On 8 September NASA began a procurment process for a human rating study for its commercial crew and cargo programme and then abruptly cancelled it on 15 September
NASA told Hyperbola: "We received inputs from a large number of aerospace companies that they would also like to participate in the Human Rating studies. We did not have enough Recovery Act money to pay for everyone that wanted to participate so we decided to cancel the synopsis and do the work in-house with civil servants and their existing support contractors. When the Human Rating products are completed in approximately March 2010, NASA plans to release the products for industry-wide review and comment through a NASA Request For Information (RFI)."
Not enough to pay for everyone? Don't they have $49 million for this? Existing support contractors on work like this probably includes Aerospace Corporation
Of course March 2010 nicely pushes this RFI out beyond the February publication of president Barack Obama's fiscal year 2011 budget request and whatever human spaceflight announcement the Obama administration has to make before that publication
What does this say about commercial crew's future?
UPDATE: I have just noticed that the original synopsis said (text changed to lower case and edited for clarity): "Competition for this opportunity is available only to contractors under fixed-price competitively awarded indefinite delivery indefinite quantity NASA Commercial Resupply Services [contractors Orbital sciences corporation and Space Exploration Technologies]."
So if only two companies could bid for this why are they talking about having too many interested parties? Either NASA wants to widen human rating work to include transport systems proposed by Commercial Crew Development programme funded space act agreement winners (being selected in November) or commercial crew is dead in the water
NASA told Hyperbola: "We received inputs from a large number of aerospace companies that they would also like to participate in the Human Rating studies. We did not have enough Recovery Act money to pay for everyone that wanted to participate so we decided to cancel the synopsis and do the work in-house with civil servants and their existing support contractors. When the Human Rating products are completed in approximately March 2010, NASA plans to release the products for industry-wide review and comment through a NASA Request For Information (RFI)."
Not enough to pay for everyone? Don't they have $49 million for this? Existing support contractors on work like this probably includes Aerospace Corporation
Of course March 2010 nicely pushes this RFI out beyond the February publication of president Barack Obama's fiscal year 2011 budget request and whatever human spaceflight announcement the Obama administration has to make before that publication
What does this say about commercial crew's future?
UPDATE: I have just noticed that the original synopsis said (text changed to lower case and edited for clarity): "Competition for this opportunity is available only to contractors under fixed-price competitively awarded indefinite delivery indefinite quantity NASA Commercial Resupply Services [contractors Orbital sciences corporation and Space Exploration Technologies]."
So if only two companies could bid for this why are they talking about having too many interested parties? Either NASA wants to widen human rating work to include transport systems proposed by Commercial Crew Development programme funded space act agreement winners (being selected in November) or commercial crew is dead in the water
on September 24, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply
Coppinger, you're conflating things. Get your facts right and try again.
on September 24, 2009 6:12 PM | Reply
This is a coup by NASA and someone in power must notice and speak out. Augustine, someone. The whole reason we're in this situation is because the system and facts were manipulated.
The arbitrary human rating requirements that passed Ares I but failed EELV were later deleted because Ares I didn't pass, but EELV was never re-investigated.
The only way the american entrepreneur can fairly compete with the government is if the government stops moving the target to block competition.
The anti-competitive gestapo crap from NASA must be stopped.
on September 25, 2009 4:03 AM | Reply
I'm not sure what NASA is trying to pull, but I don't see how this helps them. If Obama follows the HSF committee's recommendations for commercial crew, going underground with this won't matter much. In the industry, "NASA Human Rating" is a joke without a punchline. It seems more spiteful than useful - it appears the commission sent out an RFI to get Orbital and SpaceX's survivability specs just so they could put their own "human rating" out of reach.
Of course, NASA never could and never will be able to clear its own bar when it didn't have competition - imagine how foolish it will look when Ares 1 kills its crew for the first time. Then we'll have another Presidential Commission which to get ignored, but we'll also have commercial alternatives waiting for when NASA rockets become politically unpalatable again. Unfortunately, that is what it might take in the end: a dead crew. I hope NASA astronauts realize they are being used as cannon fodder for Senator Shelby's reelection campaign.
on October 3, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply
Roga, joking apart, the requirements for human-rating are redundant systems where possible and a system of early-warning sensors.
These need to be coupled with an Abort System. What do COTS plan for that? To be given the NASA-furnished LAS? Still very expensive to adapt and too heavy.
There is no simple solution. I point out also that the hydrogen leaks endemic to Delta IV rule out this option. On the other hand the NK-33 and RD-180 come from a (russian) man-rated environment. Furthermore the russians are planning to use the same RD-180 on their next generation manned launcher (RUS_M).
I agree with you about Ares 1 and will add that if it were ever built and killed a crew (or even triggered an successful abort) that would end it.
At the very least Orion should be designed to be compatible with multiple US and foreign launchers.