NASA Holds Competition to Develop Space Vehicles

BlueCup writes to tell us that the US space agency is holding a competition to develop space vehicles NASA doesn't have the time or resources to develop. The winning companies will get $500 million and NASA will merely lease them as the need arises. From the article: "NASA hopes the private-sector vehicles can bridge an expected gap between when the space shuttle fleet is grounded in 2010 and the crew exploration vehicle is flying in 2014. A thriving commercial space transportation industry also can offer researchers, and others, opportunities to send payloads into space without relying on NASA's crowded space shuttle schedule or worrying 'that the government will decide next month or next year not to launch,' Griffin said."

Comments

How about the Russians?

[Bob Cat - NYMPHS]

They have a reliable and well tested system, why doesn't NASA use that?

Re:How about the Russians?

[WindBourne]

First, We currently do. But we need to have more systems. If we can get several commercial systems to take hold here, then over the next decade or two, we will see real commercialization of local space.

Second, these systems are SMALL. The one being developed by Space Dev, is simply a scaled down derivation of soemthing that NASA funded. And it will be bigger than all the others. It will be able to take 2 pilots and 4 crew (with very little cargo) into LEO. Will it get us to the moon? Not even close. And if not moon, then mars is obviously out of the question.

Third, the system by NASA will go places that none have been able to since what was developed by kennedy's admin. And yes, that includes the Russian system.

BTW, while the current Russian launch system is mature, it takes them MANY years to get it there on all their systems(for example MIR). They have their fair share of issues with the older versions. When Russia does the klipper, it will be interesting to see how they do.

Re:How about the Russians?

[alshithead]

But I see the future as being beyond LEO. There's a lot of crap up there already. Hell, almost anyone can launch to LEO if they have some money either by developing their own launch capability or using someone elses. Commercialization of local space is not space development. It's becoming sprawl. The GP was talking about pushing towards the "future". To me, that is not LEO.

Why develop the CEV at all?

[Eric Smith]

If private industry can come up with a spacecraft that can meet the needs from 2010 to 2014, why shouldn't it meet the needs from 2014 forward?

X-prize?

[jollyroger1210]

Isn't this ust a reiteration of the X-Prize?

(by a different entity)

The year was 1987

[Audent]

And Nasa launched the last of its deep space probes...

Sadly, I worry that might well be true.

Why not simply turn over access to "deep space" to private enterprise? Asteroid belt mining is a staple of SF - is there a real commercial incentive today or do we have to wait till ol' Mother Earth runs out of diggable dirt-based useful stuff first?

And wasn't there a story about the moon being made not of cheese but of some kind of minable ... helium? Something like that...

(wanders off to google for a bit)

Re:The year was 1987

[Anonymous Coward]

Asteroid belt mining is a staple of SF - is there a real commercial incentive today or do we have to wait till ol' Mother Earth runs out of diggable dirt-based useful stuff first?

Probably the latter. Chairmen who have to answer to shareholders will choose short-term small profits over long-term huge profits everytime. And asteroid belt mining really is a long-term deal. Besides, weren't Larry Niven's belters all crazy aloof separatists? I don't think any corporation wants its miners to declare independence from headquarters.

FWIW, Michael Flynn in his future history starting with Firestar has the human race mining asteroids that come near Earth's orbit first. Slimmer pickings, perhaps, but they are easy to get to, and if you're keeping track of local asteroids for profit, you also have a better early-warning system for one coming close enough to possibly impact the Earth.

Re:The year was 1987

[Qzukk]

is there a real commercial incentive today or do we have to wait till ol' Mother Earth runs out of diggable dirt-based useful stuff first?

We'll have to wait well beyond then. First we'll have to wait until whats on Earth has been used up. We could go earlier, but the cost-benefit analysis says that it'll cost a lot and if they don't do it, then major corporations will benefit hugely by selling less metal for more money.

Once what we've got is all "gone", we'll have to wait some more... see, like idiots the people of the future kept saying "oh theres plenty it'll last for decades, and once it's gone we'll figure something else out!" Only now that it's gone, they're discovering that they really needed that metal to "figure something else out". So now "other" major companies (the mining companies went bankrupt when they ran out of metal to mine, all the miners were laid off, and the top brass assembled a new company, exactly the same as the old, but with cheaper workers since all of the freshly unemployed weren't exactly in a good bargaining position). These companies will recycle the used metal.

Except! It would be a terrible shame if these companies spent billions figuring out how to recycle all the rare metals and then lost their market to fresh space-ore. So they patent the process of retrieving ore from orbit, and proceed to sit on it for the duration of the patent. Meanwhile, they start spreading FUD about how much more expensive it would be to get ore from space and now that they can recycle nickel and other metals, they don't need it anyway. Metal is plentiful again, and people quit caring about space.

Problem solved, assuming that we manage to pull off a miracle and find a replacement for oil before it runs out, and not after the last part needed for the oil replacement equipment gets stranded in the middle of the desert because the truck it was on ran out of gas. Maybe companies will figure out a stopgap recycling solution for oil too... soylent oil anyone?

All I have to say is...

[Xiroth]

Frickin' finally. This is possibly the best possibly future for the public space agencies - fund research and development through a combination of grants and prizes, and not actually work on the problems themselves. They've done good work in the past, but they've simply become too large and inefficient, and that's exactly what privitisation is best at combating. This is very good news for people looking towards the future of space exploration, exploitation and colonisation

Re:All I have to say is...

[alshithead]

I respectfully disagree. At anytime you could have the entirety of your work taken away for "state security" reasons. The US government will NEVER allow a completely private entity to control space to a greater degree than the government. I'll mention it again...Robert Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" is the example that government will follow. If you control space to any degree you can throw "rocks" at the planet. The rocks can be anything where some mass will survive reentry and be able to be aimed at a target. The US government has contingency plans for "aliens from outer space". Why would they allow a domestic threat of the same magnitude?

Resurrect Apollo

[SourceVisigoth]

NASA already has an extremely well-tested and effective vehicle. The Space Shuttle is a weak and complex design that replaced a great and simple design.

For less than $500 million NASA could replace the Apollo program 1960's computers (on board and ground control) and develop a new hatch to allow the Apollo command module to connect to the Space Station. Beyond that, just mass produce Saturn 5's and Command/Lander modules.

This new competition is a Feel Good(TM) program that hands out money to the contractors, when NASA has already done the job.