used in 2014 and 2015. Those seats will go for $62.7 million each. That works out to $1.4 billion to Russia for Soyuz seats between now and the end of 2015. NASA plans to negotiate contracts for the additional seats that will be needed in 2016 and beyond as required, depending on when a commercial U.S. spacecraft is ready for operational use.

Asked if he was frustrated by the budget process and NASA's extended dependence on the Russians for access to the space station, McAlister said "I think it was surprising to a lot of us that we would allow our indigenous human spaceflight capability to lapse."

"I've always thought we would have follow-on system when we retired the shuttle," he said. "It's a very complicated process and there's no one reason for why we didn't, but here we are today, we don't have a follow-on system.

"So right now, I'm just focused on ensuring that gap is going to be a short as possible. ... We have to communicate the importance of that to the U.S. Congress. There are lots of worthy programs, not only in NASA but within the federal government. So there's a lot of competition for those resources and so we need to communicate why we think this activity is important."[/size]

Цитировать(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/49839.jpg)

ЦитироватьIf you're familiar with NASA's Commercial Crew program, you've probably heard of COTS and CCDev. Get ready to welcome a new acronym to the private spaceflight party: CCiCap. However, pretty much the only thing that's new about the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability initiative is its name; you can just think of it as CCDev phase three.

In case you're lost, here's a refresher. COTS (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) is NASA's commercial program for companies looking for send non-crewed cargo spacecraft to the International Space station. For example, Orbital Sciences' Antares Rocket and Cygnus supply spacecraft are COTS participants.

On the human side, CCDev (Commercial Crew Development) aims to put an end to the $55.8 million per-seat checks NASA writes to the Russian space agency Roscosmos when American astronauts ride Soyuz capsules to the International Space Station. Two rounds of CCDev funds have already been allocated. Current CCDev partners include SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and Blue Origin.

Of the round two funding winners, only SpaceX has its own rocket system. They are perennially two months away from an historic Space Station docking test. Boeing continues to prepare its CST-100 capsule for launch atop a human-rated United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser mini-shuttle and Blue Origin's Crew Transportation System capsule also seem keen on using an Atlas V to boost their vehicles into space.

So what can we expect to see in CCiCap, also known as CCDev round three? Previously, CCDev funding was given to support small pieces of more grandiose projects, such as SpaceX's launch abort system and Blue Origin's life support design. The "i" in CCiCap stands for "integrated," and will change the approach: NASA officially seeks end-to-end, full-blown proposals for reliably shipping humans and cargo to the Space Station and bringing them home to Earth safely. Solutions must include all the trappings you'd expect from a Soyuz or space shuttle launch, including ground support facilities, launch pads, rockets, capsules and docking systems.

With industry proposals due March 23, it will be interesting to see who wins the funding. Since the competing companies are required to have feasible plans for non-crewed flights, launch abort demonstrations and drop tests as early as 2014 -- with crewed flights soon after -- the selections will shed some light on which of the four current front-runners are serious contenders.

There's a lot of money on the line. NASA's 2013 budget calls for $829.7 million to be allocated to commercial crew development, with the same amount requested in 2014. The space agency's official press release says award payouts will range from $300 to $500 million. Even considering that the program will cover more than one year, it is conceivable not every current partner will make the cut. The remaining winners will then, as commercial crew program manager Brent Jett put it, "do the heavy lifting."

Presumably, no pun was intended; currently, a Russian Progress resupply vessel can lift more than two tons of supplies to the International Space Station.

ЦитироватьNASA Congrats to CCDEV2 partner SNC for completing their Engineering Test Article main landing gear drop test milestone for their Dream Chaser.
около 2 часов назад

ЦитироватьWASHINGTON -- After NASA chief Charles Bolden fielded blistering questions from Congress last week on the agency's commercial crew initiative, officials said NASA must emphasize the program's urgency and quell expectations ahead of upcoming budget negotiations, during which a crucial SpaceX commercial cargo test flight will attempt to reach the International Space Station, a symbolic mission for the burgeoning private human spaceflight industry.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/23314.jpg)

File photo of Phil McAlister, director of NASA's commercial spaceflight program. Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls
 
"I had to turn off the hearings," said Phil McAlister, head of NASA's commercial spaceflight effort. "If I heard another senator say, 'commercial crew sucks' ... I had to turn it off because it was just too much. That's because of this change we're trying to implement, which a lot of people are not comfortable with."

Speaking to House and Senate committees March 7, Bolden staunchly defended the commercial crew program amid accusations NASA was shortchanging the agency's deep space exploration goals to pay for private space taxis to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station. Commercial crew services would end U.S. reliance on Russian spacecraft following the end of the space shuttle program.

Commercial crew flights are due to begin by 2017.

"We have to redouble our communications with our congressional stakeholders," McAlister said, adding that while he is buoyed by growing support for the commercial crew program, there is still disagreement between NASA and some members of Congress on its prioritization in the agency's broad portfolio.

Besides emphasizing the importance of the commercial crew program, McAlister said NASA also needs to manage public and congressional expectations during upcoming test flights in its commercial cargo program, a precursor to the crew initiative.

SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp., two companies selected to deliver supplies to the space station, will fly their Dragon and Cygnus spacecraft to the complex for the first time later this year.

Using a prototype for its proposed crew capsule, SpaceX's Dragon demonstration flight is set to blast off as soon as April 30.

Last month, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., outlined the symbolic influence the missions will have as Congress writes a budget for NASA's commercial crew program.

"We need SpaceX and Orbital to succeed, and we need to prove that the emerging commercial space industry can fly to the ISS safely and meet all of NASA's standards," Nelson said in a February speech at a Federal Aviation Administration commercial space conference.

"I want to see that SpaceX mission succeed, rendezvous and dock," Nelson said. "If that occurs in April, that is going to be right at the right time because that's about the time the decisions are starting to be made with regard to the appropriations."

But McAlister urged caution, saying NASA officials regularly meet with Capitol Hill staffers to set expectations .

His message: "Chill out about this flight. It's a big deal, but it's not make-or-break."

NASA's strategy is to partner with commercial providers to develop private spacecraft to rotate crews to and from the space station, freeing up government funding to pay for ambitious exploration missions to asteroids and other deep space destinations using a heavy-lift Space Launch System booster and the Orion capsule.

Until NASA's commercial partners develop and test a rocket and spacecraft to deliver astronauts to orbit, the space agency will continue purchasing seats on Russian Soyuz capsules for rides to and from the space station.

"I'm going to pay the Russians $450 million a year for every year that I don't have an American capability to put humans into low Earth orbit," Bolden said.

McAlister said the March 7 hearings made it clear NASA must better communicate the commercial crew program's importance, especially the need for healthy funding in fiscal 2013, which begins Oct. 1.

The budget request calls for nearly $830 million for the commercial crew program, up from the $406 million appropriated by Congress this year. But legislators cut this year's budget request by more than half, and in an election year with a backdrop of federal debt, another reduction is not unrealistic.

"There seems to be broad agreement that this is the right way to go," McAlister said Monday. "I think now it's just a matter of priorities. When you get such a limited amount of money, every dollar becomes critical."

But with the upcoming presidential and congressional elections, lawmakers could resist committing to a government budget until a new Congress and administration take power in early 2013.

Congress could pass a continuing resolution to extend funding at this year's levels. If legislators pass a continuing resolution, or CR, it would stymie the commercial crew program, limiting it to spending at a rate equal to fiscal 2012, in which the effort received less than half of its requested budget.

This year's $406 million commercial crew budget is far short of the $850 million asked for by the White House and NASA. According to NASA, the appropriation delayed the start of commercial human spaceflights from 2016 until 2017.

"We definitely need the president's budget request to stay on course," McAlister said. "If we get significant cutbacks, then it's probably going to take us longer. At some point, you have to step back and take a look at the whole equation and see if the strategy still is appropriate."

Another delay in commercial crew services would move the start of flights closer to the space station's currently planned 2020 retirement date.

McAlister said the commercial crew program could absorb a short-term continuing resolution. But a full-year continuing resolution would be "very difficult," he said.

"That would slow us down substantially because the budget request is for double that," McAlister said. "Would it be fatal? We'll have to see the proposals" from industry.

Commercial partners have until March 23 to respond to a NASA call for proposals in the next round of the commercial crew competition. The agency will award agreements to multiple companies by August worth up to $500 million each, expecting providers to finalize their rocket and spacecraft designs by mid-2014.

"It's the first time we've asked industry to sign up to a full-up end-to-end cost and schedule," McAlister said. "We want to know what it's going to take to get to the end game, and how fast do you think you can get it?"

Up to now, commercial firms have received government funding to develop and test subsystems, build ground test vehicles and formulate designs.

NASA projects it will cost the federal government $5 billion or $6 billion to help fund at least two commercial partners through development. The cost estimate does not account for operational crew rotation services.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, accused the Obama administration of taking funding from the SLS and Orion programs to add to the commercial crew budget in the White House's fiscal 2013 spending request released in February.

"When we talk about commercial crew, it's really easy to use $406 million as the baseline," Bolden told Hutchison. "That's not the baseline. If you all recall, my original request was over $1 billion. We brought that down for fiscal year '12 to $850 million. We were cut by half. When I was asked last year, what effect does it have if you don't get $850 million? I said that directly affects the date of delivery of commercial crew capability. That is how we got to 2017 instead of 2015 or 2016. Any subsequent reductions from what the president has requested for commercial crew only serves to delay the amount of time that we have an American capability to get our crews to the International Space Station."

The Space Launch System and Orion programs would get a combined reduction of $326 million in the budget blueprint, which must be approved by Congress before taking effect.

The Obama administration's budget office and Congress agreed last year to set three top priorities for NASA: Extend the space station to 2020 and develop commercial vehicles to service it, start an exploration program with a heavy-lift rocket and crew capsule, and finish building the James Webb Space Telescope, the successor to Hubble.

"You called me with your budget proposal," Hutchison said. "And I see a $326 million combined reduction in Orion and SLS and a corresponding increase ... for commercial crew. I was frankly floored ... that it would be so blatant to take right out of Orion and SLS and put it into commercial crew, rather than trying to accomplish the joint goals that we have of putting forward both and making sure that we didn't take away from the timetables for the future to shore up the commercial crew."

ЦитироватьВАШИНГТОН - После того, как глава НАСА Чарльз Болден направила пузырей на вопросы Конгресса на прошлой неделе коммерческие инициативы экипажа агентства, чиновники НАСА должен подчеркнуть актуальность программы и подавить ожидания перед предстоящими переговорами бюджета, в ходе которой решающую SpaceX коммерческих летных испытаний груз будет пытаться добраться до Международной космической станции, символическую миссию для растущего частного полетов человека в космос промышленности.



Файл фотографии Фил Макалистер, директор коммерческого космического полета программы NASA. Фото: NASA / Bill Ingalls

"Мне пришлось отключить слушания", сказал Фил Макалистер, руководитель коммерческого космического полета усилия NASA. "Если бы я услышал еще один сенатор говорил:" коммерческий экипажа сосет ... Мне пришлось выключить, потому что было слишком много. Это потому, что этого изменения мы пытаемся реализовать, что много людей не устраивает ».

Выступая перед Палатой представителей и Сенатом комитетов 7 марта Болден стойко защищали коммерческие программы экипаж на фоне обвинений НАСА обсчет глубокие цели агентства космических исследований, чтобы платить за частные такси пространство для доставки астронавтов на Международную космическую станцию. Коммерческие услуги экипажа закончится зависимость США от русских кораблей после окончания программы космических челноков.

Коммерческие рейсы экипажа должны начаться к 2017 году.

"Мы должны удвоить наши связи с нашим конгрессом заинтересованных сторон", Макалистер, добавив, что пока он поддержанный растущую поддержку коммерческой программы экипажа, до сих пор разногласия между НАСА и некоторые члены Конгресса от его приоритетов в широком портфеле агентства .

Кроме того подчеркивая важность коммерческой программы экипажа, Макалистер сказал НАСА также нуждается в управлении государственными и Конгресса ожидания в течение предстоящих испытательных полетов в коммерческой программе грузов, предшественник экипажа инициативу.

SpaceX и Orbital Sciences Corp, две компании, выбранные для доставки грузов на Международную космическую станцию, будет плавать под их Дракон и космический корабль Cygnus к сложному, впервые в этом году.

Используя прототип предлагаемого капсулы экипажа, Dragon SpaceX демонстрация в полете установлено взлетать как только 30 апреля.

В прошлом месяце сенатор Билл Нельсон, D-Fla., Изложенные символическим влиянием миссии будут иметь Конгресс пишет бюджета на коммерческой программы экипажа НАСА.

"Мы должны SpaceX и Орбитальные чтобы добиться успеха, и мы должны доказать, что новые коммерческие космической отрасли может летать на МКС благополучно и отвечают всем стандартам НАСА," Нельсон сказал в своем выступлении февраля в Федеральное авиационное управление коммерческой конференц-залы.

"Я хочу видеть, что миссия SpaceX успеха, сближения и причал", сказал Нельсон. "Если это произойдет в апреле, что будет право в нужное время, потому что это о времени решения начинают быть сделаны в отношении ассигнований".

Но Макалистер призвали проявить осторожность, говорят сотрудники НАСА регулярно встречаюсь с Капитолийского холма сотрудники установить ожидания.

Его послание: "Холод узнали об этом полете Это большое дело, но это не делает пан или пропал.».

Стратегия NASA является партнером с коммерческими провайдерами для разработки частных космических аппаратов, чтобы повернуть экипажей и с космической станции, освободив государственного финансирования для оплаты амбициозных экспедиций к астероидам и другим глубоко направлений пространства с помощью тяжеловесных космических ракет системы ракета-носитель и Orion капсулы.

До НАСА коммерческих партнеров разработки и тестирования ракет и космических кораблей для доставки астронавтов на орбиту, космическое агентство будет продолжать покупку мест на русский капсулы Союз для прогулок и от космической станции.

"Я собираюсь платить русским 450 миллионов долларов в год за каждый год, что я не имею возможности американской поставить людей на низкую околоземную орбиту", сказал Болден.

Макалистер сказал 7 марта слушаний дали понять, NASA должно лучше информировать о важности коммерческой программы экипажа, в первую очередь необходимо для здорового финансирования в финансовом 2013 году, который начинается 1 октября.

Бюджетный запрос требует около $ 830 млн для коммерческой программы экипажа, по сравнению с 406 млн. долл. присвоены Конгресс в этом году. Но законодатели сократить бюджетный запрос в этом году более чем на половину, а в год выборов с фоном федерального долга, очередное снижение не нереально.

"Там, кажется, общее мнение, что это правильный путь", Макалистер сказал в понедельник. "Я думаю, теперь это всего лишь вопрос приоритетов. Когда вы получаете такую ограниченную сумму денег, каждый доллар, становится критической."

Но на предстоящих президентских и выборов в конгресс, законодатели могли противостоять совершению в государственный бюджет до нового Конгресса и администрации к власти в начале 2013 года.

Конгресс может принимать постоянно резолюции о продлении финансирования на уровне этого года. Если законодатели продолжают проходить разрешения или CR, было бы загнать в угол коммерческие программы экипажа, ограничивая его расходы в размере, равном в финансовом 2012 году, в котором усилия получили менее половины его просили бюджета.

406 млн. долл. В этом году бюджет коммерческих экипажа далеки от $ 850 млн попросила у Белого дома и NASA. По данным НАСА, присвоение задержали начало коммерческих космических полетов человека с 2016 до 2017 года.

"Мы определенно должны бюджетный запрос президента остаться на курс", сказал Макалистер. "Если мы получим значительное сокращение, то это, вероятно, займет больше нас. В какой-то момент, вы должны сделать шаг назад и взглянуть на все уравнения и убедиться, что стратегия по-прежнему является соответствующим".

Другая задержка в коммерческих услуг экипаж будет двигаться начала рейсы ближе к космической станции в настоящее время планируется 2020 пенсионного даты.

Макалистер сказал, что коммерческие программы экипаж может поглотить краткосрочных продолжает разрешения. Но весь год продолжает резолюция будет "очень трудно", сказал он.

"Это может привести к замедлению нас вниз по существу, потому что бюджетный запрос для двойных, что," сказал Макалистер. "Было бы фатальной? Мы должны видеть предложений" от промышленности.

Коммерческие партнеры до 23 марта, чтобы ответить на вызов НАСА предложений в следующий раунд коммерческой конкуренции экипажа. Агентство вручит соглашения с несколькими компаниями в августе на сумму до $ 500 млн каждый, ожидая, что поставщики завершить свои ракеты и космические аппараты дизайна к середине 2014 года.

"Это первый раз, когда мы спросили отрасли подписаться на полный до конца в конец стоимости и графика", сказал Макалистер. "Мы хотим знать, что он собирается предпринять, чтобы добраться до конца игры, и как быстро вы думаете, вы можете получить его?"

До сих пор коммерческие фирмы получили государственное финансирование для разработки и тестирования подсистем, строить наземные испытания и разработки проектов.

NASA проектов это будет стоить федеральному правительству $ 5 млрд., или $ 6 млрд., чтобы помочь финансировать не менее двух коммерческих партнеров по развитию. Смета расходов не приходится оперативных служб вращения экипажа.

Сенатор Кей Бейли Хатчисон, R-Техас, обвинил администрацию Обамы взять финансирование от SLS и Орион программ добавить в коммерческом бюджете экипажа в финансовом 2013 году Белым домом расходы запрос выпущен в феврале.

"Когда мы говорим о коммерческих экипажей, это очень простой в использовании 406 млн. долл. в качестве базового", Болден сказал Хатчисон. "Это не базовый. Если вы все помните, мой первоначальный запрос был более $ 1 миллиарда. Мы привезли, что вплоть финансовый год '12 до $ 850 миллионов. Мы были сокращены наполовину. Когда меня спросили, в прошлом году, что он влияет если вы не получите 850 миллионов долларов? Я сказал, что непосредственно влияет на дату поставки коммерческих возможностей экипажа. То есть, как мы добрались до 2017 года вместо 2015 или 2016 году. Любое последующее сокращение от того, что президент просил для коммерческих экипаж служит только отложить количество времени, которое у нас есть американский возможность получить наши экипажи Международной космической станции ".

Космической системы запуска и Orion программы будут получать комбинированное снижение $ 326 млн в проект бюджета, который должен быть одобрен конгрессом до вступления в силу.

Администрации Обамы бюджет офиса и Конгресс согласился в прошлом году установили три главных приоритетов для НАСА: Расширение космической станции до 2020 года и развитие коммерческих транспортных средств для обслуживания, начать изучение программы с большой грузоподъемности ракеты и экипаж капсулы, и достроить Джеймс Webb Space Telescope, преемник Хаббла.

"Вы меня звали с бюджета", Hutchison говорит. "И я вижу, $ 326 млн. комбинированных сокращение Ориона и SLS и соответствующее увеличение ... для коммерческих экипажа. Я был откровенно этажном ... что это будет настолько явной, чтобы прямо из Ориона и SLS и поместить его в коммерческих Экипаж, вместо того, чтобы выполнять совместные задачи, которые мы имеем выдвижения как и убедившись, что у нас не отнять от расписания на будущее, чтобы укрепить коммерческие экипажа ".

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1203/12commercialcrew/~~V

ЦитироватьWed, 28 March, 2012
Space Station's Future Rides on Commercial Cargo Haulers[/size]
By Irene Klotz
...
In addition to cargo transport, NASA plans to buy rides commercially for its astronauts. Proposals for integrated designs for space taxis were due March 26, with at least two awards expected in July. Currently, NASA is funding development work by Boeing, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada Corp. and Blue Origin.

 Gerstenmaier said the government-developed Orion capsule, which is being designed for deep-space human exploration, and the shuttle-derived Space Launch System booster could serve as a backup to the commercial initiatives, though the system probably would not be ready to fly until 2018 at the earliest.

 "We have to make hard decisions and trade things across our budget," Gerstenmaier said. "When we look at commercial crew, it has the potential of being there a little bit earlier than we can with the government system, so we're pushing or aiming our direction toward the commercial crew activity to provide that service."

 Gerstenmaier also noted that the $1.6 billion to $1.8 billion NASA has invested in the commercial cargo carriers is "significantly less than we would have spent on a typical NASA full-up development of that activity.

 "We have the potential to really get this cargo capability at a dramatically less cost than we would have paid under traditional contracting," he said.

 In addition to similar cost savings, NASA expects the Commercial Crew Program to provide it the option of expanding the size of the live-aboard space station crew. Currently, rotating teams of three astronauts and cosmonauts staff the station, flying on three-seat Russian Soyuz capsules.

 "If we get commercial crew at some point we'd like to increase the number of crewmembers on the flights from three to four and that would allow us to have an additional crew member on orbit, which would also increase the crew time available for research," Gerstenmaier said.

 Lawmakers also raised concerns about the Florida-based nonprofit organization CASIS that NASA hired six months ago to run the U.S. National Laboratory portion of the space station. The Center for the Advancement of Science in Space is in the midst of a reorganization following the resignation of its director this month. Reps. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) called for review of CASIS by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Hall did not comment publicly on the request.

 NASA spokesman David Weaver told Space News March 28 that following Becker's departure, the agency asked CASIS "to lay out how it intends to meet the milestones set out in the agreement we have in place with them.

 "We hope and expect that CASIS will be able to meet the performance milestones, and are anxious to review — and validate — their response to our letter," Weaver said in an email.

 CASIS spokesman Bobby Block said NASA's letter was sent to Space Florida, not CASIS, "and is being answered by them as they are the interim board."

 Block said he had not seen the letter and had not been asked to contribute to it.[/size]

ЦитироватьWASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), the veteran lawmaker who chairs the Senate Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee, on March 28 questioned whether NASA should spend billions of dollars to help industry develop privately owned and operated astronaut taxis that might only service the international space station (ISS) for a few years.

(http://www.spacenews.com/images/BarbaraMikulski_Getty02.jpg)

"I happen to support the commercial endeavor for both cargo and crew. I think it's bold, I think it's promising, but I'm concerned that it's behind schedule," Mikulski told NASA Administrator Charles Bolden during an appropriations hearing on the agency's 2013 budget request. "My concern is that now the best-case scenarios about the launch for these is 2017. We've extended the life of the space station to 2020. Isn't this a hell of a lot of money for a three-year effort?"

Bolden took issue with Mikulski's assumption that the United States and its partners would abandon the space station in 2020.

"The international partners ... the European Space Agency, Japan, Canada, the U.S., and Roscosmos in Russia, have all been engaged in engineering estimates of ... how long can we fly the international space station and we have all agreed that the international space station can be flown to at least 2028," Bolden said. "Most of them are on the record saying they would like to utilize it beyond that."

...........

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налеются вдоволь.

ЦитироватьИМХО в промежутке между Аполлонами и Шаттлами такого не было.

ЦитироватьВообще вся эта истерика отдельных лиц (заметьте - я не говорю про США) по поводу кратковременного отсутствия у США национального средства для пилотируемых полетов в космос вызывает у меня недоумение. ИМХО в промежутке между Аполлонами и Шаттлами такого не было.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьИМХО в промежутке между Аполлонами и Шаттлами такого не было.

С МКС думали что на пару лет, а вышло на десятилетие.

ЦитироватьТогда они за Союзы не платили. :wink:

ЦитироватьПаника здесь не понятна. Может США просто так выгодно летать на наших Союзах. А вот почему - это уже другой вопрос. Вы что думаете они не могли бы построить за несколько лет новый ПК? Но почему-то затягивают с этим.  Может просто хотят учесть все возможные ошибки, чтобы обошлось без аварий в будущем. Не поймешь их этих штатников. :?

ЦитироватьПаника здесь не понятна. Может США просто так выгодно летать на наших Союзах. А вот почему - это уже другой вопрос. Вы что думаете они не могли бы построить за несколько лет новый ПК? Но почему-то затягивают с этим.  Может просто хотят учесть все возможные ошибки, чтобы обошлось без аварий в будущем. Не поймешь их этих штатников[/size]. :?

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налетаются вдоволь.

Цитироватьronatu! я спрашивал конкретно про Микульски. Из цитаты я не понял ее озабоченности. Что там в сенате? Заранее благодарен. http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=913172#913172

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налетаются вдоволь.

ЦитироватьТо есть, если резать ассигнования, то они смогут сделать свои корабли позже.

ЦитироватьА нет паники. Есть три группы лиц:
- патриоты США, которым впадлу платить русским деньги "за стратегическое"
- коммерсанты, надеющиеся на попил себе в карман (и проплаченные ими журналисты)

Цитировать- наивный молодняк энтузиастов ПК, верящий, что коммерсанты (если им дать денег) сделают дёшево-дешево, потому что они "эффективные"

Собственно, вся буза от них.

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налеются вдоволь.

ЦитироватьСобственно, Обама отказался финансировать программы типа Constellation именно из-за потрясающей неффективности этой программы.

ЦитироватьПро частников: Это будет напоминать те времена, когда на чемпионат мира по хоккею североамериканцы направляли команду, не прошедшую в кубке Стенли.
Психологически сложные времена будут.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСобственно, Обама отказался финансировать программы типа Constellation именно из-за потрясающей неффективности этой программы.

По сравнению с тем что Обама финансирует, Констелейшен - образец эффективности. Просто не видит он никакого резона тратить на ПК деньги. Все что он видит - распил бабла донорами республиканцев. Прямо сказать этого не может, тк ПК пользуется поддержкой подавляющего большинства населения, вот и изводит не мытьем так катаньем.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПро частников: Это будет напоминать те времена, когда на чемпионат мира по хоккею североамериканцы направляли команду, не прошедшую в кубке Стенли.
Психологически сложные времена будут.

Там все частники, просто есть новые частники, которые пока работают эффективнее и те, которым работа за небольшие деньги уже не интересна.

ЦитироватьAviation Week: ISS Research Vulnerable To Cargo Schedule[/size] (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2012/03/29/06.xml&headline=ISS%20Research%20Vulnerable%20To%20Cargo%20Schedule)
Mar 30, 2012
 
By Mark Carreau

The future research productivity of the International Space Station (ISS) rests on the delayed startup of U.S. commercial resupply missions within the next year, experts from NASA and the agency's oversight panels told the House Science, Space and Technology Committee March 28.

The transition from space shuttle resupply to private cargo providers that began with NASA's six-year-old Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) initiative must be in full swing by mid-2013 if the space agency is to avoid research and possible staffing reductions aboard the six-person orbiting science laboratory, according to testimony from representatives of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and a NASA Advisory Council (NAC) task force.

The U.S.-led, 15-nation ISS partnership is committed to station operations through 2020.

Even the short-term projection assumes the success of scheduled unmanned cargo deliveries by the European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle, Japan's H-II Transfer Vehicle and Russia's Progress, which experienced a launch failure last August.

"If you have delays that extend into 2013 and beyond, you will see a lot of impacts on the space station and scaling back of research," Cristina Chaplain, GAO's director for acquisition and sourcing management, told the House panel.

Under current scheduling, NASA anticipates up to five test and delivery missions by the agency's two COTS partners, SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp., by year's end. They start with the April 30 launch of the SpaceX demonstration mission that includes plans for an early May station docking and a small cargo delivery.

A half-dozen additional Progress, ATV and HTV flights are slated for the remainder of 2012 as well, including Europe's anticipated ATV-3 arrival at the station late March 28.

Much is at stake, as the U.S. space station partnership turns its focus from the station's assembly, which drew to a close in mid-2011, to research and technology demonstrations.

"We are starting to begin serious use of the ISS," said William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for human exploration and space operations, who told the panel he anticipates at least one or two successful commercial cargo deliveries this year.

"Ultimately if we don't get the cargo in the time frame we need, we will need to cut back on research first and then ultimately go to the survival mode," he said. As few as two astronauts could maintain the station.

"In the near term, NASA's plans are adequate," testified Thomas Stafford, the former Apollo astronaut who chairs the NAC's ISS Operational Readiness Task Force. However, he cautioned that the COTS initiative has been plagued by chronic overoptimism and remains vulnerable to lapses in management and contractor oversight.

"Beyond the mid part of 2013, NASA becomes increasingly dependent for its projected flow of spare parts and resupply needs on the planned fleet of cargo vehicles," Stafford said.

He credited NASA with the foresight to equip the space station with critical spare parts, food and research gear on its final shuttle missions, STS-134 and STS-135, in May and July 2011.

"Without those two shuttle missions, right now we would be in a serious situation and probably be considering how we could de-crew the space station," Stafford told the panel.[/size]

ЦитироватьSpaceX Announces Safety Advisory Panel[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on March 29, 2012, at 10:21 am

Hawthorne, CA (SpaceX PR) – Today, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), one of the leading private companies working to restore America's ability to carry astronauts to the Space Station, announced it has assembled a team of outside experts to help the company create the world's safest human spaceflight system.

"When it comes to manned spaceflight, safety is our top priority," said SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer, Elon Musk. "These experts will provide us with important insights as we prepare to carry astronauts on the next generation of American spacecraft."

The independent Safety Advisory Panel is composed of leading human spaceflight safety experts, including several former NASA astronauts and senior NASA officials. The panel will provide objective assessments of the safety of the Dragon spacecraft and Falcon 9 rocket to help SpaceX maintain the highest level of safety.

Among the experts joining the SpaceX Safety Advisory Panel are:·        

    Dr. Leroy Chiao, PhD, Former NASA astronaut, Former International Space Station commander, member of the Augustine Commission (Review of United States Human Spaceflight Plans Committee).    
    Dr. G. Scott Hubbard, Former Director of NASA Ames Research Center, Stanford University professor of aeronautics and astronautics, sole NASA representative on the Columbia Accident Investigation Board.
     Dr. Richard T. Jennings, MD, MS, Former Chief of Medicine for NASA Johnson Space Center, University of Texas Medical Branch professor at the Aerospace Medicine Center.
    Captain Mark Kelly, Former NASA astronaut, Former Space Shuttle commander, Retired Navy Captain.
    Dr. Edward Lu, PhD, Former NASA astronaut.  The panel will convene in the fall of 2012 and will continue its work well after SpaceX begins flying people to space.  

About the Members:

Leroy Chiao, PhD
Dr. Chiao served as a NASA astronaut from July 1991 until December of 2005. During that time he qualified for flight assignments as a Space Station commander, Space Station science officer and Space Shuttle mission specialist. Chiao also served as chief of the Astronaut Office EVA Branch. A veteran of four spaceflights, he flew as a mission specialist on STS-65, STS-72 and STS-92, flew to and from the ISS as Flight Engineer on a Russian Soyuz, and was the commander and NASA science officer on Expedition-10. Chiao logged a total of 229 days in space, including 36 hours and 7 minutes of EVA time in six space walks. He has received numerous awards including NASA's highest award, the Distinguished Service Medal.  Chiao served as a member of the Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee, chaired by Norm Augustine.

G. Scott Hubbard
Dr. Hubbard has been engaged in space-related research for over 35 years including 20 years with NASA culminating as director of NASA's Ames Research Center. In 2003, he was the sole NASA representative on the Columbia Accident Investigation Board where he directed impact testing analysis that established the definitive physical cause of the loss of the Columbia. Hubbard was NASA's first Mars program director and successfully restructured the Mars program in the wake of mission failures. He is the founder of NASA's Astrobiology Institute, conceived the Mars Pathfinder mission and was manager for NASA's Lunar Prospector Mission.  Hubbard has received many honors including NASA's highest award, the Distinguished Service Medal. He is currently a professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanford University, where his research focuses on planetary exploration and the emerging entrepreneurial space industry. Hubbard serves as the Director of the Stanford Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Transportation.

Richard T. Jennings, MD
Dr. Jennings served as flight surgeon at NASA-JSC from 1987-1995, as chief of the Flight Medicine Clinic, and as chief of Medical Operations-Space Shuttle. He was crew surgeon or deputy crew surgeon on 14 Shuttle missions and provided mission support to 45 Shuttle flights. In 1995, he joined the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston where he directs the UTMB/NASA-JSC aerospace medicine residency program and coordinates the Wyle Integrated Sciences and Engineering/UTMB physicians that support NASA spaceflight operations, advanced medical projects, and research at the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center, NASA-JSC, and the Flight Analog Research Unit at UTMB. He is the lead flight surgeon for Space Adventures and consults in commercial suborbital spaceflight with Virgin Galactic. Jennings is a principal investigator for UTMB in the FAA Center of Excellence in Commercial Space Transportation.

Mark E. Kelly, Captain, USN
Captain Kelly served as a NASA astronaut from August of 1996 until October of 2011. His first trip into space was as pilot of STS-108, when Endeavour lifted off on December 5, 2001. In July 2006, Kelly served as pilot for STS-121 aboard Discovery, the second "Return to Flight" mission following the loss of Columbia in February 2003 in a mission that tested new safety and repair techniques introduced following the Columbia disaster. STS-124, aboard Discovery, was Kelly's first mission as commander. Kelly was also the commander of the STS-134 mission, which was Space Shuttle Endeavour's last flight. A Captain in the U.S. Navy, Kelly logged more than 6,000 hours in more than 50 different aircraft and has over 375 carrier landings.

Edward Lu, PhD
Dr. Lu served as a NASA astronaut from March of 1995 until August of 2007. A veteran of three space missions, Lu has logged over 206 days in space, including an EVA totaling 6 hours and 14 minutes. Lu was the first American to launch as the flight engineer of a Soyuz spacecraft and the first American to launch and land on a Soyuz spacecraft (Soyuz TMA-2). As flight engineer and NASA ISS science officer, Lu spent a 6-month tour of duty aboard the International Space Station maintaining ISS systems and overseeing science operations. Lu received numerous commendations including NASA's highest award, the Distinguished Service Medal. After leaving NASA, Lu joined Google, where he led the Advanced Projects Group responsible for imaging for Google Street View and Google Maps/Earth, book scanning technology and innovative energy projects.[/size]

ЦитироватьКопировать с других сайтов все мастаки. Но можно хоть в трёх предложениях по русски написать об чём речь.

ЦитироватьВы здесь третью неделю, а уже пытаетесь всех строить? :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы здесь третью неделю, а уже пытаетесь всех строить? :wink:

Наболело просто, если Вы копируете с других сайтов, значит знаете смысл. Можно ведь добавить и по русски главные тезы ссылки.

ЦитироватьШура! Не учите меня жить, лучше помогите материально! ©

ЦитироватьКопировать с других сайтов все мастаки. Но можно хоть в трёх предложениях по русски написать об чём речь.

ЦитироватьЛучше сразу на кит айский. :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПрекрасный пример: для того чтобы понять что речь идёт о СDR  CST-100 китайский знать не нужно. :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПрекрасный пример: для того чтобы понять что речь идёт о СDR  CST-100 китайский знать не нужно. :wink:

1250 это что? оказывается 12,5 млн долл (не 1250млн и не 1,250млн - а 12,5!)  :?

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНет. Боинг не Спейсекс. Он сразу делает корабль, а не инструмент PR-компании.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПри разработке таких сложных систем важна последовательность. От простого сложного. Если они сразу создадут сложную систему, то это чревато серьезными проблемами и риском аварий особенно на начальном этапе что в свою очередь может привести все к полной или частичной переработке аппарата.

ЦитироватьSpace Leaders Voice Support for Full Commercial Crew Funding[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on April 2, 2012, at 7:10 pm

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/22687.jpg)

The following letter supporting NASA's commercial crew program appears in the current edition of Space News along with an equally supportive editorial titled, "Milking Commercial Crew Is the Wrong Answer." The text of the letter was provided by the Commercial Spaceflight Federation.

Commercial Crew: Science's Friend, Not Enemy

Recent congressional hearings on the NASA fiscal year 2013 budget request have revealed a flawed and dangerous hypothesis by some members of Congress — that NASA's Commercial Crew Program has robbed funding from its planetary exploration efforts.

This conclusion is factually flawed. This can be seen from the fact that the fiscal 2013 budget request for commercial crew is no higher than the 2013 request made last year as a part of the Obama administration's fiscal 2012 five-year NASA budget projection — before this year's significant and misguided cuts to planetary exploration.

What's worse in this hypothesis and suggestions of cuts to the Commercial Crew Program is that commercial crew is a friend of science. Why? Because it enables more international space station (ISS) research, because it reduces the cost of ISS access (thereby removing a threat to NASA's other science budgets), and because it opens a budget wedge for human exploration of asteroids, the Moon and Mars that will have tremendous positive value to planetary exploration.

We hope that congressional appropriators — both members and staffers — will come to agree with us that cuts to commercial crew would be damaging to both science and human exploration at NASA, and would be the wrong way to restore NASA's planetary exploration budget.

Dr. S. Alan Stern
Planetary Scientist
Former NASA Associate Administrator for Science

Dr. Steven Collicott
Microgravity Researcher, Purdue University

Dr. Daniel Durda
Planetary Scientist, Southwest Research Institute

Dr. Louis Friedman
Former Executive Director, The Planetary Society

Dr. Owen Garriott
Former NASA Skylab Space Station and Shuttle Astronaut

Mr. Gerald D. Griffin
Former Director, NASA Johnson Space Center
Former Deputy Director, NASA Kennedy Space Center

Mr. Dale Ketcham
Director, Spaceport Research & Technology Institute

Dr. Howard G. Levine
President, American Society for Gravitational and Space Biology

Dr. John Logsdon
Founder, Space Policy Institute, George Washington University

Dr. John Pojman
Microgravity Researcher, Louisiana State University[/size]

ЦитироватьГляжу на Экскалибур и каждый раз думаю "Новый год, сейчас раскрутим проволочку и бабах пробкой в потолок."

ЦитироватьПо-поводу эффективности новых частников:

ЦитироватьAviation Week: ISS Research Vulnerable To Cargo Schedule[/size] (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2012/03/29/06.xml&headline=ISS%20Research%20Vulnerable%20To%20Cargo%20Schedule)

ЦитироватьНаучно-исследовательский потенциал МКС находится под угрозой из-за задержек в развитии программы COTS (Коммерческая орбитальная транспортировка)
Об этом свидетельствовали эксперты НАСА перед комиссией конгресса США на слушаниях 28 марта.
Переход от доставки грузов Шаттлами к сервису частных грузовых перевозчиков должен заработать к середине 2013, чтобы НАСА могло избежать сокращения масштабов исследований и возможно сокращения персонала на борту МКС.
"Если задержки продлятся в 2013 и позже, то Вы увидите серьезное воздействие на МКС и сворачивание исследований,"- свидетельствовала перед комиссией конгресса Кристина Чаплин, из Главного бюджетно-контрольного управления США.
"Мы только начинаем серьезную эксплуатацию МКС," – свидетельствовал Уильям Герстенмайер, зам руководителя НАСА по пилотируемым полетам. Он также сказал, что ожидает по крайней мере один или два успешных коммерческих старта грузовых кораблей в этом году.
"В конечном счете, если мы не получаем грузы в этих временных рамках, то мы должны будем сначала сократить исследования, а затем в конечном счете перейти в режим выживания. Двух астронавтов будет достаточно, чтобы поддержать станцию".
"Планы НАСА на ближайшее время - адекватны," - свидетельствовал Томас Стаффорд, бывший астронавт «Аполлона»,  возглавляющий Консультативный совет НАСА по созданию МКС, почетный гражданин города Калининград,
Он обратил внимание, что программа COTS изначально страдала хроническим сверхоптимизмом и остается уязвимой для ошибок подрядчика и менеджмента.
"Со второй половины 2013 НАСА становится все более и более зависимым в поставках запасных частей и пополнении запасов от запланированного флота грузовых кораблей," - сказал Стаффорд.
Он похвалил NASA за предвидение в обеспечении МКС критически важными запасными частями, продовольствием и исследовательским оборудованием в ходе заключительных миссий Шаттлов STS-134 и STS-135 в мае и июле 2011.
"Без тех двух миссий Шаттла мы уже сейчас были бы в серьезной ситуации и вероятно рассматривали бы вариант беспилотной эксплуатации станции" сказал Стаффорд комиссии конгресса.

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налеются вдоволь.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСенатор Микульски думает что если деньги на Союзы отдать свободным предпринимателям то они сделают трансферы-спасшлюпки на три года быстрее? Или она хочет просто дать им побольше денег? Или злится что деньги расходуются неэффективно?
Хотя до 2028 частники еще налеются вдоволь.

http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=916744#916744 :)

ЦитироватьАрхив телескопа "Хаббл" получил имя американского сенатора

ЦитироватьМОСКВА, 6 апр - РИА Новости. Астрономическая база данных американского Института космического телескопа (Space Telescope Science Institute - STScI), куда поступают все данные с орбитального телескопа "Хаббл", получила собственное имя - она названа в честь сенатора от штата Мэриленд Барбары Микульски (Barbara Mikulski), которая последовательно выступает в поддержку астрофизических проектов и, в частности, научных проектов НАСА.

"Решение института назвать свою базу данных в честь сенатора Микульски - это честь, которую она в высшей степени заслуживает. Она выдающийся защитник интересов науки, НАСА и астрофизического сообщества", - говорится в заявлении научного руководителя НАСА Валида Абдалати (Waleed Abdalati).

Теперь архив института будет носить название MAST (Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes). Помимо данных "Хаббла", в нем содержится информация, полученная телескопами GALEX, XMM-Newton, "Кеплер", Copernicus и ряда других.

Барбара Микульски является членом американского парламента с 1977 года и занимает пост сенатора дольше всех женщин-сенаторов в истории США. Она, в частности, добивалась принятия решения о продолжении финансирования космических телескопов "Джеймс Вебб" и "Хаббл", выступала в поддержку инициатив, направленных на развитие инноваций и поддержку научных исследований.

http://ria.ru/science/20120406/619486563.html

ЦитироватьViewpoint: Commercial Space Will Renew NASA[/size] (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/04/09/AW_04_09_2012_p58-444291.xml&headline=Viewpoint:%20Commercial%20Space%20Will%20Renew%20NASA)
 Apr 9, 2012

  By Michael Lopez-Alegria

Decisions by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama to retire NASA's space shuttle and cancel the Constellation program were both received with much—and varied—emotion among my fellow astronauts, the NASA family and others nationwide. Regardless of those sentiments, these choices have brushed in broad strokes the landscape on which our future as a spacefaring nation must be painted. That backdrop reveals a stark reality: As of Atlantis's final flight last July, our nation has no means to launch humans into Earth orbit from U.S. soil. Period.

Whether considered from a geopolitical, economic or technological perspective, recovering that capability should be a national strategic priority. NASA's Commercial Crew Program (CCP) represents the fastest and most cost-effective path to that end.

That program and its cargo-carrying precursor, called COTS, for Commercial Orbital Transportation Services, are NASA initiatives to reduce costs and invigorate the American space industry. To do that, they use competitive, fixed-priced, milestone-based agreements to develop spacecraft and launch vehicle systems, rather than the traditional cost-plus-fee structure. This effort should be lauded. A recent government study using the NASA-Air Force Cost Model concluded that design, development, test and evaluation of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket would cost about $925 million (in fiscal 2010 dollars) under the conventional approach, compared to just $300 million under a firm, fixed-price contract.

Whence all the savings? Stable design requirements, leaner management and less government oversight all contribute. This last factor has made some wonder aloud whether this could mean a decrease in safety. Specifically, they cite NASA's perceived inability to include safety requirements in Space Act agreements, the contract vehicle used for the first three phases of the CCP.

In fact, NASA did write such specifications into Space Act agreements under COTS. More significantly, last year NASA published standards by which commercial crew competitors will be judged, regardless of acquisition strategy. NASA will not select a system that does not meet its safety requirements, and each of the competing teams is keenly aware that the degree to which they meet them will directly affect whether they win NASA's business. Furthermore, some of NASA's best and brightest—former astronauts and mission-operations and launch personnel—have joined these companies in program management and safety roles. My former colleagues are among the nation's premier space operators. Safety is their highest priority, and I would trust my life to them now, just as I did before.

A different and somewhat contradictory criticism was revealed at recent congressional hearings. This time, the complaint was that SpaceX and Orbital Sciences' upcoming COTS launches are well behind their original schedules. History is littered with examples of complex systems that were late, including every first launch of a manned vehicle by NASA and almost every major weapon system. That's just a fact. But there is a big difference under COTS: The providers must bear the costs of delays, because NASA's contribution is fixed. In fact, the government can even save money by recovering performance penalties.

When industry does launch COTS flights, it should hope for the best but be ready for less. The SpaceX mission will be an aggressive combination of two planned test flights, with a long list of objectives. Accomplishing all would be a home run, but a base hit is still a success. Like in any test flight, SpaceX will be wringing out its systems, to ferret out potential problems.

What is more, COTS and the commercial crew effort are better structured to absorb technical glitches than traditional, single-string procurements. With multiple competitors in each program, no system design or approach is exactly duplicated. Redundancy, specifically dissimilar redundancy, is a hallmark of safety and reliability. NASA has appropriately resisted recent attempts to mandate a premature down-selection in the "integrated capability" phase of the Commercial Crew Program. Its evaluation team, from rocket scientists to financial analysts, is uniquely positioned to assess the recently received proposals and make selections to ensure program success given the budgetary framework.

That framework—the level of NASA funding for CCP—will directly affect the speed with which we restore U.S. independent human access to Earth orbit. This capability is not only a national strategic imperative. It is crucial to protecting our $100 billion investment in the International Space Station. The commercial program meets this objective sooner than any other approach, cost-effectively while keeping safety paramount. Congress should join the administration in leaning forward to ensure the U.S. preserves its human-spaceflight leadership[/size].

ЦитироватьБоливар не выдержит двоих... :shock:
Орион
СпейсХ
Боинг

Цитировать

ЦитироватьБоливар не выдержит двоих... :shock:
Орион
СпейсХ
Боинг

Зря не верите в SNC. Компания покрупнее SpaceX. Вот погодите, они еще пересидят Рэйтеон в перетягивании легкого штурмовика...

ЦитироватьULA Forms Human Launch Services Organization[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on April 10, 2012, at 11:50 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/23980.jpg)
United Launch Alliance's configurations for launch commercial crew vehicles on Delta IV and Atlas V vehicles. (Credit: United Launch Alliance)

CENTENNIAL, Colo., April 9, 2012 (ULA PR) –United Launch Alliance (ULA) today announced the formation of a new organization that will focus exclusively on NASA's human spaceflight programs.

ULA's Human Launch Services organization will be dedicated to supporting NASA and its partners in the development of capabilities to deliver U.S. astronauts to Low Earth Orbit and human exploration beyond Earth orbit.

"NASA is making tremendous progress towards closing the U.S. human spaceflight gap and we are committed to supporting them with our flight-proven Atlas V and Delta IV launch vehicles and technologies," said Michael Gass, ULA president and CEO. "ULA understands that human spaceflight requires the utmost attention to safety and reliability and the new organization will focus our energy and attention towards those crucial goals."

ULA's Human Launch Services Organization will be led by Dr. George Sowers. Prior to this position, Sowers headed ULA's Business Development and Advanced Programs team and brings with him more than 25 years of launch systems design, development and integration expertise.

"ULA is extremely proud of our heritage in human spaceflight beginning 50 years ago with the Mercury/Atlas launch delivering John Glenn to orbit," said Sowers. "We look forward to working with NASA and our commercial crew customers to leverage our unprecedented success record with Atlas V and Delta IV to meet the nation's need for assured access and crew safety for missions to the International Space Station and other destinations."

The ULA Human Launch Services Organization will be based in Denver, and will have resident support at key NASA Centers. The organization will draw upon the same engineering, production and operations expertise currently supporting ULA's national security and NASA science customers.

"The new organization will draw upon the same processes and people that have made our launch vehicles the most reliable in the world," said Sowers. "The intent is to leverage our successful heritage while providing our human spaceflight customers with an organization focused exclusively on their needs."

ULA program management, engineering, test and mission support functions are headquartered in Denver, Colo. Manufacturing, assembly and integration operations are located at Decatur, Ala., and Harlingen, Texas. Launch operations are located at Cape Canaveral AFS, Fla., and Vandenberg AFB, Calif.

For more information on ULA, visit the ULA Web site at www.ulalaunch.com, or call the ULA Launch Hotline at 1-877-ULA-4321 (852-4321). Join the conversation at www.facebook.com/ulalaunch and twitter.com/ulalaunch.[/size]

ЦитироватьAW&ST: How Commercial Space Is Paying Off Now[/size] (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/04/16/AW_04_16_2012_p40-444890.xml&headline=How%20Commercial%20Space%20Is%20Paying%20Off%20Now&next=0)

Apr 16, 2012
 
By Frank Morring, Jr.
Washington

It's still a "Field of Dreams" proposition—"if you build it, they will come." Even so, NASA's as-yet-unrealized efforts to offload routine human space access onto the private sector is beginning to ripple across the U.S. launch industry in ways that could go well beyond transporting people and their stuff into space.

Brash entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, who openly declares his intention to take over the worldwide launch industry with lower-cost launchers than the competition's, are exerting downward price pressure on traditional launch-vehicle manufacturers. And the possibility of an off-planet economy in low Earth orbit (LEO) has triggered a new round of innovative launcher designs, not all of them "paper rockets" and some of them quite different from traditional vehicles.

"We've selected the Atlas V for our test flights through the Commercial Crew Program," says John Mulholland, vice president and manager of Commercial Programs for Boeing Space Exploration. "But we will continue to maintain our design to be compatible with multiple launch vehicles so that we can competitively procure launch vehicles in the future, which is important for us to maintain best value, obviously. The launch vehicle is such a huge portion of our offer."

Mulholland's group has just completed the preliminary design review on the CST-100, Boeing's entry into the NASA-run commercial crew development competition. Two other teams have baselined the Atlas V to launch their space taxis, but Atlas-builder United Launch Alliance (ULA) is not resting on its laurels. The Boeing/Lockheed Martin joint venture is scrambling to cut costs of its Atlas V and Delta IV launcher lines to meet the anticipated competition from Musk and other startups, while stressing the demonstrated reliability of their products and working to improve them (see p. 44).

And as ULA goes after the nascent human space-flight market with the Atlas V it uses to launch big government satellites and space probes, new entrants in the commercial cargo and crew game are not pinning their hopes on the human market alone. If a launcher is reliable enough to send astronauts aloft, the argument goes, it certainly is reliable enough to handle high-value satellites and other spacecraft, and perhaps open up new space businesses such as satellite servicing and orbital tourism.

If it all works out—and that remains a pretty large "if"—NASA's commercial approach to carrying astronauts to low Earth orbit could lower the cost of space access to the point that the business cases for new LEO applications can close.

Beginning with the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program initiated by then-Administrator Michael Griffin, NASA has invested about $925 million of taxpayer seed money to help create a private human spaceflight industry. That money has attracted significant private investment, and the agency is optimistic that this can generate one or more new ways to get humans and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) for less money than traditional government procurements.

The COTS program could start to pay off as early as next month, provided Musk's Space Exploration Technologies Inc. (SpaceX) succeeds in getting its next Dragon capsule off the ground with its Falcon 9 rocket and berthed at the ISS for the first time, carrying 1,000 lb. of food and other relatively low-value cargo. Orbital Sciences Corp., NASA's other COTS partner, also hopes to reach the station this year with its Cygnus cargo vehicle riding the company's new Antares liquid-fueled launcher.

That could be just the beginning. With the space shuttle fleet retired, NASA is paying Russia more than $60 million a seat to train and fly astronauts to the ISS in Soyuz capsules. Starting with $50 million in federal economic stimulus package funding in fiscal 2009, NASA has been seeding development of commercial space taxis under its Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) and Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) initiatives.

The latter has attracted several different proposals for full-scale systems that would ferry ISS crews to orbit beginning as early as 2017. Funding commercial crew is contentious in Washington, and the first human flights already have been delayed a year because Congress does not want NASA to put all of its eggs in the commercial crew basket (AW&ST Dec. 19, 2011, p. 20).

At the heart of the commercial crew thrust is a change in the basic approach to spaceflight safety. Instead of costly efforts to install launch system redundancy for fail-safe reliability, the new commercial crew vehicles will rely on sophisticated escape systems to safely get away from a failing rocket.

That requires quick-response health-monitoring software in the rocket to trigger an abort. And it is driving development of cost-saving escape-propulsion systems that—unlike the escape towers NASA used in the 1960s—retain their propellant after a successful launch for orbital maneuvering. ULA won $6.7 million in the first round of CCDev awards to start developing an emergency detection system (EDS) for the Atlas V. And the company has continued testing and qualification on its own dime, in partnership with NASA, via an unfunded Space Act agreement.

"There will be a certain category of failures where you're not going to want to have any men in the loop at all," says George Sowers, ULA'S vice president of business development and advanced programs. "Failure is so imminent and the consequences are so fast that you just want the computer to make the decision and pop it off. Some warning light will come on and the astronauts will have time to clench their guts and away they go."

Other failures may develop more slowly, giving range safety officers, the ULA launch control room and even the crew itself time to decide whether to abort, based on information they will be receiving from the EDS. Essentially a software package, the system will draw on data from about 80 instruments already flying on the Atlas V—from engine rpms to tank pressure to acceleration rates and directions.

Even without the added layer of safety for crews that the EDS provides, reliability played a big role in the choice of Atlas V as a crew-launch vehicle by Blue Origin, Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corp. "They've had 29 launches on this version of the Atlas V, a 100% success rate, so for a crew transportation launch vehicle that was a clear choice for now," says Boeing's Mulholland.

Sowers says the EDS will improve Atlas V reliability for all of its payloads—manned and unmanned—because of the added insight into the rocket's performance that it affords even without hardware upgrades. As part of its unfunded commercial crew work, ULA assessed how well Atlas V stacked up against NASA's human-ratings requirements.

"We've completed that, and we don't believe there are any design modifications we have to do to the Atlas rocket to meet those requirements," he says. "We're not certified yet, and complete certification won't come until the next phase of the commercial crew program, but we did that hand-in-hand with NASA, and we feel really good about the ability of the Atlas rocket—with the addition of the emergency detection system—to meet the NASA requirements."

At SpaceX, Musk says, the company's Falcon 9 rocket was built from the ground up to meet NASA's human-rating requirements, and will be ready to carry crew to the ISS as soon as Dragon's pusher-type abort system the company is developing with CCDev-2 funding is completed. NASA astronauts have been spending a lot of time in the company's Hawthorne, Calif., plant familiarizing themselves with the Dragon capsule's systems, which Musk expects their colleagues to be operating in space as early as next month. Company engineers have been working overtime to meet NASA's stringent requirements for getting close enough to the ISS for the station crew to grapple the Dragon with a robotic arm, berth it and open it to the station environment (AW&ST Feb. 13, p. 27). The first flight will combine two milestone missions to close out the company's COTS work, and Musk says he hopes to fly at least two Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) missions before the end of this year if NASA needs the supplies they can carry.

The Dragon capsule is designed to take 6,000 kg (13,200 lb.) to the ISS and return 3,000 kg to Earth. Musk is quick to point out that the down-mass capability is not shared by its COTS competitor, Orbital Sciences. "Orbital gets almost twice as much as we do per flight, but they don't bring anything back," he says. "It's about twice the value for half the money."

Under its initial CRS contract, SpaceX will be paid $1.6 billion for 12 cargo flights to the ISS, and Orbital $1.9 billion for eight flights. The fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts each have a maximum potential value of $3.1 billion, although based on "known requirements," NASA expects to spend a total of $3.5 billion on the commercial cargo missions combined.

Ultimately, the Dragon capsule and its Falcon 9 launcher are intended to be human-rated. While the company is working under a Space Act agreement with its cargo variant, it will go to the more rigorous Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) oversight when it comes to gaining NASA's approval to fly humans.

"Eventually we will begin a certification effort that will look fairly conventional in terms of what NASA will do to ensure that we have a level of safety and mission assurance needed to fly to ISS," says Brent Jett, a two-time shuttle commander who serves as deputy manager of NASA's Commercial Crew Program.

That approach will extend to any improvements in crew vehicle designs or launch vehicle changes. SpaceX plans to change engines after its first three commercial cargo flights, and Musk has high hopes for lowering his costs and customer prices with first- and second-stage upgrades by the time he intends to begin flying crews.

"We are aware that SpaceX does have an upgrade coming to the Falcon 9 that they intend to use for crew," Jett says. "f they win CCiCap, we would see in their certification plan . . . [just] how they would get comfortable certifying that vehicle. They're going to tell us how they would certify it, and then we'll balance that against how we would certify it, and be able to understand that delta of what we would be able to do under that certification contract [which is] going to come sometime in the future."

This is an approach that will extend to all potential commercial crew transport providers. NASA is evaluating proposals it received last month under the CCiCap phase of the program, in which potential suppliers describe their overall systems, including launch vehicles, and tell NASA how they plan to meet its human-rating requirements. The agency hopes to award at least two Space Act agreements late in the summer, with a 21-month base period to push system design toward—if not past—critical design review, and to include "serious risk reduction," with no promises after that.

"The whole idea there is we have a base period and then we have an optional period," says Ed Mango, the Commercial Crew Program manager. "NASA will then decide if we want to continue on with the partners in that optional period, and that is at our discretion based on how they are performing during the base period, and also how we are doing at that point to deal with certification of a vehicle toward our requirements."

Also in the mix with the SpaceX Dragon/Falcon 9 are the Atlas-launched vehicles under development by Boeing and Blue Origin, and a lifting body in development by Sierra Nevada. Blue Origins, a secretive operation bankrolled by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, builds on hydrogen-fueled vertical-takeoff-and-landing technology that NASA studied in the 1990s.

The Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser is based on NASA's old HL-20 lifting-body test vehicle, and adds a pair of hybrid rocket motors burning nitrous oxide and hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) fuel—basically a kind of rubber—for abort or in-space operations. Either way, it returns to a runway landing, and that makes it reusable even with the expendable Atlas V as its lift to space, according to Mark Sirangelo, Sierra Nevada's space systems chief.

"We expect to be less expensive than the cost of the Russians right now, per seat," he says. "The other benefit in the Atlas is that if the two choices . . . made here are both Atlases, [the more Atlases produced], the lower . . . the cost."

Particularly when combined with U.S. Air Force use of the Atlas V, the commercial crew business could lower the cost of access to LEO for all comers. But Mango stresses that competition is key, particularly early on. And that will be difficult, as Congress questions the expense of keeping at least potential operators in the running while NASA slows it internal SLS development (AW&ST March 12, p. 36).

"Our overall program approach is that we are going to need more than one company in this next phase, because we are not meeting, and I quote, 'NASA's requirements,' per se, so how do you get industry to try to get close," says Mango. "You do that by having a competition. And that competition not only keeps the price down, but it also says 'hey, the other competitor is willing to meet or try to meet more of their customer needs.'"

The same would hold true during the safety certification phase, and in the actual contracting for services," Mango adds. "That will be another FAR contract kind of acquisition approach. It is similar to something like what the launch services program uses" [for unmanned NASA launches].

Even if NASA winds up with only one commercial crew contractor, it could still gain competitive prices in launch services for its robotic space probes and Earth-observation satellites. With the Delta II out of production, Orbital Sciences, SpaceX and perhaps some of the other new launch systems in the works may go head-to-head for launch contracts on that class of vehicle.

Orbital decided not to compete in the commercial crew arena after losing out in its bid for CCDev-2 funding, but it hopes to gain the same economies of scale for unmanned launches with its Antares rocket—a kerosene-fueled vehicle that can deliver 6,120 kg to LEO from its new launch facility on Wallops Island, Va. (AW&ST Feb. 27, p. 35).

For its part, NASA is seeking $830 million in fiscal 2013 to invest in commercial crew. That is comparable to the $850 million it requested for the current fiscal year. When Congress whittled that figure down to $406 million, the agency was forced to delay its estimated start of commercial flights to the ISS to 2017 from 2016.

So far, it remains to be seen if the commercial approach actually will hold down costs once NASA begins buying crew flights. Boeing says its business case closes on the NASA missions alone—essentially two flights a year. But company officials also concede that the price per seat of a ride in the CST-100 would only be "competitive" with Soyuz seats, and not a dramatic drop.

Boeing also has partnerships with Space Adventures, which brokers Soyuz rides to the ISS at a reported $30 million a trip, and with Bigelow Aerospace. Bigelow already has flown prototypes of its planned inflatable space habitats to orbit, and is marking time to see what happens with the NASA effort before it begins seriously marketing its capabilities. Potential customers are industrial users and sovereign nations that lack the wherewithal to develop their own space laboratories.

Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser will not only be reusable, but also reconfigurable for different types of missions, according to Sirangelo. These could include satellite-servicing flights with space-suited astronauts, a capability pioneered on the Hubble Space Telescope and lost with the shuttle's retirement. Like the SpaceX Dragon, the Dream Chaser will be designed to return scientific samples and other cargo from orbit—another potential market. Both vehicles also would have the capability to operate autonomously as unmanned or man-tended commercial laboratories.

But at this stage of the transition to the post-shuttle era, those sorts of commercial activities remain in the "Field of Dreams" realm, and the Dream Chaser and its on-orbit competitors have a long way to go before the customers will come.

Still, even without having flown, the NASA-backed commercial crew vehicles have created a space-launch market that did not exist before.

"Our position is, as these other emerging launch vehicles actually get to demonstrated reliability, necessary to ensure crew safely, we would absolutely consider using them," says Boeing's Mulholland. [/size]

ЦитироватьWASHINGTON -- Senate appropriators released a draft NASA budget Tuesday, proposing a cut of more than $300 million from the agency's funding request for commercial space transportation, but adding money for development of the Space Launch System heavy-lift rocket and Orion capsule for human exploration of deep space.
 
The Senate appropriations subcommittee for commerce, science and justice, chaired by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., approved the fiscal year 2013 budget legislation Tuesday. Fiscal year 2013 begins Oct. 1.

The House is expected to produce its own NASA budget later this year.

The White House in February requested $830 million for NASA's commercial crew program, which was chartered to foster private development of rockets and spacecraft to carry astronaut crews to and from the International Space Station. With the space shuttle's retirement, NASA must purchase seats on Russian Soyuz spacecraft.

NASA's request for commercial crew in fiscal 2012 was cut in half by Congress, delaying the scheduled start of crew transportation services by one year until 2017. Officials have warned another significant reduction from next year's $830 million request would cause another delay.

In the budget mark-up released Tuesday, Senate appropriators would provide $525 million for commercial crew.

Some senators, including Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, have accused NASA of robbing the budget for the Space Launch System and Orion programs, which are designed for human exploration beyond low Earth orbit, to pay for commercial crew development.

Hutchison is the ranking member of the Senate appropriations subcommittee for commerce, science and justice.

The SLS and Orion budgets each saw slight cuts in the White House's fiscal 2013 request, which was released Feb. 13.

In testimony before Senate committees, NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden said the heavy-lift rocket and capsule were making good progress, so the space agency could afford taking some funding away from those programs, highlighting the imperative of keeping pace in the commercial crew effort.

The Senate budget proposal includes $1.2 billion for the Orion multipurpose crew vehicle and $1.5 billion for the Space Launch System. The Obama administration's budget request includes $1 billion for Orion and about $1.3 billion for the SLS program.

The Senate appropriations bill calls for restoring $100 million to NASA's Mars science programs, responding to a cut to robotic exploration of Mars in the White House's budget blueprint. The Senate budget proposal includes $461 million for unmanned Mars research.

Senators also wish to shift $1.6 billion in funding for NOAA's weather satellites to NASA, boosting the space agency's overall budget to $19.4 billion. NASA currently manages acquisition and procurement for weather satellites under a cost reimbursement agreement with NOAA.

ЦитироватьДата пуска коммерческих КК уплывает за 2017 год:

"Медленно ракеты уплывают вдаль,
 Встречи с ними ты уже не жди.
 И хотя Америку немного жаль,
 У Европы это впереди."

ЦитироватьНе уверен. На месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск

ЦитироватьСтранные у Вас мечты. Вы грезите мечтой, что бы какой нибудь частник как можно быстрей построил за свой счет свою частную ракету и сбил ей МКС? При чем, Вы желаете, чтобы в боевом блоке непременно сидели люди  :shock: Зачем Вам это?  :shock:

ЦитироватьУ РККЭ, формально тоже частной, шансов сбить МКС намного больше. Это ваша мечта?

Я же хочу что бы раньше закончилось безвременье.

ЦитироватьВы хотите сказать, что у космического корабля с показателями надежности под 100% больше шансов сбить МКС чем у космического корабля, который вообще пока не имеет фактической надежности?  :shock:

ЦитироватьОпределение задач частной космонавтики идет полным ходом. )) Зачем они столько разных КК проектируют? Боятся промахнуться с первого раза?))

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы хотите сказать, что у космического корабля с показателями надежности под 100% больше шансов сбить МКС чем у космического корабля, который вообще пока не имеет фактической надежности?  :shock:

Это обычная логика опровергателей, к которым относится Valerij

ЦитироватьНа месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск.

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы хотите сказать, что у космического корабля с показателями надежности под 100% больше шансов сбить МКС чем у космического корабля, который вообще пока не имеет фактической надежности?  :shock:

Это обычная логика опровергателей, к которым относится Valerij

Простите, а какие корабли уже сталкивались с ОС "МИР"? Так что у РККЭ уже есть опыт ;)

Ну а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

ЦитироватьНу а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:
А Вы всё Маска расхваливаете  :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:
А Вы всё Маска расхваливаете  :)

Роман, вы в своих расчетах часто делите на ноль? Может быть вам в школу сходить?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:
А Вы всё Маска расхваливаете  :)

Роман, вы в своих расчетах часто делите на ноль? Может быть вам в школу сходить?

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:
А Вы всё Маска расхваливаете  :)

Роман, вы в своих расчетах часто делите на ноль? Может быть вам в школу сходить?

Может, Вам вспомнить правило Лопиталя? :D

ЦитироватьНа месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНу а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

Значит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНа месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск.

Проблема в том Valerij, что очень многое из того, что должно сделать, прежде чем Дракон полетит с людьми к МКС, должно сделать именно НАСА

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНа месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск.

Проблема в том Valerij, что очень многое из того, что должно сделать, прежде чем Дракон полетит с людьми к МКС, должно сделать именно НАСА

Верно. Поэтому, если ближайший полет Дракона (тьфу-тьфу-тьфу) окажется успешным, будет крайне забавно посмотреть на действия НАСА.
Реакции бюрократической системы на внешний стимул бывают совершенно непредсказуемыми :)

ЦитироватьТогда почему учитывается только один предел функции? Было проведено два испытательных полета, в обоих программа выполнена полностью, то есть второй предел - 100% или ровно единица.

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНу а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

Значит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:

Как интересно....
расскажите пожалуйста, как вы посчитали эту надежность?

ЦитироватьМожет, Вам вспомнить правило Лопиталя? :D

ЦитироватьВы грезите мечтой, что бы какой нибудь частник как можно быстрей построил за свой счет свою частную ракету и сбил ей МКС?

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНу а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

Значит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:

Как интересно....
расскажите пожалуйста, как вы посчитали эту надежность?

Как будет что считать я посчитаю  :wink:

ЦитироватьПроблема в том Valerij, что очень многое из того, что должно сделать, прежде чем Дракон полетит с людьми к МКС, должно сделать именно НАСА, а  Маск не может заплатить НАСА, даже если бы у него карман был немеряный!  Что отнюдь не так. :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТогда почему учитывается только один предел функции? Было проведено два испытательных полета, в обоих программа выполнена полностью, то есть второй предел - 100% или ровно единица.

Переменная "Надежность космических кораблей Маска" не проинициализирована, поэтому NULL, т.е. даже нет начальных условий для сравнения с чем то, т.е. свободен сразу, без входа в алгоритм сравнения. Так понятно?

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНа месте Маска я бы сделал, пусть и за свой счет, где-то в 2014 - 2015 году пилотируемый пуск.

Проблема в том Valerij, что очень многое из того, что должно сделать, прежде чем Дракон полетит с людьми к МКС, должно сделать именно НАСА

Верно. Поэтому, если ближайший полет Дракона (тьфу-тьфу-тьфу) окажется успешным, будет крайне забавно посмотреть на действия НАСА.
Реакции бюрократической системы на внешний стимул бывают совершенно непредсказуемыми :)

Здесь еще более интересно. Бюрократия НАСА действует внутри другой не менее крутой бюрократии: бюджетно-финансовой федеральной.  :)

Так что турбулентность возникнет на всем уровне. А вот будет ли она достаточной мощной, что бы система совершила бифуркацию - это вопрос вопросов.  :roll:  :D

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВерно. Поэтому, если ближайший полет Дракона (тьфу-тьфу-тьфу) окажется успешным, будет крайне забавно посмотреть на действия НАСА.
Реакции бюрократической системы на внешний стимул бывают совершенно непредсказуемыми :)

Здесь еще более интересно. Бюрократия НАСА действует внутри другой не менее крутой бюрократии: бюджетно-финансовой федеральной.  :)

Так что турбулентность возникнет на всем уровне. А вот будет ли она достаточной мощной, что бы система совершила бифуркацию - это вопрос вопросов.  :roll:  :D

На бифуркацию не потянет, имхо. Вероятность ее очень невелика. Хотя и не нулевая.

PS Хотя самое интересное тут вот в чем: что произойдет скорее, встраиваение СпейсЭкса в имеющуюся структуру или смена трендов и изменение этой самой структуры.
Вероятности, имхо, где-то 70/30 - но при условии, что Дракон слетает без проблем.

PPS Жаль только, что в России никакой смены в обозримом будущем не предвидится. Тут высота потенциального барьера запредельная, ничего его не сломает.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВерно. Поэтому, если ближайший полет Дракона (тьфу-тьфу-тьфу) окажется успешным, будет крайне забавно посмотреть на действия НАСА.
Реакции бюрократической системы на внешний стимул бывают совершенно непредсказуемыми :)

Здесь еще более интересно. Бюрократия НАСА действует внутри другой не менее крутой бюрократии: бюджетно-финансовой федеральной.  :)

Так что турбулентность возникнет на всем уровне. А вот будет ли она достаточной мощной, что бы система совершила бифуркацию - это вопрос вопросов.  :roll:  :D

На бифуркацию не потянет, имхо. Вероятность ее очень невелика. Хотя и не нулевая.

PS Хотя самое интересное тут вот в чем: что произойдет скорее, встраиваение СпейсЭкса в имеющуюся структуру или смена трендов и изменение этой самой структуры.
Вероятности, имхо, где-то 70/30 - но при условии, что Дракон слетает без проблем.

PPS Жаль только, что в России никакой смены в обозримом будущем не предвидится. Тут высота потенциального барьера запредельная, ничего его не сломает.

Я ставлю на возникновение параллельной частной структуры. И вероятность ее возникновения сейчас порядка семидесяти процентов, и намного меньше зависит от единичных неудач, даже полный крах Маска не ставит на ней крест. Просто на несколько лет сдвинутся сроки. Причина проста - в такой структуре денег будет на порядки больше, чем в карманах государственных космических агентств.

З.Ы.
На счет России - согласен.

ЦитироватьВы сказали то, что сказали. Какие у сказанного основания?
Или это просто слова, без мыслей за ними?

ЦитироватьТо есть, по вашему, двух испытательных полетов Фалькона9 не было? Не было так же одного испытательного полета Дракона?

Роман, перестаньте тупить.

Цитироватьresult = null;

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ ставлю на возникновение параллельной частной структуры. И вероятность ее возникновения сейчас порядка семидесяти процентов, и намного меньше зависит от единичных неудач, даже полный крах Маска не ставит на ней крест. Просто на несколько лет сдвинутся сроки. Причина проста - в такой структуре денег будет на порядки больше, чем в карманах государственных космических агентств.

Не в этой жизни, увы. Государство современного типа никогда на такое не пойдет. На данный момент максимум - если в иерархию НАСА будет встроено "активное звено", которое будет его тормошить и не давать только имитировать деятельность.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы сказали то, что сказали. Какие у сказанного основания?
Или это просто слова, без мыслей за ними?

Извиняюсь, Вы когда нибудь программированием занимались, хоть чуть чуть? Я сказал все четко и в соответствии с реальностью

ЦитироватьТ.е. нет входных данных для вычисления надежности.

result = null;

Цитировать"Правило Лопиталя очень широко применяется для вычисления пределов, когда имеет место неопределенность вида ноль делить на ноль , бесконечность делить на бесконечность." То есть один предел нам известен - ноль.

Тогда почему учитывается только один предел функции? Было проведено два испытательных полета, в обоих программа выполнена полностью, то есть второй предел - 100% или ровно единица.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТо есть, по вашему, двух испытательных полетов Фалькона9 не было? Не было так же одного испытательного полета Дракона?

При чем тут это? Вы же сказали про пилотируемый полет Маска, который Вы на его месте организовали бы в 2014 году. Т.е. ни одного пилотируемого полета не было. Т.е. нет входных данных для вычисления надежности.

Цитироватьresult = null;

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ ставлю на возникновение параллельной частной структуры. И вероятность ее возникновения сейчас порядка семидесяти процентов, и намного меньше зависит от единичных неудач, даже полный крах Маска не ставит на ней крест. Просто на несколько лет сдвинутся сроки. Причина проста - в такой структуре денег будет на порядки больше, чем в карманах государственных космических агентств.

Не в этой жизни, увы. Государство современного типа никогда на такое не пойдет. На данный момент максимум - если в иерархию НАСА будет встроено "активное звено", которое будет его тормошить и не давать только имитировать деятельность.

А вот это посмотрим. Если бы мы говорили о России, то я бы с вами был согласен. Но, насколько я понимаю, в Штатах есть политическое согласие у обоих ведущих партий, что можно пустить частников в космос. Препятствовать им, по большому счету, может только бюрократия, и вот здесь между Россией и Штатами определяющая разница - в штатах бюрократия все таки подчинена обществу, и в прямую бессмысленное наматывание витков как стратегическую цель себе поставить не сможет. Работать внутри НАСА частники не смогут, и у Штатов (как и у дореволюционной России, да и многих других государств) есть опыт выхода из этого противоречия. Поэтому я ставлю на возникновение некой государственно-частной корпорации, типа "Русско-Американской Компании". А возникновение такой структуры неминуемо вызовет бифукацию и изменение состояния.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТ.е. нет входных данных для вычисления надежности.

result = null;

Я все еще жду ответа, но на всякий случай - если вы считаете, что у неиспользовавшегося устройства надежность равна нулю - вы ошибаетесь.

ЦитироватьЯ преподаю теорию надежности. Программирую с 89-го года.

Цитироватьиз статистики пусков:

0 успешных полётов / 0 полётов = никакая надёжность :D

ЦитироватьВалерий, а каково ваше образование? Что вы закончили и по какой специальности?

ЦитироватьЯ Вам уже ответил. Чего тут непонятного ума не приложу?  У неиспользовавшегося устройства может бы не равна нулю расчетная  надежность, а если Вы внимательно читали нашу дискусcию, то должны были обратить внимание, что я говортл про фактическую  надежность. Так понятно?

ЦитироватьНо, насколько я понимаю, в Штатах есть политическое согласие у обоих ведущих партий, что можно пустить частников в космос.

ЦитироватьПрепятствовать им, по большому счету, может только бюрократия,

ЦитироватьПоэтому я ставлю на возникновение некой государственно-частной корпорации, типа "Русско-Американской Компании". А возникновение такой структуры неминуемо вызовет бифукацию и изменение состояния.

ЦитироватьНо, насколько я понимаю, в Штатах есть политическое согласие у обоих ведущих партий, что можно пустить частников в космос.

Цитироватьтеоретические пределы надежности.

Цитироватьравным нулю, я, со своим опытом начала программирования

ЦитироватьПоэтому, если у Романа, при отсутствии исходных данных результат его расчета получился определенным и равным нулю, я, со своим опытом начала программирования в начале восьмидесятых (хотя никогда не программировал профессионально) могу утверждать, что в его программе - ошибка.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВалерий, а каково ваше образование? Что вы закончили и по какой специальности?

Старый, я вам открою еще одну тайну. Уже давно определены теоретические пределы надежности.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ Вам уже ответил. Чего тут непонятного ума не приложу?  У неиспользовавшегося устройства может бы не равна нулю расчетная  надежность, а если Вы внимательно читали нашу дискусcию, то должны были обратить внимание, что я говортл про фактическую  надежность. Так понятно?

Фактическая надежность при отсутствии статистики никак не может быть определенной.

Никакая = неопределенная, не равна нулю.

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТ.е. нет входных данных для вычисления надежности.
result = null;

Я все еще жду ответа, но на всякий случай - если вы считаете, что у неиспользовавшегося устройства надежность равна нулю - вы ошибаетесь.

Я Вам уже ответил. Чего тут непонятного ума не приложу?  У неиспользовавшегося устройства может бы не равна нулю расчетная  надежность, а если Вы внимательно читали нашу дискусcию, то должны были обратить внимание, что я говортл про фактическую  надежность. Так понятно?

Цитировать

Цитироватьтеоретические пределы надежности.

А ничего что на "теоретический предел надёжности" у гугля всего 4 ссылки?

Цитироватьравным нулю, я, со своим опытом начала программирования

Ню-ню. В предыдущем сообщении я Вам расшифровал. Непонятно?  :D

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ преподаю теорию надежности. Программирую с 89-го года.

Вы преподаете теорию, а я практику  :) Т.е. тестирую и пока не проверю весь функционал, включая системное тестирование, для меня фактичекая надежность равна нулю (точнее, ее не существует).

ЦитироватьКакая разница сколько раз летал Фалькон? Какая разница сколько раз летал тестовый Драгон? Пока они не проведут полную цепочку ПИЛОТИРУЕМОГО полета на Драгоне о фактической надежности можно говорить, что она НЕОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.

Цитироватьиз статистики пусков:

0 успешных полётов / 0 полётов = никакая надёжность :D

ЦитироватьВы не ответили ничего.
Но одно место меня позабавило. Что такое "фактическая надежность"? Честно говоря, первый раз слышу (про практику трясти пузом не надо, слава богу, работал я и с Сичем, и в Реутово, и еще много где. Нигде не слышал про такой вид надежности).

ЦитироватьВот и попробуй ему что нибудь объяснить...
 Валерий, вам сколько раз уже повторили что в США уже лет 20 как все ракеты-носители и их запуски частные?

Цитировать

Цитироватьиз статистики пусков:

0 успешных полётов / 0 полётов = никакая надёжность :D

А это что за формула, извините?
Внешне напоминает что-то статистическое, но статистика в случае, когда не произведен статистический эксперимент не применяется. В принципе.

Цитировать

Цитироватьтеоретические пределы надежности.

А ничего что на "теоретический предел надёжности" у гугля всего 4 ссылки?

Цитировать

Цитироватьравным нулю, я, со своим опытом начала программирования

Ню-ню. В предыдущем сообщении я Вам расшифровал. Непонятно?  :D

ЦитироватьТо есть может быть любой в пределах диапазона изменения. В случае надежности - от 0 до 1.

ЦитироватьВы это расскажите Валерию.  :D
Интересно, как Вы преподаёте надёжность, если ни разу не сказали что надёжность - это комплексный показатель, а Вы всё это время говорите надёжность вместо вероятности безотказной работы.
К тому же фактическая надёжность как термин применяется. Если есть теоретическая/расчётная, то должно быть практическое/достигнутое значение.

ЦитироватьВы не ответили ничего.
Но одно место меня позабавило. Что такое "фактическая надежность"? Честно говоря, первый раз слышу (про практику трясти пузом не надо, слава богу, работал я и с Сичем, и в Реутово, и еще много где. Нигде не слышал про такой вид надежности).

ЦитироватьМежконтинентальная баллистическая ракета Р-36М УТТХ
Ракетного комплекса стационарного базирования 15П018. Создание в СССР в 1970-х гг. межконтинентальной баллистической ракеты (МБР) третьего поколения явилось продолжением ответных мер на резкое увеличение США числа боевых блоков (ББ) в группировках межконтинентальных баллистических ракет (МБР) и атомных подводных лодок с баллистическими ракетами (ПЛАРБ), повышение боевых и эксплуатационных характеристик ракетных комплексов (РК) стратегического назначения. Разработка ракетного комплекса проводилась в Государственном конструкторском бюро «Южное» имени академика М.К. Янгеля (г. Днепропетровск) под руководством академика Уткина В.Ф. в соответствии с Постановлением ЦК и СМ СССР от 16.08.1976 в рамках реализации программы совершенствования и повышения боевой эффективности разработанного ранее РК 15П014. Летные испытания ракеты Р-36М УТТХ проводились на 5 НИИП Министерства обороны (Байконур) с 31.10.1977 по 27.11.1979. Всего проведено 62 пуска, из них 56 - успешных. Фактическая полетная надежность ракеты с учетом доработок на этапе летных испытаний и обеспечением качества изготовления составляет 0,965

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы не ответили ничего.
Но одно место меня позабавило. Что такое "фактическая надежность"? Честно говоря, первый раз слышу (про практику трясти пузом не надо, слава богу, работал я и с Сичем, и в Реутово, и еще много где. Нигде не слышал про такой вид надежности).

Вы программист и не знаете что такое непроинициализированная переменная?  :shock:
Вы препод по надежности и не знаете что такое фактическая надежность и даже не слышали про такое?  :shock:

 Farakh, Вы либо ацкий тролль, либо непонимаете что несете

ЦитироватьПовторяю, если мы говорим о достигнутой фактической надежности, то придется признать, что у Фалькона9 и Дракона она пока равна единице.

ЦитироватьНо Роман сказал, что значение определено и равно нулю.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВы не ответили ничего.
Но одно место меня позабавило. Что такое "фактическая надежность"? Честно говоря, первый раз слышу (про практику трясти пузом не надо, слава богу, работал я и с Сичем, и в Реутово, и еще много где. Нигде не слышал про такой вид надежности).

Где где Вы работали?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПоэтому я ставлю на возникновение некой государственно-частной корпорации, типа "Русско-Американской Компании". А возникновение такой структуры неминуемо вызовет бифукацию и изменение состояния.

Нет. Бифуркация возможно в том случае, если в каких-то элементах системы накапливается нескомпенсированное напряжение. Накапливается энергия, которая не находит выхода в рамках существующей структуры.
Ничего подобного пока не наблюдается.
На кризис уповать не стоит - его результатом будет не усложнение а упрощение системы.

ЦитироватьБля, опять попался.

ЦитироватьКомиссия под председательством академика В.Ф. Уткина, исследовавшая причины аварии РН "Протон" 27 октября 1999 г., констатировала, что фактическая надежность двигателей РД-0210, рассчитанная по результатам стендовых и летных испытаний, составляет 0,9967 с учетом двух последних аварий. Этот показатель существенно превышает требования технического задания - не менее 0,99

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПоэтому я ставлю на возникновение некой государственно-частной корпорации, типа "Русско-Американской Компании". А возникновение такой структуры неминуемо вызовет бифукацию и изменение состояния.

Нет. Бифуркация возможно в том случае, если в каких-то элементах системы накапливается нескомпенсированное напряжение. Накапливается энергия, которая не находит выхода в рамках существующей структуры.
Ничего подобного пока не наблюдается.
На кризис уповать не стоит - его результатом будет не усложнение а упрощение системы.

Ну, некомпенсированная энергия накапливается, но пока себя почти не проявляет. Отсюда "Гибкий путь" и поиски "Новой Границы". Или "Преодоления Пределов", устоявшегося русского термина/понятия пока не существует. Я не говорю, что переход состоится одномоментно, я предполагаю, что будет создана государственно-частная компания.

ЦитироватьНигде и никогда, что при теоретическом, что при практическом исследовании в надежности не используются аналоги программистских "неинициализированных переменных"

ЦитироватьЕсли нам нужно что-то, описывающее надежность, то мы либо смотрим имеющуюся статистику (только не в том виде, в каком вы тут ее испльзуете, это не надежность, а частота), либо производим расчеты, а чаще всего - используем и то и другое - дополняем теоретическую модель имеющейся статистикой. Если статистики нет - считаем только по моделям, опрашиваем экспертов и т.п., по всему этому что-то строим.

ЦитироватьЕдинственное, что сейчас можно сказать о надежности пилотируемого Дракона - что она нам неизвестна. Что не является синонимом "нулевая", так как "нулевая надежность" есть конкретная оценка.

ЦитироватьPS В надежности вы не понимаете ни хрена

ЦитироватьИтак, какое значение у нас будет иметь неинициализированная переменная, описанная, скажем, как double? Неужто нулевое?

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьБля, опять попался.

Вы действительно очередной раз попались и кроме надувания щёк опять за Вами ничего не осталось.

ЦитироватьТо, что уже начали передёргивать кто что сказал в начале NULL дискуссии Вас не красит. Как раз в неуместное теоретизирование полезли Вы, а в обывательском понимании всё всё давно уже поняли.

ЦитироватьНо раз Вы упорствуете, я поясню:
К слову, обычно я все переменные при объявлении инициализирую в нулевые значения. Так что в ячейке отведённой под фактическую надёжность (хотя операция деления не проводилась из-за знаменателя равным 0) будет лежать значение 0.0.

Цитироватьи до кучи:

ЦитироватьPS В надежности вы не понимаете ни хрена. Но что-то меня и ваши программистские скиллы начали веселить. Итак, какое значение у нас будет иметь неинициализированная переменная, описанная, скажем, как double? Неужто нулевое?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Какое такое?

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Какое такое?

Частное. Принадлежащее частному лицу, управляемое частным лицом в частных интересах частного лица.

ЦитироватьБифуркация - это именно "одномоментно". Для нее нет предпосылок.

ЦитироватьГосударственно-частной компании скорее всего не будет. Будет НАСА, как рулящий на космическом бюджете, будут его обычные контрагенты, ну и появится некоторая совокупность новых игроков, которые создадут в некоторых областях конкуренцию. Вот эта конкуренция и может чего-то нибудь сотворить. Но только эволюционно.

ЦитироватьА может и не сотворить - раздадут длинные контракты, и конкуренция умрет не родившись. Для НАСА это удобнее.

ЦитироватьА новые горизонты и т.п. - это все в рамках старой парадигмы.

ЦитироватьЛВР сказал, что надежность Дракона равна нулю

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНу а сказать я хочу лишь то, что корабли от РККЭ летают к МКС сейчас (и в планах на ближайшие годы) чаще любых других. И попробуйте это опровергнуть.

Значит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:

ЦитироватьВот как я сказал:

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ!  :wink:

ЦитироватьИзвиняюсь, что возвращаюсь. Чисто, чтоб посмеяться

ЦитироватьНет, ничего не осталось. Я могу вам лишь рукоплескать - как быстро вы меня разоблачили!

ЦитироватьВот на всех экзаменах это слышу.

ЦитироватьЛВР сказал, что надежность Дракона равна нулю. Потом начал выкручиваться - ссылаться на NULL, поминать неинициализированные переменные и т.п.

ЦитироватьНо у сказанной им фразы есть ровно один смысл

ЦитироватьБлин, это уже укатайка. ЛВР говорит о "неинициализированных" переменных, вы же рассказываете о чем?

ЦитироватьЯ не сомневаюсь, что если вбить в поисковик "Фактическая надежность", то много что вывалится. Поэтому спросил - что это значит? Что вы под этим понимаете?
 Формула, которую вы привели (и которая противоречит вашей "инициализации") есть формула частоты. К надежности она имеет очень далекое отношение.
 Так что?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНигде и никогда, что при теоретическом, что при практическом исследовании в надежности не используются аналоги программистских "неинициализированных переменных"

А я это и не утверждал, специально привел как аналогия и пояснил , т.к. Валерий позиционирует себя как спец по компьютерам.

ЦитироватьСтранные у Вас мечты. Вы грезите мечтой, что бы какой нибудь частник как можно быстрей построил за свой счет свою частную ракету и сбил ей МКС?

ЦитироватьВы хотите сказать, что у космического корабля с показателями надежности под 100% больше шансов сбить МКС чем у космического корабля, который вообще пока не имеет фактической надежности?

ЦитироватьЗначит у космических кораблей от SpaceX надежность НУЛЬ

ЦитироватьВот по Драгону и опрашивайте экспертов и стройте теоретические модели, а сравнивать с летающими изделиями будете, когда получите статистику

ЦитироватьНо я не написал - фактическая надежность ноль, а написал - фактическая надежность НУЛЬ и привел пояснение, что NULL означает в программировании. Вам сколько раз надо повторять?

ЦитироватьБуагага! И это сказал человек, который никогда не слышал про фактическую надежность

Цитировать

ЦитироватьИтак, какое значение у нас будет иметь неинициализированная переменная, описанная, скажем, как double? Неужто нулевое?

NULL будет указатель на переменную типа double.
Farakh, Вы уводите тему в сторону.

ЦитироватьВам не надоело вытаскивать в очередной раз Валерия, когда его окунули в лужицу?

ЦитироватьНеужели не понятно, что некорректно сравнивать в части фактической надежности Драгон, который не совершил ни одного пилотируемого полета к МКС и КК Союз?

ЦитироватьЭто Вы типа на обывательском языке? Ну так и с Вами здесь точно также.
Так то - что летало НОЛЬ драконов и из них НОЛЬ успешных.
Что не так?

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Какое такое?

Частное. Принадлежащее частному лицу, управляемое частным лицом в частных интересах частного лица.

И делающее грузовые космический корабли по заказу государственной конторы, да так, что все коммерческие заказы идут лесом :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьБифуркация - это именно "одномоментно". Для нее нет предпосылок.

Про "одномоментно" - согласен, а про отсутствие предпосылок - нет. Без предпосылок ни одна бифукация не состоится.

ЦитироватьКоль Вы программист могли бы и догадаться, а для тех кто не понял я там пояснил.

ЦитироватьFarakh, не нервничайте Вы так. Сходите чайку попейте  :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьИзвиняюсь, что возвращаюсь. Чисто, чтоб посмеяться

Точно! Посмеяться над собой - это правильно.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНет, ничего не осталось. Я могу вам лишь рукоплескать - как быстро вы меня разоблачили!

Причём здесь я? У Вас это и своими руками хорошо получается.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот на всех экзаменах это слышу.

А здесь разве экзамен?

ЦитироватьВы же только что были против чтобы Вас экзаменовали. А вот других экзаменовать - Вы это - щёки то сдуйте.
А то влезли блистать, но что-то впечатление тусклое.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЛВР сказал, что надежность Дракона равна нулю. Потом начал выкручиваться - ссылаться на NULL, поминать неинициализированные переменные и т.п.

И тут Вы влезли, поблестеть.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьНо у сказанной им фразы есть ровно один смысл

Да! И смысл один - пилотируемый Дракон ещё не летал. А Вы какой смыл увидели?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьБлин, это уже укатайка. ЛВР говорит о "неинициализированных" переменных, вы же рассказываете о чем?

Именно укатайка, ибо я это Вам пояснял как тупому студенту.

ЦитироватьА Вы как ни крутитесь, результат то по пилотируемому Дракону всё равно никакой. Думаете после Вашего теоретизирований на тему надёжности у Дракона результат появился?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПоэтому спросил - что это значит? Что вы под этим понимаете?
 Формула, которую вы привели (и которая противоречит вашей "инициализации") есть формула частоты. К надежности она имеет очень далекое отношение.
 Так что?

Вы меня экзаменуете? :D  :D
Я Вам в самом начале сказал - что непрофессионально упоминаете термин надёжность. Это Вы типа на обывательском языке? Ну так и с Вами здесь точно также.

ЦитироватьТак то - что летало НОЛЬ драконов и из них НОЛЬ успешных.
Что не так?

ЦитироватьРебят, вам не надоело кирпичами то?

такое ощущение, что собралась стая закомплексованных пубаритатных юнцов и гнут пальцы друг перед другом. и так в каждой теме.

новости, блин, космонавтики

сразу становится понятно, почему отечественная космонавтика, да и другие высокотехнологичные отрасли в полной ... ну там где они есть.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Какое такое?

Частное. Принадлежащее частному лицу, управляемое частным лицом в частных интересах частного лица.

И делающее грузовые космический корабли по заказу государственной конторы, да так, что все коммерческие заказы идут лесом :)

Ну да. А что?

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьВот СпэйсИкс - компания частная, и это реально первый случай, когда такое вот экономическое образование делает что-то, летающее в космос.

Какое такое?

Частное. Принадлежащее частному лицу, управляемое частным лицом в частных интересах частного лица.

И делающее грузовые космический корабли по заказу государственной конторы, да так, что все коммерческие заказы идут лесом :)

Ну да. А что?

А то, что работает СпейсИкс полностью в системе, не забывает даже притормозить других частников, которые давно бы уже хотели наконец запустить свои спутники на девятом фалконе.

Цитироватьps: По поводу Вашего заявления: Один успешный запуск = надежность 100% спасибо посмеялся

Цитировать1. Насчет "не смог понять" - сказано сильно. То, что сказано - я, кажется, понял верно. Вот контекст - да, игнорировал совершенно сознательно

ЦитироватьМне было страшно интересно посмотреть, насколько далеко вы зайдете в отстаивании своей правоты

ЦитироватьНу и попутно - насколько важен для вас Валерий, насколько важно вам самоутвердится за его счет

Цитировать2. Насчет "фактической" - благодарю за веселье. Разговор-то можно продолжить - вы, вроде как, поприветствовали приведенную Фронтмом формулу частоты и сказали, что это именно она. Теперь вспомнили об ЭН. Это разные вещи, заметьте. И вы так ничего и не сказали о ФН, так что про "аналогичность" ничего не могу сказать.

ЦитироватьЗа все, что говорю - отвечаю. Я действительно не знаю, что такое ФН, никогда не использовал этот термин, никогда с ним не сталкивался

ЦитироватьВыберите что-то одно - надежность Дракона не определена, или надежность Дракона описывается понятием NULL. В первом случае соглашусь (с учетом того, что ТВМ есть, просто дает достаточно сильный разброс), во втором буду задавать вопросы.

ЦитироватьЗакругляться - как знаете, но это здорово напоминает слив. Ибо на мои вопросы вы отвечать отказываетесь, мою компетенцию подвергаете сомнению, ну и еще по мелочи.

ЦитироватьДа и не флуд это - или вы и впрямь считаете, что наш, хоть в какой-то мере технический разговор менее соответствует теме, чем ваше "опускание" Валерия?

Цитировать

Цитироватьps: По поводу Вашего заявления: Один успешный запуск = надежность 100% спасибо посмеялся

Я не делал таких заявлений :) Я посчитал ФН по формуле Фронтма, которую вы одобрили. А?

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПро "одномоментно" - согласен, а про отсутствие предпосылок - нет. Без предпосылок ни одна бифукация не состоится.

Ну, я и написал, что предпосылок для нее нет.

Поживем - увидим, конечно, но в отель я пока не очень верю. Не сейчас. Как раз по таким планам кризис и стукнул более всего.

ЦитироватьВот и вся суть.

ЦитироватьНу, и, посмотрели?

ЦитироватьА вот этого не надо.

ЦитироватьЧто такое ФН понятно из названия, она рассчитывается на основании результатов экспериментов.

Цитироватькогда поимеем статистику тестирования системы в целом, что то более серьезное о ФН пилотируемой системе Драгон можно будет говорить после 10 запусков, когда наберется приемлемая статистика.
На этом пока прервусь

ЦитироватьА я сталкивался. Может это и не ГОСТированный термин, но в общении с техническими специалистами, в том числе и в переписке, этот термин используется.

ЦитироватьВо первых, оставляю за собой право использовать оба определения в комплексе.
Во вторых, по поводу "буду задавать вопросы" ... "Вы меня экзаменовать собрались?"

ЦитироватьОпять же, я через пару сообщений отметил, что Вы вступились в бой за честь Валерия

ЦитироватьКаждый единичный эксперимент так и оценивается, но ценность исследования в количестве экспериментов, поэтому с каждым экспериментом значение ФН уточняется.

ЦитироватьСобсно есть две формулы для разных ситуаций.
1 формула - расчет коэфициента надежности для нелетавших и новых
2 формула - расчет коэфициента надежности для летавших и неновых по статистике.
Так вот.
Дракон надо считать по первой формуле пока он не наберет статистику.
Союз надо считать по второй.

Цитироватьэксплуатационной надежности (после долгого размышления я думаю, что этот показатель ближе всего к вашей "фактической").

ЦитироватьНо только потому, что эксплуатации пока не было.

ЦитироватьА сравнивать - почему нет? Не вижу, что этому может помешать.

ЦитироватьЯ сам делал сравнение надежности узлов СУ-27 (это ТВВД к Ан-70) с аналогами, хотя он тогда только на стенде испытывался.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьЯ Вам в самом начале сказал - что непрофессионально упоминаете термин надёжность

Опять не понял. То есть такого термина не существует? Или у него нет значения? Или?

ЦитироватьНапомню - вы ведь сами взялись отвечать, я к вам-то не обращался.

ЦитироватьДа вот вы понимаете, из этого, в частности, следует, что если будет ОДИН полет, и из них ОДИН успешный, то "фактическая" надежность Дракона будет выше, чем у всех прочих космических кораблей.  Или не так?

ЦитироватьЕсли честно - меня совершенно не устраивает ситуация, когда научные термины, у которых есть вполне строгое значение начинают использовать абы как.

ЦитироватьА как считается самое первое значение ФН?

ЦитироватьТак и запишем - предполагаемая надежность Дракона находится в интервале от 0 до 1. ))

ЦитироватьFrontm, вы ответьте честно - с какой целью вы все это пишете?

ЦитироватьРазоблачить меня хотите - типа, я ничего не знаю, но влез "щеки понадувать"?

Цитироватьслишком просто с одной стороны - пока я с вами не соглашаюсь, я буду профаном, так как для вас критерий - это согласие с вашей точой зрения; с другой стороны для вас неподъемно - я не вьюнош с горящим взором, вам ничего доказывать не буду.

ЦитироватьДоказать, что ЛВР прав?

ЦитироватьОн сам уже признал, что нет такого термина, что надежность у Дракона не нулевая, что статистика полетов нужна не для определения надежности, а для ее уточнения.

ЦитироватьВы-то что воюете?

ЦитироватьБольше и варинтов-то в голову не приходит.

ЦитироватьPS В чем проблема (не моя). Я давно представился, можно поискать по Инету - кто я, чем занимаюсь, что делаю.

ЦитироватьВы - абсолютный NULL в том плане, что можете представиться хоть академиком.

ЦитироватьСкажите - кто вы, чем занимаетесь. Хотя бы в личке.

ЦитироватьА то пока похоже на человека, который погуглил, ну и с этих позиций чего-то пытается сказать в довольно профессиональной области.

ЦитироватьЯ сказал, что приведенная вами формула - это формула частоты. Из математической статистики - в числителе количество событий, в знаменателе - общее количество опытов.

ЦитироватьПро то, что это функция времени - повеселили :))))

ЦитироватьНапомню ваше же:
0 успешных полётов / 0 полётов
Это - функция времени? Напомню, что именно ее я и назвал статистической функцией частоты.

ЦитироватьВаша квалификация несколько... блекнет.

ЦитироватьКонечно то, что вы так легко меня разоблачили (кстати, а на чем я там попался? Что сказал слово надежность, не упомянув то, что это комплексный показатель?)

Цитироватьставит вас неизмеримо выше меня, надувающего щеки, но вам так валиться тож не стоит :)

ЦитироватьWolf's "Reconfigured" Commercial Crew: Less Money, Less Competition, More Regulation[/size]
on April 20, 2012, at 3:15 pm

By Douglas Messier
Parabolic Arc Managing Editor

We now know what the House has in mind for NASA's "reconfigured" commercial crew program. I'll let Rep. Frank Wolf, chairman of the House's Science subcommittee, explain in his own inimitable way:

    Commercial Crew development is funded at $500 million, consistent with the current authorization and the report accompanying the House Budget Resolution.  In light of limited budgets and the need to find the fastest, safest and most cost effective means of achieving a U.S. capability for access to the International Space Station, the bill directs NASA to winnow the commercial partners and advance the schedule for moving to traditional government procurement methods.

So, the House's "fastest, safest and most cost effective" approach can be summed up as follows:

    Slash $350 million from the President's request so NASA doesn't have enough money to do the program the way it wants
    Use the lack of funds to force NASA to down select earlier than it wants, thus limiting competition that will keep prices down
    Require NASA to use traditional government procurement methods as soon as possible, which will likely raise costs even further.

I think I get where Wolf is coming from here. Slashing the funds is a sign that you're being "cost effective" with the people's money and not wasting it on unnecessary competition. (And it frees up money for really cost effective projects the Space Launch System.) If the space agency continues to run the program as planned, the schedule will slip ever further to the right, which would be NASA's fault for not using the "fastest" approach. And "safest" is using the government's traditional procurement methods because...we're the Congress and that's how we roll.

Of course, eliminating competition too early and moving too quickly to traditional acquisition methods could well harm the "cost effective" part of the plan. Whatever Congress saves through its annual butchering of the commercial crew budget and its interference in the program might well get added to the costs later on.

Not that this ever seems to bother anyone in Congress. Sen. Barbara Mikulski recently questioned whether we should be spending money on commercial crew given how badly the schedule had slipped even though Congress's budget cuts had caused the delay and left us paying ever more to the Russians for crew transport. Alas, it is useless to point out these contradictions to our elected officials for Capitol Hill is truly an irony-free zone.[/size]

Цитировать

ЦитироватьСобсно есть две формулы для разных ситуаций.
1 формула - расчет коэфициента надежности для нелетавших и новых
2 формула - расчет коэфициента надежности для летавших и неновых по статистике.
Так вот.
Дракон надо считать по первой формуле пока он не наберет статистику.
Союз надо считать по второй.

Лев, вы серьезно?! Это две разные формулы?
Извините за некоторый налет "экзамена", но еще пара вопросов:
Какова будет надежность нового модифицированного Союза? И какова - у корабля, который создан и собран в другой стране, но использует узлы и конструкторские решения, уже опробованные на Союзе?

ЦитироватьИзвините за некоторый налет "экзамена"

ЦитироватьCool Blue Origin Engine Picture[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on April 22, 2012, at 9:18 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24226.jpg)
NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center NASA Administrator Charles Bolden (r) discusses the upcoming testing of Blue Origin's BE-3 engine thrust chamber assembly with Steve Knowles, Blue Origin project manager, on the E-1 Test Stand TODAY at NASA's Stennis Space Center. The BE-3 will be used on Blue Origin's reusable launch vehicle as part of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program. Blue Origin is one of NASA's partners developing innovative systems to reach low Earth orbit.
NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center:  NASA Administrator Charles Bolden (r) discusses the upcoming testing of Blue Origin's BE-3 engine thrust chamber assembly with Steve Knowles, Blue Origin project manager, on the E-1 Test Stand at NASA's Stennis Space Center. The BE-3 will be used on Blue Origin's reusable launch vehicle as part of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program. Blue Origin is one of NASA's partners developing innovative systems to reach low Earth orbit.[/size]

ЦитироватьBoeing Signs Agreement with JSC for Mission Planning, Training and Flight Ops[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on April 21, 2012, at 2:59 pm

HOUSTON (Boeing PR) – Boeing has signed an agreement with NASA's Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) at Johnson Space Center to collaborate on mission planning, training and flight operations for the company's Commercial Space Transportation (CST)-100 spacecraft.

Under the new arrangement, which Boeing negotiated under its current Phase 2 NASA Space Act Agreement for Commercial Crew Development, Boeing will begin discussions with the MOD on integrating launch operations and the company's own mission control facility at Kennedy Space Center, Fla., with training and real-time operations at Johnson Space Center in Houston.

"Adding MOD to our team leverages NASA's experience in crewed space operations to ensure mission success for our CST-100 spacecraft," said Chris Ferguson, director of Crew and Mission Operations for the Boeing Commercial Crew Program. "As we continue to mature our spacecraft design, MOD technical support will ensure the CST-100 is built with the operators in mind."

Later this year, Boeing intends to enter into a larger agreement with the MOD to provide end-to-end flight operations from the command and control facility in the Mission Control Center at Johnson Space Center, the site where NASA managed the Apollo missions and all 135 flights of the space shuttle.

"Colocating initial CST-100 flight operations with the International Space Station flight control facility in the Mission Control Center will facilitate a seamless transition to regularly scheduled CST-100 operations with the space station," Ferguson said. "Working with MOD on Boeing's mission operations also will help NASA retain key proficiencies for future human spaceflight operations."

The CST-100 is a reusable capsule-shaped spacecraft based on flight-proven subsystems and mature technologies. The system can transport up to seven people, or a combination of people and cargo. Boeing has designed the spacecraft to be compatible with a variety of expendable rockets to enable competition and reduce cost over the program life cycle. The company has selected United Launch Alliance's Atlas V launch vehicle for initial test flights that will begin as early as 2015.

Boeing is continuing to develop the system design at its Houston and Huntington Beach, Calif., sites and is making preparations to manufacture, assemble and test the CST-100 spacecraft in the former Orbiter Processing Facility-3 at Kennedy Space Center.

Boeing's Commercial Crew Program includes the design, manufacture, test and evaluation, and demonstration of an integrated Commercial Crew Transportation System — comprised of the CST-100 spacecraft, launch vehicle, and ground and mission operations for NASA's Commercial Crew Development program. The Boeing system will provide crewed flights to the International Space Station and also support the Bigelow Aerospace orbital space complex. The program is based on Boeing's experience and innovation evolved from more than 50 years of human spaceflight and nearly 100 years of commercial aviation.

A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world's largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $32 billion business with 62,000 employees worldwide. Follow us on Twitter: @BoeingDefense.[/size]

Цитироватьhttp://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/04/22/cool-blue-origin-engine-picture/

ЦитироватьCool Blue Origin Engine Picture[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on April 22, 2012, at 9:18 am

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24226.jpg)
NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center NASA Administrator Charles Bolden (r) discusses the upcoming testing of Blue Origin's BE-3 engine thrust chamber assembly with Steve Knowles, Blue Origin project manager, on the E-1 Test Stand TODAY at NASA's Stennis Space Center. The BE-3 will be used on Blue Origin's reusable launch vehicle as part of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program. Blue Origin is one of NASA's partners developing innovative systems to reach low Earth orbit.
NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center:  NASA Administrator Charles Bolden (r) discusses the upcoming testing of Blue Origin's BE-3 engine thrust chamber assembly with Steve Knowles, Blue Origin project manager, on the E-1 Test Stand at NASA's Stennis Space Center. The BE-3 will be used on Blue Origin's reusable launch vehicle as part of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program. Blue Origin is one of NASA's partners developing innovative systems to reach low Earth orbit.[/size]

ЦитироватьLanding Is A Variable In NASA Commercial Crew Choice[/size]
By Frank Morring, Jr.
Source: Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/65926.jpg)
April 20 , 2012

COLORADO SPRINGS — NASA managers looking for at least two commercial vehicles to take crews to the International Space Station have a choice of techniques for returning astronauts to Earth, from parachute landings on land to a gliding touchdown on a runway.

As they consider system-level proposals for the third phase of the Commercial Crew Program, known as Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap), space agency evaluators are pondering the eventual use of propulsive vertical landing proposed by Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and perhaps the secretive Blue Origin LLC.

Also on the table are the Boeing and Sierra Nevada entries presented at the National Space Symposium here this week, and an as-yet-undisclosed entry by ATK/Astrium based on the proposed Liberty Rocket.

Boeing and Sierra Nevada both plan to use the Atlas V to launch their crew vehicles. The similarity stops there, and landing is a big difference. Boeing's CST-100 capsule will ride parachutes to an airbag-cushioned land landing at one of three sites in the continental U.S., while the Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser can return to a runway landing pretty much anywhere there's 10,000 ft. of tarmac.

"We've got three parachutes; there's six airbags," says John Mulholland, vice president and manager of Commercial Programs for Boeing Space Exploration. "So we'll be dual-fault tolerant with that system. Under a normal landing, it'll be around four or five gs, so it's really low loads on landing. But we are able to have a single parachute and a single parachute out."

Inside the capsule, the crew seats are anchored to a "pallet" that sits on struts designed to give if the landing load exceeds 20 gs, Mulholland says. But normally airbags would use a two-stage design to hold the load well below that. "We've got an inner airbag that inflates, and then there's an outer airbag that inflates, and the outer airbags actually have relief valves in them," he says. "So right on landing, at a certain pressure it blows those relief valves, so it relieves that pressure, which takes a lot of the load out, and then it comes to rest on the inner airbags."

Mulholland says his company probably will land first in the desert at White Sands, N.M., and has also picked Edwards AFB, Calif., as a landing site. A third site will be selected later. The capsule also is equipped with flotation devices to turn it upright in case of a water landing after a launch abort or mistargeted re-entry, he says.

Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser maintains the outer mold line of NASA's experimental HL-20 lifting body, outfitted with a hybrid-motor pusher escape system to eject it from its Atlas V in a launcher failure. After that, it would fly a piloted return-to-landing site maneuver and land with about a 2g load on the crew.[/size]

Цитироватьhttp://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2012/04/Press21-660x453.jpg

 Бор ворочается в гробу.

ЦитироватьNASA: Competition at core of commercial crew program[/size]
BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW
Posted: May 2, 2012

NASA managers argued Tuesday a proposal by lawmakers to immediately select a single provider for commercial crew transportation services would undermine the agency's strategy of reducing the cost of space travel through private industry.

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24502.jpg)
File photo of Ed Mango (left) and Brent Jett (right), manager and deputy manager of NASA's commercial crew program. Credit: NASA/KSC
 
Officials are in the middle of evaluating industrial bids for the commercial crew program's next phase, with a goal of selecting at least two companies by August to continue developing rockets and spacecraft for the next two years.

NASA plans to award multiple industry teams each between $300 million and $500 million under agreements set to run until at least May 2014.

But a House budget bill would direct NASA to immediately choose one provider and sign a development contract. The House spending plan provides $500 million to NASA's commercial crew program in fiscal year 2013, which begins Oct. 1.

A Senate appropriations bill gives NASA a $525 million mark for commercial crew, but it does not call for a shift in procurement strategy. Both funding levels are less than NASA's request for $830 million in fiscal 2013.

The Senate and House budgets must pass their respective bodies, and their differences must be sorted out in a conference committee.

This year's commercial crew budget is set at $406 million, about half of NASA's request. The less-than-requested budget caused NASA to adjust its schedule for the start of operational astronaut flights to the space station from 2016 until 2017.

Ed Mango, manager of NASA's commercial crew program, said Tuesday a "downselect" to a sole company could double the cost of fielding a privately-built human transportation system.

"We need competition as long as possible. The price to go with one [provider] starting today, and then all the way through certification and into services, is at least twice what it would be if you had competition at least as long as possible," Mango said.

Mango and other officials spoke with the NASA Advisory Council's commercial space committee Tuesday.

House appropriators wrote an immediate downselect to one commercial crew firm would reduce the program's projected $4.8 billion cost, but NASA officials said such a move would move the cost in the opposite direction.

"If we get narrowed down to one [provider] now, we're kind of back into the same old way of doing business, and that's why a system costs $8 billion to build," said Brent Jett, NASA's deputy program manager for commercial crew.

According to Mango, a budget reduction now would delay the beginning of commercial crew service to the International Space Station, extending U.S. reliance on Russia for astronaut access to space.

Stretching out development would lengthen the gap in U.S. human spaceflight capability and would ultimately make the program more expensive, according to Mango.

"If we did that, then the overall total cost would be more," Mango said. "The area under the curve is going to go up."

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24503.jpg)
NASA astronauts and SpaceX employees in the interior of a mock-up of the Dragon spacecraft, SpaceX's proposed human capsule. Credit: SpaceX/Roger Gilbertson
 
Phil McAlister, head of NASA's commercial spaceflight office in Washington, said the agency has "walked the walk" in its commitment to competition, citing a decision in December to switch from traditional federal government contracts to Space Act Agreements for the program's next phase, known as CCiCap, or Commercial Crew Integrated Capability.

NASA changed to Space Act Agreements because they allow more flexibility to pay multiple companies to continue development with less funding. The agreements also require industry to supply private capital to go toward the effort.

"That [decision] was deliberately because we felt like, with the previous strategy and the previous budget, we might have been forced to only select one [company]," McAlister said.

Mango said competition also encourages innovation, adding partners have put in more private money in previous commercial crew development rounds to accelerate testing in order to obtain a competitive advantage for future bids.

According to McAlister, NASA has not decided how many partners - two, three, or four - it will select for the CCiCap phase, which will fund projects through the completion of designs until the start of qualification testing.

NASA has ongoing funded agreements with Boeing Co., SpaceX, Sierra Nevada Corp., and Blue Origin. The companies expect to complete their milestones under their current agreements this summer, before NASA awards the next round of funding.

Each company is developing a human-rated spacecraft to launch on top of an expendable rocket.

"Competition is in everyone's interests," Mango said. "Going to one [provider] means your price for development, let alone services because we haven't figured that out yet, is probably at least double what it would be if you had at least some competition throughout some phase of the overall development."[/size]

ЦитироватьМОСКВА, 3 мая - РИА Новости. Нынешняя ситуация, когда российские "Союзы" оказались единственным средством доставки экипажей на МКС, является очень рискованной, поэтому Роскосмос надеется на успех разрабатываемых другими агентствами программ, которые могли бы дополнить российские корабли, заявил начальник управления пилотируемых программ Роскосмоса Алексей Краснов.

"Я вам честно скажу, сейчас для меня не самое лучшее время - я живу со всем грузом ответственности за доставку экипажей на МКС, который лежит на нас (РФ - ред.). Иметь только одну систему обеспечения функционирования станции очень-очень рискованно, поэтому я желаю всяческих успехов НАСА или любому другому партнеру по МКС, который захочет дополнить существующие пилотируемые корабли", - сказал Краснов на симпозиуме партнеров по Международной космической станции, который открылся в среду в Берлине.

Ранее запуск пилотируемого "Союза ТМА-04М" с экипажем новой экспедиции на МКС переносился с 30 марта на 15 мая из-за инцидента во время испытаний корабля. Глава Роскосмоса Владимир Поповкин заявлял, что резервные корабли для экстренной доставки на Международную космическую станцию космонавтов или грузов будут готовы к концу будущего года.

Краснов подчеркнул, что иметь как минимум одну "запасную" возможность доставки на станцию грузов и экипажей крайне важно, однако, например, пять и более систем представляются, скорее, "розовой мечтой" космической отрасли.

Российские корабли "Союз" после завершения программы полетов шаттлов в США остаются единственным средством доставки экипажей на МКС. Именно "Союзы" будут возить астронавтов НАСА и агентств-партнеров на МКС и возвращать их обратно на Землю по крайней мере до 2016 года. Соответствующее дополнение к контракту подписали ранее Роскосмос и НАСА.

В начале февраля НАСА открыло третью фазу конкурсного отбора коммерческих компаний, разрабатывающих пилотируемые космические корабли для доставки астронавтов на МКС. В рамках отбора предполагается выделить несколько грантов в размере от 300 до 500 миллионов долларов.

В рамках новой программы Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCIC) разработчики кораблей для доставки астронавтов на околоземную орбиту и, в частности, для полетов на МКС должны будут представить план действий на 21 месяц - от момента выделения гранта до мая 2014 года. За это время нужно представить полностью готовые к работе пилотируемый корабль, ракету-носитель, а также пусковой комплекс и систему управления полетом на земле. Кроме того, НАСА хочет видеть и приблизительный план дальнейших действий, кульминацией которого станет демонстрационный пилотируемый полет на околоземную орбиту.

Частные пилотируемые космические корабли уже разрабатываются победителями первых двух фаз отбора в рамках программы Commercial Crew Development, стартовавшей в 2010 году. За это время компании-разработчики получили в общей сложности более 300 миллионов долларов. Победителями второго раунда отборов стали компании Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada Corporation, SpaceX и Boeing.

ЦитироватьBlue Origin Developing Its Own Launch Vehicle[/size]
By Frank Morring, Jr.
Source: Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

April 30 , 2012

Blue Origin, the secretive spaceflight startup endowed by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, is at work on separate vehicles for two different flight profiles: a suborbital vertical-takeoff-and-landing spacecraft called New Shepard, and a seven-seat orbital capsule so far known only as Space Vehicle.

Brett Alexander, Blue Origin's director of business development and strategy, lifted the curtain a little on the Kent, Wash.-based company in a brief interview April 27, revealing that while the Space Vehicle will fly to orbit on an Atlas V in early flights, the company plans to build its own partially reusable launch vehicle "several years in the future" for orbital flight.

The Space Vehicle under development as part of NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) seed-money effort will return to Earth by parachute, while the New Shepard will return suborbital space tourists and scientific researchers to a powered vertical landing reminiscent of the DC-X and DC-XA testbeds flown by the Defense Department and NASA, respectively, in the 1990s.

Initially the orbital Space Vehicle will use a solid-fuel pusher type launch abort system (LAS), positioned in the center of the capsule below the crew. Set for testing later this year to check out its thrust-vector control system, the solid-fuel LAS is designed to be carried to orbit and recovered.

Alexander, a former White House space-policy advisor who later worked as head of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, says the company is still trading that approach, and may adopt the liquid-fueled pusher technique used by some other CCDev vehicles that allows the propellant to be used in orbit.

"We're using the solid for our suborbital demonstration of it," he says. "For the orbital system for the Space Vehicle we're trading solids and liquids and combined fuel and all that sort of stuff. We're trading all that in our system requirements review that's coming up next month. That will define those sorts of things."

The company announced April 26 it has completed more than 180 tests of the Space Vehicle's biconic shape at Lockheed Martin's High Speed Wind Tunnel Facility in Dallas, Texas. Alexander said Blue Origin engineers chose the biconic approach to add a little cross-range over a pure capsule for more landing options on reentry, without the weight penalty of a lifting body like the planned Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser or a winged vehicle like the space shuttle. The tests evaluated different versions of the basic shape, as well as trim flaps to optimize the transitions from hypersonic flight down to subsonic speeds, when parachutes would deploy for the final touchdown.

The company also is preparing to test the thrust chamber assembly and nozzle of its BE-3 liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen engine in test stand E-1 at NASA's Stennis Space Center. Alexander says the engine is being developed in-house, as is the turbomachinery for the 100,000-lb.-thrust rocket. The company has hired a "very talented engine department," he says, which also developed the peroxide/kerosene BE-2 engine used on a suborbital test that reached 45,000 ft. and Mach 1.2 before it was destroyed over West Texas by range safety officers when it developed flight instability.

The BE-3 will power the reusable first stage of the two-stage rocket the company plans as the ultimate launch vehicle for the Space Vehicle. The upper stage would be a throwaway, while the first stage would return to Earth in a powered vertical landing, Alexander says.[/size]

ЦитироватьWASHINGTON — A 2013 spending bill that would fund NASA's commercial crew program below the level the president requested drew a veto threat May 7 as the U.S. House of Representatives was preparing to begin debate on the proposal.

The $51 billion Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Act for 2013 (H.R. 5326) that the Republican-led House began debating May 8 would fund NASA at $17.56 billion next year — the lowest level since 2008 and some $150 million less than President Barack Obama requested for the agency.

NASA's commercial crew program — a two-year-old effort that aims to foster development by 2017 of at least two privately operated launchers capable of transporting crews to the international space station — would receive $500 million next year under the House spending measure, which is $330 million below the White House request. The House bill would also direct NASA to immediately narrow the field of commercial crew competitors, either by picking a single provider now or adopting a so-called leader-follower strategy where the bulk of the money goes to one company.

In a Statement of Administration Policy issued May 7, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) cited the below-request funding for NASA's commercial crew program among the reasons Obama would be likely to veto H.R. 5326 if it reaches his desk as is.

"The Administration strongly opposes the level of funding provided for the commercial crew program, which is $330 million below the [fiscal year] 2013 Budget request, as well as restrictive report language that would eliminate competition in the program," OMB wrote. "This would increase the time the United States will be required to rely solely on foreign providers to transport American astronauts to and from the space station.

"While the Administration appreciates the overall funding level provided to NASA, the bill provides some NASA programs with unnecessary increases at the expense of other important initiatives," the NASA portion of the statement concludes.

Although OMB does not cite any specific examples besides commercial crew, the House bill rejects Obama's proposal to cut NASA's $1.5 billion planetary science portfolio by 20 percent and provides more money than the president requested for the Mars Next Decade planning effort and the Discovery and New Frontiers line of competitively selected space science missions.

The Senate, meanwhile, has yet to schedule floor debate for its version of the Commerce, Justice Science bill that Senate appropriator's approved April 19.

The Senate bill would provide $525 million for commercial crew but give NASA free rein to manage the program as it sees fit.

Цитировать А действительно - сколько их?

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/22687.jpg)

на вскидку:

1. SpaceX
2. Orbital
3. CST-100
4. Orion Havy
5. Orion Light
6. Dearm Chaser Orbital
7. Excalibur Almaz
8. ПТК лунный
9. ПТК околоземный
10.Шэньчжоу
11.Blue Origin
12.ATK composite
13.ISRO
14.ESA
15.Japan

????

Цитировать

Цитировать А действительно - сколько их?

на вскидку:

1. SpaceX
2. Orbital
3. CST-100
4. Orion Havy
5. Orion Light
6. Dearm Chaser Orbital
7. Excalibur Almaz
8. ПТК лунный
9. ПТК околоземный
10.Шэньчжоу
11.Blue Origin
12.ATK composite
13.ISRO
14.ESA
15.Japan

????

Забыли как минимум ВА Хруничева и Бион ЦСКБ

ЦитироватьOrbital, Orion Light и Шэньчжоу вычеркиваем.

Цитировать(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24996.jpg)

Цитировать

Цитировать(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/24996.jpg)

"Бюджетный вариант" для небогатых туристов. :lol:

ЦитироватьМОСКВА, 22 мая - РИА Новости. Глава компании SpaceX Элон Маск (Elon Musk) надеется, что успешный запуск космического грузовика Dragon, который во вторник вышел на орбиту и раскрыл солнечные батареи, сможет развеять сомнения в способности коммерческих компаний обслуживать МКС.

Ракета-носитель Falcon 9 с космическим кораблем Dragon стартовала во вторник в 11.44 мск с космодрома на мысе Канаверал. Dragon, разработанный американской компанией SpaceX, стал первым частным космическим грузовиком, который отправился к МКС. Примерно через десять минут после старта Dragon отделился от ракеты-носителя, а ещё через две минуты полностью раскрыл солнечные батареи. Через два с половиной часа после старта на корабле заработали датчики сближения, без которых невозможно будет подойти к МКС и состыковаться со станцией.

Маск добавил, что считает начавшийся полет Dragon успешным "вне зависимости от того, что произойдет дальше", и сравнил личные ощущения от старта корабля с "победой в бейсбольном чемпионате", а "новую эру" в космонавтике, которую открывает полет, с открытием интернета для коммерческих компаний, которые качественно ускорили его развитие.

"Я знаю, что многие вполне обоснованно сомневались в том, что коммерческие компании смогут с этим справиться, они же никогда этого не делали... думаю, что этот полет развеет любые сомнения у всех разумных людей", - сказал Маск на пресс-конференции по итогам запуска.

Ранее эксперты космической отрасли высказывали опасения, что предложенное Конгрессом финансирование коммерческих пилотируемых полетов в бюджете НАСА на 2013 финансовый год, на 40% меньше, чем запросило агентство, может поставить под вопрос целесообразность самой программы и отодвинуть первый полет на неопределенный срок.

Заместитель руководителя НАСА по космическим операциям Уильям Герстенмайер (William Gerstenmaier) также поздравил SpaceX с успешным запуском.

"Есть еще тысячи вещей, которые должны пройти гладко, но мы уже считаем это успехом... Спасибо SpaceX за то, что дали нам собой гордиться", - сказал Герстенмайер журналистам.

Глава НАСА Чарльз Болден (Charles Bolden) назвал запуск Dragon "идеальным, как с картинки" и отметил, что сегодняшний день станет историческим событием не только для США, но и для всего мира.

"Именно такие вещи дают всем в космической отрасли силы просыпаться утром и идти на работу", - сказал Болден журналистам.

SpaceX потратила на разработку корабля Dragon четыре года - в декабре 2010 года он совершил первый полет на орбиту и успешно приводнился в Тихом океане. Таким образом, SpaceX стала первой частной компанией, выведшей в космос корабль и успешно вернувшей его на Землю - то, что раньше удавалось лишь трем государствам - США, России и Китаю.

Второй полет рассматривается как испытательный - специалисты намерены проверить все системы корабля, и проведут сложную многоступенчатую процедуру сближения с космической станцией. Только на третий день после выхода на орбиту и серии проверок систем навигации, двигателей, способности быстрого ухода с орбиты, Dragon начнет приближаться к МКС.

Цитировать"Бюджетный вариант" для небогатых туристов. :lol:

ЦитироватьБион попросторнее будет. :wink:

ЦитироватьА собсно зачем туристам профессиональный пилот?
Пуляем троих туристов на Бионе как макак.
БС - штатка.
Во смеху будет!

Цитировать

ЦитироватьА собсно зачем туристам профессиональный пилот?
Пуляем троих туристов на Бионе как макак.
БС - штатка.
Во смеху будет!

Причем за их же деньги и еще и экспериментов пару-другую провести можно...  :D

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьА собсно зачем туристам профессиональный пилот?
Пуляем троих туристов на Бионе как макак.
БС - штатка.
Во смеху будет!

Причем за их же деньги и еще и экспериментов пару-другую провести можно...  :D

Фиг проведут. Вот заблюют друг друга по самое "не могу" - это точно.

Цитировать

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьА собсно зачем туристам профессиональный пилот?
Пуляем троих туристов на Бионе как макак.
БС - штатка.
Во смеху будет!

Причем за их же деньги и еще и экспериментов пару-другую провести можно...  :D

Фиг проведут. Вот заблюют друг друга по самое "не могу" - это точно.

Не они, а на них

ЦитироватьА собсно зачем туристам профессиональный пилот?
Пуляем троих туристов на Бионе как макак.
БС - штатка.
Во смеху будет!

ЦитироватьМожет быть боян.)  2010. Но очень понравилось. )
Доставка экипажей МКС коммерческими кораблями

Цитировать

ЦитироватьМожет быть боян.)  2010. Но очень понравилось. )
Доставка экипажей МКС коммерческими кораблями

И экипаж 7 человек :)

ЦитироватьГоршочек на вари!

ЦитироватьПроверка не развалится ли корабль если его переставить с помощью вертолёта? :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПроверка не развалится ли корабль если его переставить с помощью вертолёта? :)

Мне тоже не совсем понятно, зачем нужен такой тест, но тем не менее это проплачиваемый шаг, и его нужно было сделать (а то денег не дадут).

ЦитироватьИнтересно, кто-нибудь может объяснить смысл этого теста?

 http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=145064741

 Проверка не развалится ли корабль если его переставить с помощью вертолёта? :)

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПроверка не развалится ли корабль если его переставить с помощью вертолёта? :)

Мне тоже не совсем понятно, зачем нужен такой тест, но тем не менее это проплачиваемый шаг, и его нужно было сделать (а то денег не дадут).

ЦитироватьHouse Chairman Eases Commercial Crew Restriction[/size]
By Frank Morring, Jr. morring@aviationweek.com
Source: AWIN First

June 05, 2012

NASA will get a little slack from Congress on how it may procure commercial crew transportation for astronauts headed to the International Space Station (ISS), but apparently no more money.

Administrator Charles Bolden and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), who chairs the House Appropriations subcommittee that handles NASA funding, have negotiated a deal that lets the U.S. space agency pick "2.5 program partners" — two proposals for a full share of federal seed money to develop commercial crew vehicles, plus another company that will receive a "partial award."

That is a change from earlier language from Wolf's panel directing NASA to pick one competitor and at most a partially funded backup, in an effort to save money. But the new agreement — reflected in an exchange of letters released June 5 — does not include more money for the work.

Wolf's letter to Bolden proposes a slight boost in fiscal 2013 funding for the commercial crew program (CCP) from the $500 million the House approved, but only to the $525 million level set by the Senate. Bolden's response urges the Senate-House conference committee that will reconcile the two NASA funding bills to approve "a conference funding outcome for the CCP above the Senate-proposed level and closer to the president's FY 2013 request." That request called for $836 million in CCP funds for the coming fiscal year, and Bolden told Wolf in his June 4 letter that "it is important to note that the CCP will require increased annual funding in future years to accomplish the current program plan."

The lawmaker and the NASA administrator also agreed that future commercial crew contracting will be handled under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rules instead of less-restrictive Space Act Agreements (SAAs). Last year NASA shifted gears and opted for SAAs instead of FAR procurements for the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) phase of the commercial crew development that NASA is evaluating.

Under the agreement, the 2.5 CCiCap winners announced this summer will work under FAR rules, and NASA will handle the FAR procurements "in a manner that will minimize substantive delays and programmatic risks." The agreement, as stated by Wolf in a May 31 letter to Bolden, calls for the space agency to collect and evaluate financial data on CCiCap winners "to provide confidence that these partners are capable of meeting their obligations under the program."

Wolf's letter was dated the day a Space Exploration Technologies Inc. (SpaceX) Dragon cargo carrier splashed down safely in the Pacific Ocean with a load of cargo from the ISS after becoming the first commercial vehicle to reach the orbiting laboratory. In his response to Wolf, Bolden said NASA is at work planning the transition to FAR-based contracts and expects to have it "substantively complete" before the CCiCap awards are announced.[/size]

ЦитироватьWASHINGTON — When privately operated spacecraft begin ferrying NASA astronauts to the international space station, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will license launch and re-entry but leave it to NASA to decide whether the vehicles are fit to dock with the station and carry astronauts in the first place, the heads of the two agencies said June 18 in a joint press briefing.

NASA and FAA held the briefing to discuss a memorandum of understanding (MOU) they signed June 4. The document lays the foundation for developing the federal regulations that will govern crewed flights of privately operated spacecraft.

"This MOU is intended to support the transition to commercial transport of government and non-government passengers to low-Earth orbit in a manner that avoids conflicting requirements and multiple sets of standards," the document states.

FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation is the licensing and permitting body for all U.S. commercial space transportation.

"On the FAA side, the licensing requirements and our assurance of public safety is the same, whether it's a NASA mission or a pure commercial mission," Acting FAA Administrator Michael Huerta said. "It's all just to maintain the safe environment during launch and reentry."

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said NASA will have no jurisdiction over commercial human space transportation unless the vehicles are carrying NASA personnel or visiting NASA destinations, such as the space station.

"The FAA is always involved," Bolden said during the briefing. "NASA is only involved when there is a NASA fee being paid for the service because there are NASA crew members aboard."

The first privately operated, passenger-carrying spacecraft likely to reach orbit are being developed in part with NASA funding for the purpose of getting NASA astronauts to and from the international space station.

At least four companies are vying for funding under the third round of NASA's Commercial Crew Program: ATK Aerospace, Magna, Utah; Boeing Space Exploration, Houston; Sierra Nevada Space Systems, Louisville, Colo.; and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, Calif.

The companies are competing for awards worth $300 million to $500 million apiece over a 21-month technology development period. NASA's goal is to get designs for at least two competing systems, including a crew vehicle and a launcher, ready to enter production in time to begin crewed flights by 2017. The agency will pick three winners around mid-July, Bolden said during the teleconference.

One of those three will be funded at half the level of the other two winners, Bolden said.

"Two companies will get full funding at whatever level is decided based upon the amount in the NASA appropriation for commercial crew," Bolden said. "The third company would get about half of that."

This arrangement is part of a compromise NASA reached with Rep. Frank Wolf, chairman of the House Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee, as a condition of Wolf dropping his insistence that NASA immediately pick a single company to build an astronaut taxi system.

Although only three companies will be eligible for funding, NASA wants to keep "upwards of three companies" involved in the third round of the Commercial Crew Program, which is known as the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability phase.

In the Commercial Crew Program's previous round, which is set to wrap up in August, NASA gave financial assistance to four companies working on crewed spacecraft. Three other companies, however, got unfunded Space Act agreements. The latter type of agreement provides access to NASA facilities, documents and technical expertise, but no NASA funding.

The Commercial Crew Program has encountered resistance among congressional appropriators, who have yet to appropriate anything close to the more-than $800 billion in annual funding the White House has sought for the past two years. The program got $406 million last year. This year, spending bills in the House and Senate provide $500 million and $525 million, respectively, for 2013. Wolf has agreed to fund the program at the Senate-approved level, but that will not become official until legislators in both chambers gather in conference to iron out the differences in the two spending bills.

While Bolden praised the compromise, he once again warned that the Commercial Crew Program will need more cash soon to meet its goal of producing a domestic astronaut transportation system by 2017. He said NASA will seek a "significant increase" in commercial crew funds in 2014.

"Ideally, I would say that what we want is to see the president's [2013] request, which was the $850 million," Bolden said during the briefing.

ЦитироватьBolden: Commercial Crew Awards Expected in Mid-July[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier on June 18, 2012, at 9:30 am in News

By Douglas Messier
Parabolic Arc Managing Editor

During a press conference this morning about a NASA-FAA agreement on commercial crew oversight, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden was asked about the agency's plans for awarding the next phase of the program.

Bolden said the agency fully expects to announce the winners of the Commercial Crew integrated
 Capability (CCiCap) round in mid-July. The awards, which will cover all aspects of commercial vehicle development, will last for 21 months.

Two companies will receive full awards to develop their systems while a third will receive half of an award. This approach was worked out between Bolden and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who wanted NASA to immediately down-select to one provider.

At the end of the 21-month period, NASA will put out a request for proposals open to all bidders to provide commercial crew services under Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Bolden said. FAR includes much more rigorous government oversight than the Space Act Agreements that NASA is now using for the commercial crew program.

Bolden said that NASA would prefer that Congress fully fund the President's request for commercial crew at $830 million for Fiscal Year 2013. NASA will ask for significantly more funding in future years to keep to a 2017 schedule for commercial crew flights.[/size]

Цитировать А действительно - сколько их?

на вскидку:

1. SpaceX
2. Orbital
3. CST-100
4. Orion Havy
5. Orion Light
6. Dearm Chaser Orbital
7. Excalibur Almaz
8. ПТК лунный
9. ПТК околоземный
10.Шэньчжоу
11.Blue Origin
12.ATK composite
13.ISRO
14.ESA
15.JAXA

16.Space Operations

Цитировать....Space Operations, Inc. (SpaceOps) has formed a team of highly motivated aerospace companies for this purpose.

The three companies involved with the effort are WestWind Technologies, Inc., Advanced Solutions, Inc., and Southern Aerospace Company.  SpaceOps, will use the technology developed on the Gemini Program to be the basis for the 21st century, two-seat, ECLIPSE spacecraft.

"Since this is an existing and proven design we could begin construction six to eight weeks after funding and complete a flying prototype ten to thirteen months later," said WestWind President Bill Jolly.

U.S. built rocket boosters are currently available and could launch the ECLIPSE plus a significant amount of cargo into orbit.....

ЦитироватьWed, 20 June, 2012
NASA Banking on Commercial Crew To Grow Space Station's Population[/size]
By Dan Leone

    WASHINGTON — NASA is banking on its Commercial Crew Program to increase international space station (ISS) crew capacity to seven from the current six — something that could happen as soon as 2017 if Congress is willing to dramatically increase the program's budget, the agency's top human spaceflight official said.

    "We would definitely increase the crew size on ISS to seven crew members," William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate said June 20 during a hearing before the Senate Commerce science and space subcommittee. "We think that will increase the research capability onboard station and allow us to do more national lab research and be more effective in utilizing space station."

    To do that, and to ensure that the privately operated astronaut taxis NASA is helping industry develop are flying by 2017, the Commercial Crew Program will need more than $800 million in annual funding from 2014 to 2017. Congress gave the program $406 million for 2012, less than half what NASA requested. The program is poised to fare somewhat better in 2013, with key lawmakers pledging $525 million of the $830 million the agency requested.

    NASA currently pays the Russian space agency, Roscosmos, about $60 million a seat to ferry crew members to the international space station aboard Soyuz spacecraft. The U.S. companies competing to develop a domestic alternative to Soyuz are expected to beat that price, Gerstenmaier said.

    "We expect there to be a cost reduction, but I think it's a little too early for us to pick a particular value for a cost reduction," Gerstenamier said. He added that NASA plans to buy seats on two commercial crew flights a year. The agency would book four seats on each flight, he said.

    Congress and the White House have frequently disagreed about how to run the Commercial Crew Program. Earlier this year, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), chairman of the House Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee, drafted legislation calling for NASA to immediately pick a single provider to build a crew transportation system rather than prolong competition with multiple large awards.

    Wolf announced June 5 that he had dropped that demand after NASA agreed to fund no more than three providers, one of which would get half as much funding as the others. Wolf also insisted that the agency shift away from funded Space Act Agreements to more traditional government contracts once the next 21-month phase of the program concludes.

    So-called Commercial Crew Integrated Capability awards are expected in mid-July, NASA administrator Charles Bolden said June 18. At least four companies are competing for an award: ATK Aerospace, Magna, Utah; Boeing Space Exploration, Houston; Sierra Nevada Space Systems, Louisville, Colo.; and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, Calif.

    Meanwhile, an industry witness at the June 20 hearing said space transportation prices will have to fall substantially before any business plan involving a payload — crew or cargo — becomes palatable to private enterprise.

    "Those prices must come down from the sixty-plus-million-dollar range," said Mike Gold, director of Washington operations and business growth for Bigelow Aerospace, North Las Vegas, Nev. "They must come down dramatically for there to be a business case from the private sector."

    Bigelow is developing inflatable space habitats that it wants to market primarily to foreign governments. The company has sent two prototype modules into space on Russian rockets but says it cannot afford to develop or fly an operational habitat until cheaper space transportation is available. Gold said Bigelow needs a domestic transportation option because it is too expensive to comply with U.S. export control policies; Bigelow spent about $1 million on export control compliance for the two Russian launches it bought.

    Michael Lopez-Alegria, president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation here, told lawmakers that the companies developing commercial crew taxis are counting on ISS service contracts to make their business cases close.

    "We sort of need the [international space station] to be there for us," Lopez-Alegria said. "We support whatever is necessary to ensure future use of the space station."

    Lopez-Alegria called on Congress to renew NASA's waiver to provisions in the Iran, North Korea and Syria Nonproliferation Act that bar the agency from buying space station-related goods and services from Russia. The current waiver expires in 2016 and, in addition to letting NASA buy Soyuz seats, allows the agency to barter with Russia for engineering and data analysis critical to keeping the station operational.

    Gerstenmaier said without a new waiver, the United States will have to depend on Russian goodwill to secure needed engineering services.

    "Maybe they would donate that engineering service and that research service without bartering for it, I don't know if that's the case or not," Gerstenmaier said.

    Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), chairman of the Senate Commerce science and space subcommittee, offered strong support for granting such a waiver.

    "We don't have any choice, we have to pass that," Nelson said at the hearing. "We simply can't let that get in the way of us moving ahead with the space program." He did not say whether the waiver would appear as stand-alone legislation or as part of another bill.[/size]

Цитироватьsomething that could happen as soon as 2017 if Congress is willing to dramatically increase the program's budget

ЦитироватьComposite Crew Module Undergoes Vacuum Testing at Marshall[/size]
Posted by Doug Messier
on June 21, 2012, at 5:02 pm

(https://img.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/25537.jpg)
The Composite Crew Module being rolled into the vacuum chamber at Marshall's Environmental Test Facility. The test will continue through the end of the summer. (Credit: NASA/MSFC/Emmett Given)

Huntsville, Ala. (NASA PR — This week, engineers at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., moved a Composite Crew Module (CCM) into the Environmental Test Facility vacuum chamber to gauge how well a space structure fabricated with composite materials will react in a simulated space environment. Data gained during this test series will aid in the design and development of future in-space composite habitable structures.

During the vacuum test, the chamber is sealed and purged to a level a vehicle would encounter on orbit to evaluate the composite material's integrity. The crew module is filled with helium gas to allow engineers to detect any leaks that may occur as pressure increases. Vacuum testing will yield a leak rate for the entire structure, then the team works to repair small leaks that may arise to improve the hardware's performance.

The test team includes members from the Marshall Center; NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.; Goddard Space Flight Center in Md.; Kennedy Space Center in Fla.; and the Boeing Company in Huntsville. To date, the team has completed ten tests and will continue testing through the end of the summer.

The crew module was designed to test new materials and fabrication techniques that may be used in future space structures, which will be constructed of both metals and composites. The Composite Crew Module Project is led by NASA's Engineering and Safety Center at Langley.

Fabricated at Alliant Techsystems in Iuka, Miss., the CCM was constructed in two parts using a hand layup technique, which combines carbon fiber epoxy and an aluminum honeycomb core. The two parts were joined together and then bonded in a unique process developed at the Marshall Center for the crew module. The project team is a partnership between NASA and industry and includes design, manufacturing, testing, inspection, and tooling expertise.[/size]

ЦитироватьSpaceX Completes Dragon Crewed Design Review[/size]
Posted
by Doug Messier
on July 12, 2012, at 4:30 pm

HAWTHORNE, Calif., July 12, 2012 (SpaceX PR) — NASA partner Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) has completed an important design review of the crewed version of its Dragon spacecraft. The concept baseline review presented NASA with the primary and secondary design elements of its Dragon capsule designed to carry astronauts into low Earth orbit, including the International Space Station.

SpaceX is one of several companies working to develop crew transportation capabilities under the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) agreement with NASA's Commercial Crew Program (CCP). Through CCDev2, NASA is helping the private sector develop and test new spacecraft and rockets with the goal of making commercial human spaceflight services available to commercial and government customers.

In the June 14 review conducted at the company's headquarters in Hawthorne, Calif., SpaceX provided details about each phase of a potential crewed mission. This included how the company plans to modify its launch pads to support such missions, Dragon's docking capabilities, the weight and power requirements for the spacecraft, and prospective ground landing sites and techniques. The company also outlined crew living arrangements, such as environmental control and life support equipment, displays and controls.

"SpaceX has made significant progress on its crew transportation capabilities," NASA CCP Manager Ed Mango said. "We commend the SpaceX team on its diligence in meeting its CCDev2 goals to mature the company's technology as this nation continues to build a real capability for America's commercial spaceflight needs."

Safety was a key focus of the review. The SpaceX team presented NASA with analyses on how its SuperDraco launch abort system would perform if an emergency were to occur during launch or ascent. The review also outlined plans for getting astronauts away from danger quickly and safely on the way to low Earth orbit, in space and during the return home.

"The successful conclusion of the concept baseline review places SpaceX exactly where we want to be — ready to move on to the next phase and on target to fly people into space aboard Dragon by the middle of the decade," said SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer Elon Musk.

All of NASA's industry partners, including SpaceX, continue to meet their established milestones in developing commercial crew transportation capabilities under CCDev2.

While NASA works with U.S. industry to develop commercial spaceflight capabilities to low Earth orbit, 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 of deep space. Designed to be flexible for launching crew and cargo missions, Orion and SLS will expand human presence beyond Earth and enable new missions of exploration across the solar system.

For more information about NASA's Commercial Crew Program, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew[/size]

ЦитироватьCandrea Thomas
Kennedy Space Center, Fla.
321-867-2468
candrea.k.thomas@nasa.gov

Trent Perrotto
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-0321
trent.j.perrotto@nasa.gov

Jessica Rye/Chris Chavez
United Launch Alliance
321-730-5646/303-269-5550
jessica.f.rye@ulalaunch.com / chris.s.chavez@ulalaunch.com

July 19, 2012
 
RELEASE : 12-245
 
 
NASA Partner United Launch Alliance Completes Two Atlas V Reviews
 
 
CENTENNIAL, Colo. -- NASA partner United Launch Alliance (ULA) has completed a review of its Atlas V rocket to assess its compliance with NASA human spaceflight safety and performance requirements.

ULA has partnered to launch Boeing's CST-100, Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser and Blue Origin's Space Vehicle on missions to low Earth orbit and the International Space Station. NASA provided technical consultation during the ULA review.

ULA is one of several companies working to develop crew transportation capabilities under the Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) agreement with NASA's Commercial Crew Program (CCP). Through CCDev2, NASA is helping the private sector develop and test new spacecraft and rockets with the goal of making commercial human spaceflight services available to commercial and government customers.

The Atlas V has launched numerous satellites and robotic missions into space for NASA, including the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover and the Juno probe to Jupiter. Requirements to launch humans will require more stringent criteria, so the company has to show its rocket can meet the extra demands.

"Our partnership with ULA during this round of development has really been focused on understanding the core design of the launch vehicle," said CCP Program Manager Ed Mango. "In these reviews we were able to see how ULA plans to modify the vehicle for human spaceflight."

Among adjustments required to evolve the Atlas V for human spaceflight, designers would have to modify the launch pad so crew members can board the spacecraft. The upper stage of a crewed Atlas V would require the use of two Centaur engines, stronger than the current Atlas V upper stage that uses a single engine. The onboard flight computers would be programmed to guide the rocket on a more managed path through the sky into orbit. Sensors also would be added to the rocket to detect emergency situations for the crew.

"The systems requirements review was the result of an extensive effort with NASA and our commercial spacecraft partners to determine what capabilities the Atlas V already meets and to define what we need to do from here to certify the rocket for human spaceflight," said George Sowers, ULA's vice president for human launch services. "We continue to receive valuable insight from NASA's human spaceflight experts as we move toward the certification of Atlas V for human spaceflight."

All of NASA's industry partners, including ULA, continue to meet their established milestones in developing commercial crew transportation capabilities under CCDev2.

For more information about NASA's Commercial Crew Program, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew

ЦитироватьТам не было никакого пересмотра. Все как было, так и осталось, только проведен обзор этапа проектирования. "Review" - это что-то типа заседания НТС.

ЦитироватьThe key modifications needed to meet NASA's Human Spaceflight Certification include the upper stage rocket needing two engines rather than the single engine currently used.

Цитировать

ЦитироватьТам не было никакого пересмотра. Все как было, так и осталось, только проведен обзор этапа проектирования. "Review" - это что-то типа заседания НТС.

ЦитироватьThe key modifications needed to meet NASA's Human Spaceflight Certification include the upper stage rocket needing two engines rather than the single engine currently used.

ЦитироватьМОСКВА, 3 авг - РИА Новости. Американское аэрокосмическое агентство НАСА назвало три коммерческие компании, которые получат контракты на общую сумму более 1,1 миллиарда долларов в рамках третьего этапа программы создания силами частных фирм новых космических кораблей для доставки астронавтов на МКС, ракет для них и наземной инфраструктуры.

Партнерами НАСА в рамках программы CCiCap (Commercial Crew Integrated Capability) стала компания Boeing, получившая контракт на 460 миллионов долларов, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) - 440 миллионов долларов, Sierra Nevada - 212,5 миллиона долларов.

"Мы выбрали три компании, которые помогут нам проложить дорогу к использованию технологии аутсорсинга в сфере пилотируемых космических полетов в космос и в создании высокооплачиваемых рабочих мест во Флориде и по всей стране", - заявил глава НАСА Чарльз Болден (Charles Bolden), выступая в Космическом центре НАСА имени Кеннеди.

После завершения полетов шаттлов США остались без собственных средств доставки астронавтов на околоземную орбиту и на Международную космическую станцию. Для того, чтобы сократить расходы и способствовать развитию индустрии НАСА решило создавать новый пилотируемый корабль силами частных компаний, в то время как собственные силы агентства были направлены на создание корабля для полетов в дальний космос на базе проекта Orion и ракеты SLS для него.

Ранее НАСА в рамках программы CCP (Commercial Crew Program) по поощрению частных фирм, работающих в сфере разработки и создания космических кораблей, уже провела два этапа отбора компаний. В рамках первого этапа в 2010 году контракты на разработку проектов пилотируемых кораблей получили фирмы Blue Origin, Boeing, Paragon Space Development, Sierra Nevada и United Launch Alliance (ULA).

В рамках второго этапа (CCDev2), предусматривающего продолжение разработки ракет-носителей и кораблей, партнерами НАСА стали Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada и SpaceX.

Третий этап, CCiCap, предусматривает создание полноценной интегрированной транспортной системы, которая будет включать себя корабль, ракету-носитель, и наземную инфраструктуру, в том числе центр управления полетами.

Теперь Boeing, SpaceX и Sierra Nevada к концу мая 2014 года закончить проектирование и испытания новых систем.

Среди трех партнеров безусловным лидером выглядит компания SpaceX. Ее корабль Dragon в беспилотном варианте к настоящему времени уже совершил два полета, в том числе один - со стыковкой с МКС. В то же время капсула Boeing CST-100 еще проходит наземные испытания, так же как и мини-шаттл Dream Chaser фирмы Sierra Nevada.

Цитировать

Цитировать А действительно - сколько их?

на вскидку:


1. SpaceX
3. CST-100
6. Dearm Chaser Orbital
[/size]

2. Orbital
4. Orion Havy
5. Orion Light
7. Excalibur Almaz
8. ПТК лунный
9. ПТК околоземный
10.Шэньчжоу
11.Blue Origin
12.ATK composite ВЫЧЕРКИВАЕМ
13.ISRO
14.ESA
15.JAXA

16.Space Operations

Цитировать....Space Operations, Inc. (SpaceOps) has formed a team of highly motivated aerospace companies for this purpose.

The three companies involved with the effort are WestWind Technologies, Inc., Advanced Solutions, Inc., and Southern Aerospace Company.  SpaceOps, will use the technology developed on the Gemini Program to be the basis for the 21st century, two-seat, ECLIPSE spacecraft.

"Since this is an existing and proven design we could begin construction six to eight weeks after funding and complete a flying prototype ten to thirteen months later," said WestWind President Bill Jolly.

U.S. built rocket boosters are currently available and could launch the ECLIPSE plus a significant amount of cargo into orbit.....

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gemini-to-fly-again-159561815.html

ЦитироватьFri, 3 August, 2012
Boeing, SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Win CCiCAP Awards[/size]
By Dan Leone

    WASHINGTON — Boeing and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) are the big winners in the third and final development round of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, garnering $460 million and $440 million, respectively, in government aid to complete and test astronaut crew taxis.

    Sierra Nevada Corp. netted $212.5 million in Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) funding, NASA announced Aug. 3.

    Bidders for the 21-month Space Act Agreements had to propose a complete system, including launch and crew vehicles, capable of carrying astronauts to and from the international space station. NASA wants at least one of these systems to be ready by 2017.

    Currently NASA relies on Russia for space station crew transport services.

    "Today, we are announcing another critical step toward launching our astronauts from U.S. soil on space systems built by American companies," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a press release announcing the awards.

    All three CCiCap winners have previously received NASA funds to work on elements of their crew transportation systems. Boeing Space Exploration of Houston is developing a space capsule called the CST-100, which the company plans to launch aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket.

    Also planning to use an Atlas 5 is Sierra Nevada Space Systems of Louisville, Colo., which is developing a lifting-body vehicle called Dream Chaser based on an old NASA design.

    SpaceX of Hawthorne, Calif., is adapting its flight-tested Dragon cargo capsule for crewed missions, to be launched atop the company's Falcon 9 rocket.

    Before any of these systems are cleared to carry astronauts, NASA will have to certify that they meet the agency's safety standards. This work will be done under separate contracts to be awarded at or near the end of the CCiCap performance period.

    All three winners have said they can stage their first demonstration flights — which will not carry astronauts — by 2015 or 2016, depending on available funding.

    NASA's selections leave ATK Aerospace, Magna, Utah, the longtime builder of solid-rocket motors for the now-retired space shuttle, without funding for its proposed Liberty crew transportation system. ATK, whose Liberty design has not been funded in previous rounds of the Commercial Crew Program, nonetheless announced in May that it would compete for a CCiCap award.

    The Liberty rocket would have used an ATK-built solid-fuel core stage and the first stage of Europe's Ariane 5 rocket as an upper stage. ATK proposed capping the rocket with a composite crew module.

    ATK was working with NASA through unfunded Space Act agreements to refine Liberty's design.

    In a conference call with reporters Aug. 3, NASA human spaceflight chief William Gerstenmaier confirmed that Blue Origin, the secretive space startup bankrolled by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, did not submit a CCiCap proposal. Blue Origin had been involved in NASA's Commercial Crew Program since the first round of funding was awarded in 2010. The Kent, Wash., company has received a total of $25.7 million in NASA funding, some of which it put toward a crew escape system for its New Shepard vertical-takeoff, vertical-landing suborbital vehicle. [/size]

ЦитироватьПилотируемая версия Dragon'a ещё не летала. У Вас другая версия? :wink:

ЦитироватьПилотируемая версия Dragon'a ещё не летала. У Вас другая версия? :wink:

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПилотируемая версия Dragon'a ещё не летала. У Вас другая версия? :wink:

Пилотируемая версия не летела ни у кого.

Цитировать1. SpaceX (7-ми местный) - слетал к МКС в 2012 (без экипажа)

ЦитироватьЗачотно :D

Цитировать

Цитировать

ЦитироватьПилотируемая версия Dragon'a ещё не летала. У Вас другая версия? :wink:

Пилотируемая версия не летела ни у кого.

Цитировать1. SpaceX (7-ми местный) - слетал к МКС в 2012 (без экипажа)

ЦитироватьДрагон С3 уже никуда не летит! Летит Драгон CRS1.