E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Orbital Sciences Corp.
An artist's conception shows Orbital Sciences' proposed space vehicle making a rendezvous with the International Space Station.
Several industry teams — reportedly including Orbital Sciences and Virgin Galactic — are vying to build new crew-worthy spaceships for NASA's use.
Today was the deadline for companies to provide NASA with proposals for spacecraft that could transfer astronauts to and from the International Space Station. Such spacecraft would help fill the gap left by the expected retirement of the space shuttle fleet next year. The call for proposals follows up on an earlier round of $50 million in funding that's being disbursed under NASA's Commercial Crew Development program, or CCDev. This round is known as CCDev 2.
The companies making CCDev 2 bids weren't required to announce publicly what they were doing, but a few companies have confirmed their participation:
SpaceX
SpaceX's Dragon capsule, shown here in an artist's conception, has had an initial test.
SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Brost told me today that "we filed a proposal" for CCDev 2 funding. SpaceX did not participate in the first round of CCDev work, in part because there wouldn't have been enough money available to do what the California-based company needed to do to upgrade its Dragon capsule for crewed flight. However, SpaceX is receiving $278 million from NASA under a separate program to develop a space cargo delivery system, known as Commercial Orbital Transport Services or COTS. Just last week, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket and the Dragon aced their first COTS demonstration flight.
Boeing
An artist's conception shows Boeing's CST-100 orbital capsule.
The Boeing Co. sent out a news release confirming that it submitted a proposal to push ahead with development of its CST-100 spacecraft. It is already receiving $18 million in CCDev funding from NASA for the project, which envisions a seven-person capsule that can be used up to 10 times. Among Boeing's partners are Bigelow Aerospace, a Nevada-based venture whose inflatable space modules could serve as additional destinations for the CST-100; and Virginia-based Space Adventures, which would arrange orbital transport packages for spaceflight participants who would pay their own way.
Orbital Sciences Corp. "did submit a proposal for Commercial Crew Development 2," company spokesman Barron Beneski told me today. Virginia-based Orbital is receiving $171 million under the COTS program to develop its Taurus 2 rocket and Cygnus cargo capsule, but it didn't participate in the initial CCDev round. Beneski declined to tell me anything else about Orbital's proposal, other than to say "we intend to comment on it later this week."
Space News reported that Orbital was teaming up with Virgin Galactic, the New Mexico-based suborbital space company that's backed by British billionaire Richard Branson. The publication said Orbital's craft would be a lifting body capable of carrying four passengers initially, with an option to carry up to six later. The craft would be launched toward the space station from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida atop an Atlas 5 rocket, and make a runway landing back on Earth at the end of its journey.
California-based Scaled Composites is currently testing Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo rocket plane as well as the White Knight Two carrier aircraft for future suborbital space tours. Space News said that Virgin would sell commercial seats on Orbital's craft, and ferry the spaceship between its landing strip and the Cape using White Knight Two. Such an arrangement would follow through on Branson's stated aspirations to get involved in orbital spaceflight.
Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser would be a lifting body, as shown in this artist's conception.
Tonight, Space News added yet another nugget: It said Virgin would announce a separate CCDev 2 bid that's led by Sierra Nevada Corp. That Nevada-based company is receiving $20 million in CCDev 1 funds to work on its Dream Chaser space glider. Moreover, SpaceDev, a Sierra Nevada subsidiary, is already working on the hybrid rocket engines that are to be used on SpaceShipTwo. Last week, Aviation Week reported that Sierra Nevada was looking at NASA's mothballed X-34 space plane prototype as a testbed for the Dream Chaser development effort. Ironically, the X-34 started out as an Orbital Sciences project for NASA.
There are lots of questions yet to be answered about these proposals — and more generally about CCDev 2:
- Who else is in the running? Besides Boeing and Sierra Nevada, the other companies funded under CCDev 1 include Blue Origin, Paragon Space Development and United Launch Alliance. Some of the other players in the CCDev competition may make themselves known in the days to come, but they're under no requirement to do so.
- How much money is at stake? NASA has said it expects to award about $200 million during this round of funding, but that's dependent on how much money is appropriated for the program by Congress.
- When will these new spaceships be flying? Orbital is reportedly talking about test flights as early as 2014. SpaceX has said it could have its crew-capable Dragon ready within three years after striking a deal with NASA, which would imply a potential 2014 time frame. Sierra Nevada is also targeting 2014 for the Dream Chaser's first flight. And Boeing says it expects to begin crewed flights of the CST-100 by 2015. So under the current best-case scenario, NASA would be facing a three-year gap between the retirement of the shuttles and the start of commercial crew missions.
NASA is due to announce who gets the money in March.
Update for 3 p.m. ET: Orbital Sciences has issued a news release confirming that it submitted a proposal calling for the development of a "blended lifted body" that could be launched on United Launch Alliance's Atlas 5 or other expendable rockets. "The design derives from studies performed by Orbital for NASA under the Orbital Space Plane program between 2000 and 2003," the company said.
The spaceship would seat four astronauts, as reported by Space News. Orbital said its major suppliers would include Thales Alenia Space, Northrop Grumman, Honeywell and Draper Laboratory and United Launch Alliance. I've added an artist's conception of the Orbital blended lifted body to the top of this item.
Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter.
Leave a Comment:
I would hope the money would be parceled out widely and that nasa would aggressively look for companies interested in the CCDev 1 but somehow I can see the same old people from the same old companies getting the quick splash cash and the others wondering just what really is fair.....
When will american leaders put an end to this useless work project, "manned space program" and direct NASA to cleanup planet Earth and do real science, (and that includes space exploration).
Man will never be able to go beyond near earth orbit and with a high cost and risk high enough to make man useless for any science and/or military functions.
Stop this pipe dream and face reality responsibly.
But we are spending the money responsibly.
NASA's working with the Muslim community to make them feel good about themselves and their historic and continuing contributions to science. Not to mention teaching them about rockets, missiles and the hazards of high explosive fuel.
With that attitude, you're absolutely right, we'll never make it off Earth. Anything worth doing doesn't come easy, and getting of Earth and spreading our species to new worlds definitely worth doing, not to mention a necessity for our survival.
Oaktree your comment demonstrates your complete lack of education in what our drive to explore the universe has brought in the way of knowledge and technology to our species. I hate to break it to you but Man will be out in space, it wont be for a very long time but it will happen.
People like you said we would never land on the moon too, or go into space, people once said the speed of sound was impossible but they were proved wrong.
Humanity strives for the impossible that is why we are still here, that is why we have accomplished a great many things, because some people challenge the impossible, some fail, but others surpass the impossible barrier.
Never say never because history has proven that the the word never is usually proven wrong.
Just remember, Oaktree, all it takes is one massively bad day, and there will be no more humanity. We cannot build large habitats in space fast enough, to make sure the human race lives on. Our true salvation wil be O'Neill habitats, constructed at the Lagrange points.
If you think that NASA is wasting the tiny little portion of the budget it receives, you're seriously in need of a reality check. NASA does more with it's <1% of the budget than any other agency.
NASA makes a persistent case that there is a return on the investment of tax dollars...
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ppm/ppm68.htm
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/portal/usability/resources/roi.htm
http://start1.jpl.nasa.gov/caseStudies/CTO.cfm
For an opposing viewpoint to the one I am making go to this link, (claiming the ROI is not a reliable conclusion)
http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/jp_950525.htm
Neil, has no one made you feel good about yourself, is that why you sound so jilted?
Oaktree, do you really believe mankind is stuck on this planet? Human beings can safely go into space, but you can't find a way to justify the financial bottom line. Humanity needs a multi-pronged space program utilizing all of our capabilities. The space program is good for humanity and financially it MAKES money. I am all for sending robots out to do the dirty work and dangerous things, and basically all of the exploration, but we must utilize humans in space. You say man will "never be able to go beyond near Earth orbit". I don't know if you mean Low Earth Orbit (which mankind has already gone beyond) or if you are thinking about near Earth objects (which NASA is preparing to send astronauts to an asteroid).
Also, as to your question about when will American leaders "direct NASA to cleanup planet Earth", I would suggest you look back at what Obama actually directed NASA to do when he instituted the change from the Constellation program to his "Flexible path". Part of the change was directing NASA to develop more and better Earth monitoring satellites and align their operations to assist in "cleaning up planet Earth". But I would go one further and say that it is NOT only NASA's responsibility but EVERY man, woman, and child on this planet has a responsibility to cleanup our planet. It's not an American endeavor, it needs to be a Human endeavor, otherwise it will never happen.
Anyway, I disagree fervently with you Oaktree. This is NOT a useless work project. NASA makes money for America. By directing private companies to develop space capabilities this is only going to drive prices down and increase competition to gain NASA contracts to ferry astronauts to the space station. That saves taxpayer dollars.
Oh, and Oaktree, NASA is an abbreviation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NOWHERE in its' charter is it supposed to clean up the planet. That's why we have your much-beloved EPA.
Oh, wait, the EPA's mission seems to be restricted to restricting the growth of business, and suing people who have wet spots in their yards. Yeah, maybe you'd better have a word with them, Oaktree...
Ah how I miss being a kid again, when we didn't have a care and only dreamed about non adult stuff.
In anycase, cool, more spaceships and such.
Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases: 1- It's completely impossible.
2- It's possible, but it's not worth doing.
3- I said it was a good idea all along.
- Arthur C. Clarke