NASA’s Contractors

nationalreview.com ^ | 9/19/2014 | Taylor Dinerman

[rktman]

Boeing has walked away with the biggest share ($4.2 billion) of the money, as its design was further along than that of the SpaceX proposal and, in the opinion of NASA’s leadership, has the best chance of meeting the schedule. At first glance this looks wrong, because SpaceX is already flying its unmanned Dragon 1 on supply missions to the International Space Station, fulfilling its part of one of the original COTS contracts. While a manned version of the Dragon 1 was certainly possible, Elon Musk and the team at SpaceX chose instead to develop something far more ambitious. The Dragon 2, if it does becomes operational, will be years ahead of Boeing CST-100 and of any other manned spacecraft either now existing or on the proverbial drawing board.

[rktman]

A former astronaut friend sent me the press release on Tuesday afternoon. Kinda what we figured. Boeing has been in tight with NASA for a lot of years(40+) and SpaceX king pin and Tesla plant dude is in tight with the lyin' king. So, SNC didn't really stand much of a chance. I mentioned to my friend that I'd much rather see the flight vehicle return to a runway rather than bobbing up and down in the ocean waiting for the Navy or some subcontractor to fish them out. His response: "Amen!" Maybe SNC can find some investors to keep their entry in some sort of development. Lockheed had it's fingers in both the SNC vehicle and the Boeing vehicle so they'll still make some money regardless.

[illiac]

I’d rather fly with a proven technology like Boeing any day.

[rktman]

LOL! “Back to the Past”. As expensive as the SSP was, at least there was the capability to do more than just ride up and back. Think Hubble updates.

[teeman8r]

i believe i will wait for the muslim contributors to NASA before i make a final decision on which system to back.

i believe the muslims will have a lower overhead or something lowered on the head or cutting the head altogether...

i will just have to wait.

t

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

The Dream Chaser should win on looks alone.

[StolarStorm]

If it ain’t Boeing I ain’t going. That said, SpaceX is pretty impressive as well. Happy to see more than one player involved.

[DoughtyOne]

Boeing and Space X have been awarded part of the program.

I didn't realize that at first.

LINK

[rktman]

Yeah. Despite it’s minor mishap during the landing/drop test, I think it would have made a much better vehicle. But, that’s just me.

[rktman]

A sad day for SNC. Unless they can get some investors, that may be all for the little space place that could.

[DoughtyOne]

Does the Space X V2 offer a better payload capability?

I don’t know enough about the two systems.

It appears you have been quite favorably impressed by the SNC craft.

[rktman]

Carry folks. Still need to use cargo carriers for “stuff” I think. Boeing vehicle lands in the ocean. SpaceX vehicle designed to use reverse thrusters with parachute back up to land on terra firma. Dream chaser would have landed like the shuttle used to. On an actual runway. Jack Hydrazine may or may not weigh in. I’m out of the business now and am not following it that closely. Nobody’s ringing my phone off the hook to come back to work. :>}

[DoughtyOne]

Ocean return seems so 1960s.

I agree that a runway landing made much more sense.

The Boeing Vehicle must have offered something superior.

I need to study up on this.

I appreciate the response.

The Space X V2 seems rather iffy to me. I guess it probably shouldn’t.

All that energy to land, it just seems like it makes more sense to use a vehicle than can fly/coast back in.

[rktman]

Boeing has a very long history with NASA and a real good lobby. The SpaceX vehicle will be interesting to say the least. Think Flash Gordon with reverse thursters and extending legs to land on.

[DoughtyOne]

I think it will be interesting too. Stay tuned...