NASA

Among the spaceship projects receiving NASA support are Boeing Co.'s CST-100 capsule (left), Sierra Nevada Corp.'s Dream Chaser space plane (middle) and SpaceX's Dragon capsule (right).

Americans could be flying into orbit on U.S.-built spaceships again as early as 2015 — but the first fliers won't be NASA astronauts or millionaire space tourists. Instead, they'll be commercial test pilots, employed by the Boeing Co., Sierra Nevada Corp., SpaceX or maybe even a dark-horse company like Blue Origin, the venture funded by Amazon.com billionaire Jeff Bezos.

Those four companies provided updates on their efforts to build new spaceships capable of carrying astronauts to and from the International Space Station during a Wednesday news briefing at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. One of the companies, Blue Origin, is wrapping up its work for NASA and is no longer receiving money through the Commercial Crew Program, or CCP. But SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada are splitting more than $1 billion that's to be paid out through 2014.

NASA's manager for the Commercial Crew Program, Ed Mango, said the agency and its commercial partners are already talking about "Phase 2" for the program. The certification requirements and timetable for Phase 2 are expected to be set this year, with contracts awarded by May 2014, Mango said. "We believe that there’ll be more than one, probably two, three, maybe others, that will be ready to compete for Phase 2," he said.

That phase would move the program forward to 2017, by which time NASA expects to be flying its astronauts on U.S. launch vehicles for the first time since the shuttle fleet was retired in 2011. In the meantime, NASA will be paying the Russians more than $60 million per seat for round trips to the space station.

"Our target was to repatriate that industry back to the United States, and that's what we're doing," said Mark Sirangelo, chairman of SNC Space Systems at Sierra Nevada.

Here's how the companies' plans are shaping up:

SpaceX: Former NASA astronaut Garrett Reisman, SpaceX's commercial crew project manager, said his company is working toward a launch pad abort test by the end of the year at Kennedy Space Center. An in-flight test that would demonstrate the ability to abort a launch safely during ascent, "at the worst possible moment," is planned for April 2014, he said. If SpaceX sticks to its schedule, it would use its Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon capsule for a manned test flight in mid-2015, and would send test pilots to the space station by the end of 2015. "We're not selling tickets. Don't call our toll-free number," Reisman joked.

Sierra Nevada Corp.: Sirangelo said his company was planning to drop its Dream Chaser mini-shuttle from a carrier airplane for its first autonomous, free-flying glide test in the first quarter of this year. That would be followed by a series of autonomous and crewed aerodynamic test flights, similar to the tests conducted by NASA using the prototype shuttle Enterprise in the late 1970s. Then Sierra Nevada's team would launch the Dream Chaser into space — first on suborbital test flights, and eventually into orbit. Last year, the company said manned orbital flights could begin in 2016.

The Boeing Co.: John Mulholland, vice president and program manager for Boeing's commercial crew program, said his company proposed conducting a three-day orbital spaceflight with a Boeing crew in 2016. The head of Boeing's flight test program is former NASA astronaut Chris Ferguson, who commanded Atlantis' crew during the final flight of the shuttle program. "He is defining crew requirements," Mulholland said. Before the test pilots fly, Boeing will conduct an unmanned orbital trial of its CST-100 space capsule, plus an altitude abort test.

NASA / Blue Origin

An artist's conception shows Blue Origin's orbital space vehicle.

Blue Origin: The company that Bezos founded in 2000 is not receiving NASA funding during the current phase of the agency's spaceship development program — but Blue Origin's president and program manager, Rob Meyerson, said he's still doing business with the space agency. "We're working with NASA to extend our Space Act Agreement in an unfunded manner," Meyerson said. The company is continuing to test its BE-3 rocket engine and work on its next prototype propulsion vehicle. Eventually, Blue Origin aims to launch crews on suborbital as well as orbital spaceflights.

The plans for future flights are dependent on continued NASA support — and Phil McAlister, NASA's commercial spaceflight development director, acknowledged that "the budget is going to be an extremely challenging topic."

If NASA's funding is reduced, Reisman said his company would continue to move toward manned flights, but at a slower pace. "Human spaceflight is our reason for being. We are in this for the long haul," Reisman said. "There will be impacts to cost and schedule, should funding dry up. But we're going to get there eventually."

More about the commercial space race:

• Blue Origin aces pad-escape test
• Boeing looks for test pilots
• Sierra Nevada's mini-shuttle passes first flight test
• SpaceX capsule splashes down after space station delivery

Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

NASA

Among the spaceship projects receiving NASA support are Boeing Co.'s CST-100 capsule (left), Sierra Nevada Corp.'s Dream Chaser space plane (middle) and SpaceX's Dragon capsule (right).

NASA has committed $1.1 billion over the next 21 months to support spaceship development efforts by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp., with the aim of having American astronauts flying once more on American spacecraft within five years. 

The lineup of companies matches what sources told NBC News on Thursday, but today NASA laid out the details, including the outlays for each of the teams involved. The space agency is setting aside $460 million for Boeing, $440 million for SpaceX and $212.5 million for Sierra Nevada.

The next phase of NASA's commercial spaceflight effort — known as Commercial Crew Integrated Capability, or CCiCap — calls for these three companies to take their design and testing program through a series of milestones by May 2014. Optional milestones could lead to crewed demonstration flights in later years.

NASA wants to have at least one commercial space taxi carrying astronauts to and from the International Space Station by 2017. The three companies say they can meet or beat that schedule, provided that they continue to receive NASA support.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden told reporters that the space taxi program "is a top priority of the Obama administration." In the wake of last year's retirement of the shuttle fleet, the space agency has had to depend on the Russians to fly American astronauts at a cost of roughly $60 milllion a seat. Bolden said the move to U.S. commercial transport would guarantee "that we never find ourselves in the situation where we find ourselves today," at the mercy of a sole provider.

Flying crew by 2015, 2016, 2017?
This is actually the third phase of NASA's Commercial Crew Program. All three companies have received NASA support adding up to hundreds of millions of dollars during earlier phases. Boeing is working on a capsule called the CST-100, SpaceX is upgrading its Dragon capsule to be capable of flying astronauts safely, and Sierra Nevada is testing its Dream Chaser space plane, which looks like a miniaturized version of the space shuttle.

The CST-100 and Dream Chaser would be sent into orbit on United Launch Alliance's Atlas 5 rocket, while SpaceX would launch the crew-capable Dragon on its own Falcon 9 rocket. The Dragon and Falcon 9 are already being used for robotic cargo resupply missions to the space station. 

The three companies say their spacecraft will be capable of flying seven astronauts to the space station, at a per-seat cost that's less than what NASA is paying the Russians.

NASA and congressional leaders made a deal that called for two commercial partners to receive full funding, with one additional backup partner receiving half funding. That would imply that Sierra Nevada Corp. is the halfway partner, but Mark Sirangelo, chairman of SNC Space Systems, said he didn't see it that way.

"We're very happy with the award," Sirangelo told me. "Obviously more money would have been great." He said NASA's funding, plus Sierra Nevada's own resources, would keep the program on track for the start of operations in 2016 or 2017. Sierra Nevada's milestones stop just short of a critical design review, while SpaceX and Boeing could be funded through that phase.

In a statement, Elon Musk, SpaceX's billionaire founder, CEO and chief designer, hailed the CCiCap award as "a decisive milestone in human spaceflight" that would set "an exciting course for the next phase of American space exploration."

"SpaceX, along with our partners at NASA, will continue to push the boundaries of space technology to develop the safest, most advanced crew vehicle ever flown," Musk said.

Boeing also welcomed today's announcement. "Today’s award demonstrates NASA's confidence in Boeing's approach to provide commercial crew transportation services for the ISS," John Elbon, Boeing vice president and general manager of space exploration, said in a statement. "It is essential for the ISS and the nation that we have adequate funding to move at a rapid pace toward operations so the United States does not continue its dependence on a single system for human access to the ISS."

SpaceX projects being able to launch a crewed demonstration flight in 2015, and Boeing anticipates achieving that feat by late 2016, said Phil McAlister, director of NASA's commercial spaceflight development program. However, he said those timetables come with a "big asterisk": optimal funding from NASA, which McAlister said almost never happens.

Musk told me that the 2015 demonstration flight would go into orbit, but not to the space station. He estimated that the first space station flight could take place a year later. Getting to that point would require NASA funding to the tune of $1 billion, he said — which implies that SpaceX would be roughly halfway there with the CCiCap funding.

A PDF file from NASA summarizes the details for the CCiCap agreements.

Who didn't win?
Four other companies submitted proposals for CCiCap funding, said Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator for human exploration and operations. Three of the also-rans — Space Operations, American Aerospace and Space Design — didn't meet the requirements for consideration, he said.

The fourth company was ATK, which has been working with Lockheed Martin and Astrium on the Liberty launch system. ATK has said that it will continue work on Liberty, which would use adapted versions of the space shuttle's solid rocket booster and a second stage from Astrium's Ariane 5 rocket. But without NASA support, the pace of development would be slower.

Gerstenmaier said ATK's development plan didn't come up to the level of the three companies that were selected, but held off on providing details about the decision process. "The stronger proposals were really the three that we talked about," he said.

Additional companies could negotiate unfunded agreements for NASA's advice, McAlister said. ATK and two other companies, United Launch Alliance and Excalibur Almaz, had such agreements during earlier phases of the commercial crew program. Another company, Blue Origin, has been received NASA funding for the development of its orbital space vehicle but did not apply for continued CCiCap support.

Looking ahead
NASA says the reliance on commercial transport to low Earth orbit would free up the space agency to concentrate on exploration beyond Earth orbit.

"For 50 years American industry has helped NASA push boundaries, enabling us to live, work and learn in the unique environment of microgravity and low Earth orbit," Gerstenmaier said in a statement. "The benefits to humanity from these endeavors are incalculable. We're counting on the creativity of industry to provide the next generation of transportation to low Earth orbit and expand human presence, making space accessible and open for business."

NASA is spending billions of dollars to develop the Orion multipurpose crew vehicle for deep-space exploration, as well as a heavy-lift rocket known as the Space Launch System. Those spacecraft are being designed to send astronauts to a near-Earth asteroid by 2025, and to Mars and its moons in the 2030s.

More about the space race:

• NASA backs Boeing, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada in space race
• Follow the money in the commercial space race
• Why SpaceX is setting the pace in the space race
• Cosmic Log archive on commercial space

Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

NASA

Sources tell NBC News that NASA will provide further support for the development of the Boeing Co.'s CST-100 capsule (left), Sierra Nevada Corp.'s Dream Chaser space plane (middle) and SpaceX's Dragon capsule (right).

Update for 12:55 p.m. ET Aug. 3: Boeing, SpaceX and Sierra Nevada are due to receive up to $1.1 billion to continue work on spaceships that could be carrying astronauts to orbit in the 2015-2017 time frame. Check out today's updated story.

My earlier report from Aug. 2: Teams headed by the Boeing Co., SpaceX and Sierra Nevada Corp. will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA over the next 21 months for further development of spaceships capable of transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station, knowledgeable sources told NBC News today.

NASA is to make the official announcement of the winning commercial teams on Friday morning — but NBC News' Cape Canaveral correspondent, Jay Barbree, received word from two sources who were informed of the decision in advance, on condition of anonymity. The sources did not discuss how much money any of the companies would be receiving.

The coming phase of the spaceship development effort — known as Commercial Crew Integrated Capability, or CCiCap — is aimed at producing the design for an entire launch system, including the "space taxi" capsule and launch vehicle as well as ground and recovery operations. The three companies tapped for future funding already have received hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA during earlier development phases. Boeing has gotten $131 million for work on its proposed CST-100 capsule, Sierra Nevada has been allotted more than $125 million for its Dream Chaser space plane, and SpaceX has won $75 million to upgrade its Dragon space capsule to carry crew.

SpaceX, known more formally as Space Exploration Technologies, has also received almost $400 million from a separate NASA program to support the development of the Dragon and Falcon 9 rocket for cargo deliveries to the space station. The successful flight of a Dragon to the station and back in May opened up the way for SpaceX to start regular cargo deliveries under a $1.6 billion contract with NASA.

Representatives of SpaceX and Sierra Nevada had no comment on the news. NASA said it would not announce the agreements until Friday morning, as scheduled. Efforts to contact Boeing were unsuccessful so far tonight. The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, quoted industry sources as saying that Boeing and SpaceX were expected to share the bulk of NASA's CCiCap money, and that Sierra Nevada seemed likely to emerge with a smaller award.

NASA invited companies to submit proposals in the range of $300 million to $500 million for development of their spaceship designs through May 2014, with potential optional milestones as well. Under an agreement with congressional leaders, the space agency will provide the full negotiated amount for two companies, plus half of the requested funds for a third company. It's an arrangement I like to call "Two and a Half Spacemen," playing off the title of the popular CBS sitcom.

What about the also-rans?
Other companies sought unsuccessfully to win CCiCap funding — most prominently, a consortium that included ATK, Lockheed Martin and Astrium. The consortium's Liberty launch system would adapt the ATK-manufactured solid rocket booster that was used for the space shuttle and the now-canceled Ares 1 rocket. The second stage would be based on Astrium's Ariane rocket. The composite capsule would be provided by Lockheed Martin, which is the prime contractor for NASA's more capable Orion deep-space capsule.

Other contenders from previous rounds of development included Blue Origin, which was founded by Amazon.com billionaire Jeff Bezos; and Excalibur Almaz, which is adapting Russian technology for its launch system.

NASA officials have said they'd be willing to continue advising the also-rans on an unfunded basis. On the other side of the table, all of the companies involved in the CCiCap competition have said they intended to continue spaceship development efforts even if they didn't win NASA's financial support, but at a reduced pace.

What lies ahead?
Boeing, SpaceX and Sierra Nevada have said their spaceships could be ready for NASA's use in the 2015-2016 time frame if they received adequate funding from the space agency. Last month, Ed Mango, NASA's manager for the Commercial Crew Program, told me that the middle of the decade seemed doable, but suggested that 2015 might be too soon.

"By the end of the base period, you need to have an integrated design that you have talked with the government about," Mango said. Actually launching a demonstration spaceflight with a crew might serve as an optional milestone, he added.

Boeing and Sierra Nevada are partnering with other companies to develop their launch system — and the most notable partner in both cases is United Launch Alliance, which could launch Boeing's CST-100 as well as Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser on its Atlas 5 rockets. SpaceX, in contrast, is pursuing its effort on a solo basis.

With last year's retirement of the space shuttle fleet, NASA must depend on the Russians to transport U.S. astronauts to and from the space station, at a cost of around $60 million a seat. All of the companies involved in the Commercial Crew Program say they can do the job for less money than the Russians. In comparison, the cost of flying the space shuttle was estimated at $1 billion or more per mission.

Like the shuttle, the new space taxis are being designed to carry up to seven astronauts.

The commercial space taxis are an essential piece of the strategy worked out by the White House and NASA to free up money for the development of the Orion multipurpose crew vehicle as well as a heavy-lifting Space Launch System. The Orion and SLS would be used for exploration beyond Earth orbit, featuring trips to a near-Earth asteroid by 2025 and journeys to Mars and its moons in the 2030s.

Update for 11:15 p.m. ET: I want to emphasize that Jay's sources did not tell him which companies are getting more or less money than other companies. They only named the three companies. The Wall Street Journal's report suggests that Boeing and SpaceX will be getting more money than Sierra Nevada, but we don't have any information about that angle of the story. NASA promises that all will be revealed in the morning, and of course we'll pass that along. 

More about the spaceship competition:

• Follow the money in the commercial space race
• Handicapping the commercial space race
• Why SpaceX is setting the pace in the space race
• Cosmic Log archive on commercial space

Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

If you think America's space effort is in a state of flux now, you ain't seen nothing yet: Just wait until billionaires Richard Branson and Robert Bigelow are vying to offer orbital hotels, or until there are as many brands of spaceships built in the United States as commercial jets.

Or not.

That's the curious thing about Space Race 2.0: It's definitely a marathon, not a sprint, and the field of contestants have had dropouts (like the bankrupt Rocketplane Kistler) as well as drop-ins (like the Boeing Co.).

If any of the racers make it to the finish line, NASA will once again be able to send U.S. astronauts to the International Space Station on U.S.-built spacecraft, ending the post-shuttle spaceship gap. There may also be opportunities for businesses and foreign governments to purchase their own presence in space, in the form of private-sector space stations. Regular folks may be able to buy vacation packages that include a quick up-and-down on a suborbital spacecraft, or even a stay on one of those space stations.

There'll be new opportunities for space research and manufacturing as well. Alan Stern, a planetary scientist at the Southwest Research Institution as well as an adviser to the Blue Origin space venture, has called low-cost space research the "killer app" for the space travel industry — right up there with space tourism and space station resupply.

But what steps lie ahead for private space ventures, and what's the time frame for taking those steps?

A crucial year
For the companies seeking NASA's business, the next six months to a year will be crucial: Four companies — Blue Origin, Boeing, Sierra Nevada Corp. and SpaceX — are receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from NASA to develop spaceships capable of ferrying astronauts to the space station and back. SpaceX and yet another company, Orbital Sciences Corp., have already been receiving NASA funding to support the development of unmanned cargo spaceships.

In February, SpaceX is due to launch a test cargo shipment to the space station and bring the capsule back to Earth. Orbital Sciences, meanwhile, is gearing up for its first test flight of its Taurus 2 launch vehicle in the same time frame. By 2013, both companies should be cleared for orbital cargo deliveries as part of a $3.5 billion combined deal with NASA.

The development effort for crew vehicles is more complex, due to the higher safety requirements. Last month, Congress settled on an allocation of $406 million for the next phase of the commercial crew development program, or CCDev. That's less than half of the $850 million requested by the Obama administration, and NASA hasn't yet laid out a revised plan for the next development round.

Based on the space agency's previously announced plans, the money for the next phase would be given out starting next July, for the development of an integrated system that includes a space-taxi capsule as well as the rocket it rides on. SpaceX can already offer the full package, which combines its Falcon 9 rocket with its Dragon capsule. The other contenders will have to buddy up with rocket builders — either United Launch Alliance, which offers the Atlas 5; or ATK and EADS Astrium, which have proposed creating a hybrid rocket called Liberty. Right now, the Atlas 5 is the favored vehicle in the rocket race, but the next phase of CCDev provides an opportunity for dark horses like ATK to get back in the race.

As long as no one crosses the finish line, NASA is stuck in the position of paying the Russians $50 million or more for each seat filled by a U.S. astronaut heading to the space station. So the space agency has a powerful interest in making sure that at least one space-taxi operator succeeds. NASA expects that it'll be using U.S.-built space taxis in the 2017 time frame, but warns that reduced funding levels will slow down the timeline.

Suborbital space race
Meanwhile, additional companies are aiming for suborbital space business, either for research or tourism purposes. Among the major players in this particular race are Armadillo Aerospace, Virgin Galactic and XCOR Aerospace,

Virgin Galactic says it's on track to begin powered test flights of its SpaceShipTwo craft early next year, with an eye toward offering suborbital trips at $200,000 a seat in 2013. Branson, the company's founder, is aiming even higher: "We're starting by suborbital trips, we'll then go to orbital trips, we're then going to look at space hotels. We're going to look at intercontinental travel at a speed much quicker than you can currently travel," he told me during an interview in October.

XCOR Aerospace plans to start testing its Lynx rocket plane in the air within a year, and wants to take on tourists starting in the 2013-2014 time frame.

Armadillo has partnered up with Space Adventures, the company that has sent seven paying passengers to the space station, to develop a suborbital launch system capable of carrying passengers or scientific experiments. The New Mexico Spaceport Authority says Armadillo ran a successful test of a reusable sounding rocket known as STIG A on Dec. 4. The rocket rose to an altitude of 137,500 feet (41.91 kilometers), and carried a scientific package from Purdue.

Blue Origin, which was founded by Amazon.com billionaire Jeff Bezos, is also working on a suborbital spaceship project that's separate from the NASA-funded orbital effort. (The company is bouncing back from the crash of a suborbital test vehicle in August.)

Next giant leap
Of course, there's no guarantee that any of these companies will get off the ground on the timetable they expect. This space race is notorious for slowing down the pace: Spaceship builders have been predicting that the golden age of private spaceflight is just two years away for the past 15 years.

The interesting thing is that the different companies are coming together in combinations that make the space race look more like a square dance: Space Adventures is teaming with Armadillo on suborbital tourism, with Boeing on orbital tourism, and with the Russians on trips to the space station and even the moon. Sierra Nevada is relying on Virgin Galactic's help for atmospheric tests of its prototype orbital vehicle, while Virgin Galactic is relying on Sierra Nevada to provide the hybrid rocket engine for SpaceShipTwo. Boeing is a partner with Lockheed Martin in United Launch Alliance, which plans to provide rockets for Boeing as well as two of its CCDev competitors.

Bigelow Aerospace, which has already put two of its inflatable space modules into orbit on Russian rockets, could conceivably purchase launch services from SpaceX or United Launch Alliance to establish future private-sector space stations — and it's teaming up with Boeing and Space Adventures to make the arrangements for orbital trips by tourists and researchers.

Where could all this lead? Would you believe to Mars? At least that's what SpaceX founder Elon Musk expects. He's teaming up with NASA's Ames Research Center on a proposal for an unmanned Mars mission in the 2018 time frame, and he has said SpaceX's rockets could send humans to Mars in the next 10 to 15 years if that's what NASA wants to do.

"The reason to do space and to try to push the boundary of space is that it's one of the coolest things that humanity, or we as a country, can do," he told me. "We want there to be cool things. Life cannot just be about solving problems. If that's all it's about, why get up in the morning? There's got to be things that are inspiring and make life worth living — and I think pushing the boundaries of space and the outer frontier is one of those things."

More on the future of spaceflight:

• SpaceX chief aims for Mars
• Boeing runs hard in the new space race
• Future spaceflight goes virtual at Sierra Nevada
• Blue Origin spruces up its rocket report
• Slideshow: The making of SpaceShipTwo
• Gallery: Ten players in the commercial space race
• Cosmic Log archive on the new space race

This report draws upon videos that are part of a Future of Technology package produced by msnbc.com's Matt Rivera. Stay tuned for a new twist in the saga of future spaceflight on Tuesday.

Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

Bigelow Aerospace

An artist's conception shows a Boeing spacecraft pulling up to a Bigelow space station.

Imagine racking up the frequent flier miles by the millions during a trip to low Earth orbit: Here's how it'd work, as sketched out by John Elbon, vice president and program manager for commercial crew programs at Boeing Space Exploration.

You buy your ticket and get a boarding pass from Space Adventures for the trip from Earth to orbit on a Boeing CST-700 spaceship, and show up at a commercial spaceport in Florida to get to the launch pad. The experience is much like boarding an airplane, except that you take a lift up to the top of a rocket rather than queueing up at a jetway.

About eight hours after launch, you pull up to a Bigelow Aerospace orbital station, which looks a bit like a series of sofa pillows connected by tubes. Those space pillows are actually pressurized habitation modules that were inflated after being sent into orbit. In about the time it'd take you to make your way out of an airplane's cabin and through the jetway, you're inside the station for a one- to two-week stay.

At the end of your visit, you get back on a CST-700 for the eight-hour ride back to Earth.

"Someday, that will be a relatively close description of reality," Elbon told his luncheon audience at today's NASA Future Forum, conducted at Seattle's Museum of Flight.

This little story has lots of gaps: Will the CST-700 be as big as a commercial jet, or as small as the seven-passenger CST-100 crew capsule being developed for NASA's use? Will the trip end in an Apollo-style splashdown, or a rough Soyuz-style thump on land, or a smooth, thruster-controlled touchdown?

Elbon is confident that there'll be a story to tell: Boeing is already working with Space Adventures and Bigelow Aerospace to flesh out the scenario. He cautioned that he won't be able to make the case for his scenario unless Boeing wins NASA's business for servicing the International Space Station. "It wouldn't be interesting to do that, though, if there wasn't a significant potential upside," he said.

What would people do once they got off the CST-700 in orbit? Well, what do people do when they get off an airplane at their destination? There's been a lot of talk about orbital hotels, perhaps in part because Robert Bigelow, the founder of Bigelow Aerospace, has been so successful in the terrestrial hotel business. But Elbon said he's talked with some of Bigelow's potential clients, who tend to be government representatives rather than private-sector entrepreneurs — and it turns out they're interested in space for the same reasons cited by the major spacefaring nations.

"There's a prestige of having a spaceflight program for these countries," Elbon said. But there are other reasons as well. "Fundamentally, they believe that pursuing technology, pursuing science ... will ratchet up their economies," he said.

Hmmm....

Stay tuned for additional updates from the Future Forum in Seattle by checking in with cosmiclog.com/nasafuture. You can also follow the action in real time by tuning in NASA TV on the Web or following the Twitter hashtag #nasafuture. Next week, we'll have a special video report about the commercial spaceflight revolution in Cosmic Log and msnbc.com's "Future of Technology" section.

Watch the morning talk by NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver on NASA's YouTube channel.

Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

Few companies are as connected to the history of U.S. spaceflight than Boeing. The company can trace its lineage back to Apollo and the Saturn 5. It's the prime U.S. contractor for the International Space Station, and a partner in the joint venture that manages the space shuttle program for NASA.

But now the company is running in a new space race for the post-shuttle era, with a business model that will treat Boeing spaceships more like Boeing airplanes.

NASA has committed more than $110 million so far to the development of Boeing's CST-100 capsule for ferrying up to seven astronauts to and from the space station, beginning as early as 2015. Boeing is partnering with "new space" companies such as Bigelow Aerospace and Space Adventures on its bid. It's even playing a supporting role on Sierra Nevada's rival project to build a winged mini-shuttle for NASA's use.

When Atlantis lands at the end of its current mission, that will spell the end of the 30-year space shuttle program — and the beginning of a years-long hiatus in NASA's capability to launch humans into orbit. Thousands will be losing their jobs, including employees at Boeing and at United Space Alliance, the Boeing-Lockheed Martin venture that's the main shuttle contractor. Work on the CST-100 will only partially close the employment gap.

Just today, Florida Today reported that Boeing was involved in negotiations with NASA and Space Florida on the use of facilities at Kennedy Space Center and its environs in Florida for CST-100 development. One option would be to use the orbiter processing facility that once housed the shuttle Discovery. That shuttle was towed to NASA's Vehicle Assembly Building this week for further work to turn it into a museum piece for the Smithsonian.

John Elbon, the Boeing manager in charge of the CST-100 project, says the company expects to decide which rocket would be used to launch the spaceship in the next two or three weeks, and to identify a manufacturing site in a couple of months. "Space Florida and the state and the center have been very good to work with through this process," he told Florida Today's James Dean. "They've been very responsive, and I know they're working hard to get an offer on the table here, so we'll see how it plays out."

This week I chatted with Elbon about Boeing's perspective on the post-shuttle era and the commercial space race. Here's an edited transcript of the Q&A:

Cosmic Log: Boeing has been involved with the shuttle and station programs for so long. What does the end of the space shuttle era portend? Some people are saying this could be the end of U.S. human spaceflight. How do you see the next chapter unfolding?

John Elbon: The shuttle is the icon of human spaceflight. For lots of people alive today, the shuttle has been around their whole life. There are a lot of people who have worked for their whole career on the shuttle. So it's an emotional thing to get to the end of such a successful program. It's a sad thing to think about. But it's a transition, I think, as opposed to the end of human spaceflight.

Boeing

John Elbon is vice president and program manager for commercial crew program at Boeing Space Exploration.

There are two big objectives going forward: The first objective is that there's a very significant investment that's been made in the space station. We can predict that there will be Americans on the space station through 2020, and so that's human spaceflight, and it's ongoing. But it's really important that we use the logistics system that's in place so we can use the station the way it was intended at least through 2020, and there's no technical reason why we couldn't use it beyond that date, to 2028 or so.

The second thrust is to take human exploration beyond the confines of low Earth orbit again, and even beyond the moon. Developing the capability, the spacecraft and the launch vehicles to take us back to the moon, to Lagrangian points, asteroids and finally to Mars — and using those missions as drivers for the technologies that are necessary to go to Mars — that's the second big focus.

Here's the way commercial crew fits into this: We're not developing a capsule and putting it into low Earth orbit just for the sake of doing that. We've been doing that for 50 years, since John Glenn went up. But we want to develop systems that can go to low Earth orbit in a very affordable way, so that we can use the station, use these systems to transport people to station, and still have funding left within NASA's budget to develop the capability for exploration beyond low Earth orbit.

So it's important, I think, to look at commercial crew as an enabler for the utilization of station and the development of capabilities for exploration beyond low Earth orbit. Plus, once we have affordable access to low Earth orbit, hopefully a commercial market develops in low Earth orbit. And, boy, that's when this thing can really jump-start.

Q: Some people have asked if commercial spaceflight is the way to go, why is NASA having to put in tens or hundreds of millions of dollars into supporting this? Is it truly commercial if NASA has to pay so much to have these new spaceships developed?

A: There's a lot of debate over this definition of "commercial." I can explain, from Boeing's perspective, what the market is like and what the business case needs to be. From our perspective, there's not a very definite market at this point beyond flying NASA astronauts to the space station. We think that clearly there is a market. I'll give you two examples: Space Adventures, who we're teamed with, has proven there's a market by flying seven people to space station on Soyuz craft, one of them twice. Clearly there are some numbers of folks who are willing to pay for that transportation.

And a little over a year ago now, we traveled with Robert Bigelow to the Farnborough Airshow, and we met with several of his potential customers. They are countries around the world who can't afford the infrastructure for their own space program, but certainly have the resources to rent one of his modules on orbit for some number of months, train their own astronauts. Assuming there's some form of transportation like the one we're working on, they can take those astronauts up to Bigelow's space complex and do research. From those meetings, I can tell you that there are countries that are serious about doing that, assuming that there's a safe and reliable transportation system and that Mr. Bigelow gets his space complex up there.

Those markets are there, but to define how deep those markets are and put a business case together that warrants the investment it takes to develop a transportation capability ... from our perspective, that business case doesn't close. So because this is a new market, it's important that there is government funding to assist developers in producing this capability, and then that there is a government use of this system to be the foundation of the market. In fact, we can close our business case around that NASA business, and then look at the commercial market beyond that as a significant potential upside.

It's a model similar to the way airmail delivery was used as a government effort to help fund the early endeavors in the commercial airplane arena.

Q: Another point of debate is the balance of money going to commercial crew as opposed to NASA's beyond-orbit exploration effort. What's the proper balance?

A: The technologies that it takes to go beyond low Earth orbit are much more involved and less existent than the capabilities to go to low Earth orbit. We understand that mission, we've got the technology to do that. It's more about running the business than developing the technology. But going to Mars, for example, is a big deal. It's a long mission, so the vehicles have to be more reliable. You can't come home on a moment's notice. Logistics are a huge consideration. There are issues around radiation in deep space. Mars has an atmosphere, so entering and landing on Mars is different from landing on the moon or making a rendezvous with an asteroid. You have a communications delay, so the crew has to be able to operate independently from the ground.

All that needs to be worked out. Those issues are not well understood. So it's important that those missions are developed and executed through government-led programs. That's such a grand adventure that it will probably require an international approach.

We are able to do commercial crew right now, and so are others in this game. In our case, we have the experts in the shuttle and station programs, and we can transfer them over to work on commercial crew. Others are hiring that expertise. But if we don't continue government-led programs, working on these new technologies so that we're developing the skills that can feed that pipeline for commercial activity, sooner or later that dries up.

Q: That raises a potential problem: Thousands of people are going to be laid off from the shuttle program soon after Atlantis lands, and that could lead to an employment gap in aerospace. What's the strategy for retaining workers so that they feel as if there's a place they can go?

A: I think the most important thing is to get on with it. The authorization bill that was passed said that we had to develop a multipurpose crew vehicle and a Space Launch System, and that we should use the existing Constellation contracts to the extent we can to do that. So the best way to retain the skills here is to get on with Orion and get on with SLS. It's not going to take much of a lull between now and when those programs really get going for those skilled workers to find other jobs, and then it becomes difficult to recover that expertise.

Q: Has there been a learning curve for Boeing to get accommodated to the new environment for spaceflight? Are there new lessons that have to be learned?

A: There are, but fortunately Boeing's got that kind of experience in-house. Not only do we have experience from the human spaceflight side, we also have a lot of experience on commercial aerospace vehicles — like Boeing airplanes, commercial launch vehicles, Delta 4 and Sea Launch, and commercial satellites. So there's a lot of experience working on commercial programs as well as experience working on human spaceflight. I think we're in a unique position, being able to combine those two and put together a team that can really focus on something safe and reliable, because of our human spaceflight experience; and also affordable and available soon, because of our commercial experience.

Q: Do you have any personal thoughts about the future? We asked people to tell us in an online poll whether they were optimistic or pessimistic about future spaceflight, and about two-thirds said they were pessimistic. Where do you stand?

A: I'm an optimist by nature.

This is what it is. The shuttle program is ending, and we need to look at this transition as an opportunity and turn it into something. You can't move on to the next step without letting go of what's behind us. As I said, the shuttle is an incredibly capable vehicle, it's an incredibly successful program — but like it or not, we're moving on to the next phase. So we need to figure out how to make the most of it, and grow into the next phase. It's a mourning process. We need to let go of the past and embrace the future.

More perspectives on the post-shuttle era:

• Sierra Nevada chases NASA's dream
• SpaceX chief sets his sights on Mars
• Is the space effort dying, or evolving?
• After the shuttle lands, layoffs loom
• Shuttle's legacy: Soaring in orbit and costs 
• Gallery: Ten players in the commercial space race

Correction for 3 p.m. ET July 18: An earlier version of this posting incorrectly stated that XCOR Aerospace was on Boeing's team for its commercial crew development bid.

Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter. You can also add me to your Google+ circle, and check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.

With the shuttle program winding down, the future of American spaceflight may well depend on how starry-eyed tycoons spend their money — and some of NASA’s money as well.

Three of the four companies that are in line to receive $269.3 million from NASA for building future spaceships are privately held, and what's more, they're led by well-off individuals who have at least a hint of intrigue about them. The fourth company, Boeing, is partnering with Bigelow Aerospace, which was founded by hotel-chain billionaire Robert Bigelow and has its own orbital aspirations.

NASA has laid out a plan for paying out the money over the next year or so, with the aim of promoting the rise of a new set of spaceship operators in the post-shuttle era.

In a commentary, George Washington University communication researcher Linda Billings picks up on the fact that hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are going to ventures that are headed up by folks who already have hundreds of millions of dollars.

"Why do these 'commercial' space companies need government handouts?" she asks. "The awardees are not hard-up start-ups (and these government handouts are not their first)."

It's true that all four companies have received money from the federal government previously, but none of those companies would characterize the payments as "handouts" or "subsidies."

They'd see them instead as payments for services rendered, goods delivered, or milestones achieved along the path that NASA wants them to take. And the $50 million that's been paid out so far under NASA's Commercial Crew Development program, or CCDev, is dwarfed by the $9 billion paid to commercial providers such as Lockheed Martin for the development of NASA's now-canceled Ares 1 rocket and now-downsized Orion crew capsule.

Although the financial details are hard to come by, it's virtually certain that the four companies have already spent far more than they've received for their spaceship projects. It's also virtually certain that not all four projects will make it into orbit. Because NASA is spreading out its bets, failure is definitely an option.

Here's a recap on the four spaceship development projects that NASA will be supporting for the next year under the second phase of the CCDev program. I'll be focusing on these efforts on Saturday during a Second Life chat about the post-shuttle spaceflight era, presented by the Meta Institute for Computational Astrophysics at 1 p.m. ET (10 a.m. SLT/PT):

Blue Origin

Blue Origin's orbital space vehicle is designed to take on trips to the International Space Station.

Blue Origin: The venture getting the least amount of money ($22 million) is arguably the most mysterious of the bunch. Amazon.com's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, set up Blue Origin in 2000 to follow through on his childhood dream of going into outer space. He has the country's only privately owned spaceport, nestled amid his 165,000-acre ranch in West Texas — and until CCDev came along, most people assumed he was targeting solely suborbital space tourism.

CCDev made clear that Bezos had higher ambitions: Blue Origin's agreement with NASA, made public in redacted form this week, shows that the company aims to build an orbital launch system capable of getting seven passengers to the International Space Station (or other destinations in low Earth orbit). Its space vehicle would initially be launched on an expendable rocket such as United Launch Alliance's Atlas 5, and eventually Blue Origin plans to field its own reusable rocket.

The suborbital effort is now seen as an interim step along the way to orbit. "The suborbital vehicle will be fully reusable and capable of flying three or more astronauts to an altitude of over 328,000 feet (above 100 kilometers) for science research and adventure," Blue Origin said. "The suborbital booster is currently undergoing integrated testing. ... The suborbital capsule will baseline key technologies for the orbital space vehicle, and is currently undergoing final assembly."

With rare exceptions, the only information publicly available about Blue's plans comes from government documents that must be made publicly available, such as the one released this week. Thus, it's hard to tell how much money Bezos has put into his rocket venture so far. But when you consider the construction costs for Blue Origin's production facility in Washington state, plus its facilities in Texas, plus all the testing it's done to date, it's unquestionably more than the $3.7 million the venture received under CCDev1 plus the $22 million it's due to get under CCDev2.

Blue Origin's partners include NASA's Ames Research Center and Stennis Space Center, United Launch Alliance and Lockheed Martin, Aerojet and the Air Force Holloman High Speed Test Track in New Mexico. The company's agreement with NASA says that Bezos "recognizes that successful development of an innovative space launch capability is a long-term endeavor and is committed to steady funding for development efforts to achieve a commercial orbital vehicle."

The company said NASA's support would "accelerate" the development of a reusable crew transportation system. "We are very pleased to continue working with NASA on development of our Crew Transportation System, and appreciate the confidence NASA places in Blue Origin," the company's program manager, Rob Meyerson, said in an emailed statement.

Sierra Nevada Corp.

An artist's conception shows Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser near a space station docking port.

Sierra Nevada Corp.: Sierra Nevada received $20 million during CCDev1 and is getting $80 million in CCDev2 to continue development of its Dream Chaser space plane, which is based on the HL-20 lifting-body design that NASA pioneered back in the 1980s. The concept was revived by high-tech entrepreneur Jim Benson at SpaceDev and inherited by Sierra Nevada when it acquired SpaceDev in 2008. (Benson had left SpaceDev two years earlier and came up with a different spaceship concept, but he passed away in 2008 before he could get very far with the idea.)

Sierra Nevada's top corporate officers are in the public eye far less than Jeff Bezos. After all, Bezos is still the head of a publicly traded company, but CEO Fatih Ozmen and his wife, company president and chief financial officer Eren Ozmen don't have much reason to go public. Three years ago, a story about Sierra Nevada in the Las Vegas Sun called Fatih Ozmen a "mystery man."

The Ozmens started out as employees at Sierra Nevada and acquired the Nevada-based company in 1994. Since then, Sierra Nevada has grown into a big-time defense contractor with 29 locations in 15 states. Inc. magazine listed its 2009 revenue at just under a billion dollars.

Sierra Nevada's website lists numerous awards, including recognition as "the top woman-owned company demonstrating excellence in applying innovative IT solutions to the federal government." But the company has also experienced the occasional hiccup, such as recent questions over the development of an imaging pod for the Air Force, called Gorgon Stare.

The company's agreement with NASA lists 11 partners, including Boeing, United Launch Alliance, United Space Alliance, Aerojet, Draper Lab, NASA's Langley Research Center, AdamWorks, SAS, the University of Colorado, the U.S. component of Canada's MDA robotics company and Virgin Galactic (which is working with Sierra Nevada on "global marketing, sales and commercial operation" of the orbital Dream Chaser).

SpaceX

An artist's conception shows SpaceX's Draco thruster engines firing to separate the Dragon spacecraft from the Falcon 9 second stage. Side-mounted thrusters could be used as a launch abort system and landing system.

SpaceX: This California-based company, founded by high-tech entrepreneur Elon Musk in 2002, has notched a surprising number of space successes lately, including last December's launch-to-splashdown test of its Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon cargo capsule. NASA is supporting the development of the Falcon-Dragon system with $278 million under a separate program for cargo craft development, known as Commercial Orbital Transport Services or COTS. If SpaceX hits its marks, it will be in line for $1.6 billion worth of NASA contracts to deliver cargo to the International Space Station.

Musk has said it would take $1 billion and three years of work to adapt the Falcon-Dragon system to carry crew, primarily because of the expense of developing an emergency launch abort system. This week, he said the $75 million in CCDev2 money would put SpaceX on track to meet that schedule.

"The award will accelerate our efforts to develop the next generation of rockets and spacecraft for human transportation," Musk said in a statement. "With NASA's support, SpaceX will be ready to fly its first manned mission in 2014."

Musk has made no secret of his long-term goal: to open the way for colonizing Mars and turn humanity into a multiplanet species. This week's statement referred slyly to those ambitions by noting that SpaceX's thruster system would "provide the capability for Dragon to land almost anywhere on Earth or another planet with pinpoint accuracy, overcoming the limitation of a winged architecture that works only in Earth's atmosphere."

A couple of years ago, Musk said that he invested $100 million of his fortune in SpaceX — but there have been more recent indications that the spigot has been turned down on his personal cash flow. SpaceX recently reported raising $50 million in additional funds, and Musk said an initial public offering may take place next year. Last year, there were a flurry of reports about Musk's financial straits, which led him to discuss the situation candidly in the Huffington Post.

SpaceX's agreement with NASA says the $75 million would accelerate crew-transport development by 50 percent compared to an internally funded baseline. So what does that say about SpaceX's investment? That figure is blacked out in the agreement posted online, but if time is money, that might imply SpaceX is bringing $75 million of its own to the project. The section listing SpaceX's partners and institutional investors is also blacked out, but the company notes that it works in "close collaboration with four NASA centers and eight leading aerospace companies."

Boeing

Boeing's CST-100 craft approaches the International Space Station in an artist's concept.

The Boeing Co.: This aerospace giant is something of an outlier. It's publicly traded, and has been involved in the U.S. space effort for decades. Among other things, Boeing served as the prime contractor for construction of the International Space Station. Billings' knock against Boeing was that with $3.3 billion in profit for 2010, the company didn't need a government "subsidy" for its spaceship-building operation.

However, Boeing's John Elbon repeatedly said in the run-up to the CCDev2 announcement that NASA had to serve as the anchor customer for the company's proposed CST-100 crew capsule. Without NASA support, the financial underpinnings of the project just didn't stand up. The $92.3 million in CCDev2 money, added to the $18 million from CCDev1, will keep Boeing on track to have the capsule ready for flight by 2015.

"By the end of CCDev2, our design will be firmed up and we'll have it synced up with NASA requirements so we understand our vehicle will meet those requirements," Boeing's John Elbon told reporters.

Boeing's go-ahead is also good news for Robert Bigelow, whose aerospace company has already put up two inflatable test modules into orbit on Russian spacecraft. Bigelow Aerospace is hoping that the CST-100 — perhaps launched on an Atlas 5, Delta 4 or Falcon 9 — can bring paying passengers to its future private-sector space stations as well as to the government-supported International Space Station.

In addition to Bigelow, Boeing's agreement with NASA lists Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Airborne Systems, ILC Dover, Spincraft, XCOR Aerospace, United Space Alliance and ARES Corp. as teammates and investors. Boeing also notes its agreements with Bigelow, Space Adventures and an additional blacked-out entity "to increase market growth."

Orbital Sciences Corp.

Orbital Sciences' Prometheus space plane, shown in this artist's conception, was one of the proposals that NASA passed up. Orbital is now reportedly planning to mothball the concept.

What separated the winners and losers: NASA has now released the full list of companies proposing CCDev2 spaceship projects, plus short rundowns on why particular proposals were chosen or eliminated. It's fascinating reading for space geeks.

The also-rans included alphaSpaces, Andrews Space, ATK Aerospace Systems, Excalibur Almaz, ILC Dover, Innovative Space Propulsion Systems, KT Engineering, Oceaneering International, Orbital Outfitters, Orbital Sciences Corp., Orbital Space Transport, Paragon Space Development Corp., PlanetSpace, Spacedesign Corp., TGV Rockets, Transformational Space Corp. (a.k.a. t/Space), United Launch Alliance and United Space Alliance.

Philip McAlister, acting director of NASA Headquarters' Commercial Spaceflight Development program, said Boeing and SpaceX were clear standouts from the rest of the pack. "They were the only ones to receive 'very high' confidence ratings, which I consider significant," he wrote.

ATK, Excalibur Almaz and United Launch Alliance were among the finalists, but McAlister said Excalibur Almaz was eliminated due to low ratings, especially on business considerations. He opted not to go with ATK and United Launch Alliance in part because of their lack of linkage to a crew-carrying vehicle. Those two companies were proposing only to build launch vehicles, and McAlister put somewhat less weight on that side of the equation.

"Within the U.S. industrial base, there is considerable launch vehicle development expertise, as many companies have successfully developed new launch vehicles over the last few decades," he explained. "In contrast, no U.S. company has successfully developed a crew-carrying spacecraft in over 30 years."

In other words, not since the space shuttle ... unless you count the private-sector SpaceShipOne rocket plane, which made three suborbital space trips in 2004. 

Lockheed Martin

Lockheed Martin's Space Operations Simulation Center in Colorado can simulate on-orbit docking maneuvers using mockups of the Orion spce capsule, left, and the International Space Station.

So what's next? The CCDev2 covers the development timeline through May 2012, but NASA is looking for another $850 million to cover the third phase of the program, CCDev3. Being a CCDev2 winner doesn't guarantee that you'll get CCDev3 funding, and it's possible that a company not receiving money in one phase of the program could be funded for a future phase. For example, SpaceX didn't receive any funding in CCDev1 but was awarded $75 million in CCDev2.

The agreements with NASA spell out milestones that must be met in order to receive incremental payments. It's not guaranteed that all the companies will meet all the milestones. For example, Rocketplane Kistler was awarded up to $207 million from COTS, NASA's cargo spacecraft development program, but the company couldn't reach its investment target and was cut off after receiving $32.1 million for hitting earlier milestones.

If the CCDev process is successful, NASA should be able to choose from new U.S.-built spaceships for launching astronauts to the International Space Station in the 2014-2015 time frame. In the meantime, the space agency will have to rely on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft for crew transport. NASA expects to begin sending cargo up to the International Space Station on remote-controlled craft provided by SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. as early as next year.

Separately, NASA is also funding Lockheed Martin's work of the Orion crew capsule, which is currently envisioned as a NASA-operated emergency crew escape vehicle. Such capsules would be launched to the space station without a crew, thus minimizing the flight risk.

The Orion may well turn into the multipurpose crew vehicle that Congress wants NASA to develop for trips beyond Earth orbit. Congress has set aside $1.2 billion in the current fiscal year for the Orion-based crew vehicle, plus $1.8 billion for a heavy-lift rocket capable of putting 130 tons of payload into orbit. Lawmakers want to see that mission accomplished by 2016, but NASA isn't sure the job can be done. 

Even if the beyond-Earth space transport system is ready by 2016, NASA is expected to use commercial transports to get astronauts to and from the space station. Using a heavy-lifter to send astronauts to low Earth orbit would be like using a semi to get from one end of town to the other. It's better to call a taxi ... which is exactly what NASA plans to do once its commercial "space taxis" are ready to fly. 

More on the space race:

• NewSpace Journal: Orbital may wind down commercial crew effort
• Aviation Week: Five vehicles vie to succeed space shuttle
• The Register: Millionaire's private spaceship 'can land on Mars'
• NewSpace Journal: Paul Allen considering new space projects
• Much, much more from RLV and Space Transport News 

If you're a Second Life user, please join me at the StellaNova Amphitheater on Saturday at 1 p.m. ET (10 a.m. PT/SLT) for "From the Shuttle to Mars," a talk about the post-shuttle era presented by the Meta Institute for Computational Astrophysics. If you miss the talk, you'll still be able to listen to the full hourlong podcast via MICA's audio archives. (You'll also find links to the archived podcasts from my three previous MICA talks.)

Join the Cosmic Log community by clicking the "like" button on our Facebook page or by following msnbc.com science editor Alan Boyle as b0yle on Twitter. To learn more about my book on Pluto and the search for planets, check out the website for "The Case for Pluto."  

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.