Optional Milestones under CCiCap and Phase Two of Certification:

NASA is currently funding three commercial crew providers under its Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) program which runs thru May 2014. Optional milestones under CCiCap beyond May 2014 could be exercised by NASA.

As with the two previous phases (CCDev1 & CCDev2), NASA is granting money under CCiCap using Space Act Agreements (SAAs), instead of Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR).

In parallel, NASA has also started initial certification activities using FAR-based procurement contracts. The first phase of certification is known as the Certification Products Contract (CPC) and its deliverables include early life-cycle certification products (alternate standards, hazards analysis, and verification, validation, and certification plans).

CPC money was awarded last December to SpaceX, SNC and Boeing for amounts that did not exceed $10 million per company.

Under NASA’s planned strategy, the next phase of certification (phase two) should start in 2014 and should include development, test, evaluation, and certification activities. It could also include, as options, a number of crewed missions to the ISS following certification.

McAlister indicated that although FAR will be used for phase two of certification, NASA has yet to decide which part of the FAR would be used. He explained that while they are planning to shift away from SAAs for the second phase of certification, NASA will not change the basic philosophy of the program.

“The specific mechanism (space act agreement versus contract) has gotten a lot of attention but what’s really important to us is the philosophy under which we are exercising this program. We want the philosophy to remain the same. We still want industry to own (their crew transportation system). We still want some form of fixed price arrangement.

“We would like to do a public-private partnership meaning the companies (will) own the design and they (will) make more of the decisions. For customers, it should be (both) NASA and non-NASA customers.

“We are going to provide that investment (by a company) be a milestone payment based on cost. Industries defines how (they intend to do things) and we approve (it). We believe (that) we are going to maintain our program philosophy and approach to be more of a commercial oriented development.”

Phase two of certification is currently planned to start in the spring of 2014 (after the CCiCap base period ends) but the exact date has not yet been finalized.

McAlister explained that NASA is not certain that it will be able to award it in the spring of next year. If NASA is unable to award it at that time, NASA may decide to exercise some of the early optional milestones from CCiCap.

“If it’s in the government’s interest, we might exercise the early milestones. We do not intend to exercise the crewed flights milestones which are the last milestones. As you get later and later in the timeline, there is going to be more time for us to push those efforts into the certification phase. But we have not made any decision yet. We are (still) keeping the options open.”

McAlister’s statement confirms what Ed Mango, program manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, had previously told NASASpaceflight.com last year.

Mango had stated that the optional milestones in the CCiCap agreement had two purposes. “One, to get the entire end-to-end cost and schedule profile for the company to certify their hardware, their way for a crewed demonstration.

“Second, we may need to activate some options if the budget and schedule drives us in the late 2014 timeframe. We are not committing to any of the optional milestones, and there will be a rigorous process to activate those milestones.”

Although the optional milestones funding for each company is proprietary, the hearing charter from a House Hearing on commercial crew on September 14th 2012 revealed that the optional milestones under CCiCap for all three commercial crew providers “have aggregate total cost estimates in the range of $4.5 Billion”.

NASA or Company Astronauts?:

A crew transportation system can either be offered as a taxi or a rental system. Under the taxi system, each company would use its own pilot to ferry the crew. Under a rental arrangement, NASA would rent the entire capsule and would thus provide its own pilot.

McAlister explained that it was up to each company to decide which model they preferred. “NASA has not dictated whether the commercial providers should use a taxi or a rental car system. We have left that up to the provider (to decide which) concept of operation is best for them.

“Because of our requirement that they have to provide a lifeboat function, it kind of complicates the taxi model to some extent but it doesn’t preclude it. It’s up to the providers to figure out whether they want their pilot or a NASA pilot. As long as they meet our requirements, we shouldn’t care (which option they choose). We are probably going to ask for a four crew person rotation if we have the money for it.”

McAlister added that there will be test flights during the second phase of certification. It will likely include an uncrewed and a crewed flight, but they are leaving up to the commercial companies to define how many test flights they need.

The issue of whether NASA or company astronauts can be used also arises for test flights under phase two of certification. This issue was previously discussed by Ed Mango on January 9, 2013.

Click here for additional Commercial Crew News Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/news/commercial/

“Under phase two (of certification), it will probably be combined crews between what NASA needs as well as what the companies want to do. In the end, this is a joint effort between our astronaut core and the crew members that the individual companies (are) hiring.

“It’s that joint test plan that will get us to an end state. It isn’t just one or the other. If anyone has developed aircrafts in the past, you know that it is military pilots as well as pilots from the companies that do the flight testing. We expect that same kind of approach as we move through this overall process (of certification).”

Competition Is Important:

McAlister also emphasized the importance of maintaining competition in the next phase of certification. “If the budget would enable it, we would like to have more than one” commercial crew provider (during phase two of certification),” he noted.

“The posture for the government is to have competition because the big item is going to be in this ISS service line (i.e. the crew transportation contract is part of the budget for the ISS). (It was the) same way with cargo (where) we have seen significant benefits from competition.

“A lot of people think that competition only means you are getting a good price. It actually means that you are getting a safer vehicle as well. These guys are competing on safety because they know that’s (one of the) evaluation criteria by NASA. The government loses a lot of leverage when you only have one (provider).

“If we want any little change, if there is only one (provider), there is really no reason for that company to invest additionally. My big concern is that we will prematurely go down to one.

“Both schedule and competition are very important to NASA. We would like to maintain those. If it gets to the point where we can’t, it will depend on the proposals that we will receive.”

McAlister explained that if they are in a situation where one proposal is evaluated very highly but the others are not, this could have an impact on how may providers they will continue to fund in the next phase. On the other hand, he explained that if you have two proposals that are very close, this could dictate a different outcome.

“The lifetime of the ISS might (also) be factor in the decision. Once we get those phase two proposals and they get evaluated and we get a little bit better understanding of where our budget is going to be, we will be able to make a better informed decision.”

Cost of Commercial Crew Development:

McAlister also discussed the recently completed Booz Allen evaluation of NASA’s cost estimates for commercial crew.

“We have had some internal cost estimate (for commercial crew) that we have used using a variety of different data sources. Some of our stakeholders felt that it would be important for us to get an independent cost estimate. (Booz Allen) did not do an independent estimate; they did an assessment on our estimate.”

McAlister noted they purposely used some of the same people from Booz Allen that did the analysis for the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Orion.

He indicated that the report indicated that the “government cost estimates are high quality and follow standard cost estimating best practices but should be considered optimistic (i.e., likely to experience cost growth).” He said that he was pleased with the report.

“We do have some reserves (Unallocated Future Expenses – UFE) to cover these potential cost growth. In general, we embraced all of the findings (of Booz Allen). We had some slight differences on some of their recommendations regarding some of (the) areas of cost growth and the magnitude of the cost growth. But in general at (the) top level, we thought that (their) findings and recommendations were positive and kind of validated our approach and certainly our cost estimates.

“Where we had differences, I kind of consider them not to be big ticket items.”

McAlister said that in their estimates they calculated the total funding which would be required for each company in order to complete their program. He added that he couldn’t share these numbers because they were proprietary.

Cost of Commercial Crew Operations:

McAlister also discussed the cost of commercial crew once operational, noting that “the assumption is that (commercial crew) will be cost effective with respect to the Russians. However, McAlister admitted that he was being purposely vague on whether this meant lower than Soyuz or not.

“There is still a big pretty range on what the (costs) are going to come in at,” he added. “We will have a better idea (of the cost) in the phase two (certification) contracts.”

Another point that was addressed by McAlister is whether NASA would provide any Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) to the commercial crew companies. He explained that NASA’s philosophy was that they should not generally provide any equipment to the companies.

“We did not want to want to be in the critical path (by) providing any GFE. (However,) we always said that there were two possible exceptions: docking and the communication system because they are so integrated with the ISS. It got a little bit complicated with cargo (for systems that are very integrated with the ISS).”

McAlister indicated that rescue services could potentially be another exception, noting “for global rescue services, it might make more sense for the government to do that using Department of Defense assets as opposed to have each company negotiate individually.

“However, we haven’t made any final decisions on that, because there will hopefully be flights without NASA crew and (the companies) have to figure out how to do that without NASA’s involvement. Whatever, they come up with has to work in both situations.”

McAlister also discussed the impact that a slip to the 2017 schedule could have on each company’s business case.

“With a slip, you lose a bit of certainty on the business case for the providers if the end date for ISS is 2020. It gives them a couple of (fewer) flights that they can rely on. The plan was always for them to get non-government customers.

“Each provider is looking at that market a little bit differently. Some of them are bearish on that market; some are little bit more bullish. If you are more bullish, you might be able to say that’s not a problem, I can still close my business case (without these additional flights).

“If you are more risked adverse and you are not certain about that non-government market, it might be more difficult to close your business case. That also factors into how much they are willing to invest. It’s all kind of inter-related.”

At the same meeting William Gerstenmaier, Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate discussed another issue which could also have an impact the business case of certain of the commercial crew providers.

He mentioned that NASA has not yet decided whether it will extend the Crew Resupply Service (CRS) contract to Orbital and SpaceX after 2016, or if it will allow new entrants such as SNC or Boeing to compete for new cargo contracts after the current CRS expires in 2016.

NASA anticipates releasing a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for phase two of certification in July, with the final RFP to follow in October. Awards are planned for the spring of 2014.

(Images: NASA and L2 Content)

(NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and CRS/CCP, to European and Russian vehicles.

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ – to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet.)

Related posts:

1. Boeing’s CST-100 conducts a successful full landing system testThe CST-100 crew transport vehicle successfully conducted its second parachute...
2. Teal predict over 2,200 payloads to be launched over next 20 yearsThe Teal Group – a defense and aerospace consulting firm...
3. NASA managers announce February 7 launch date for Dragon ISS missionIn what will be a highly historic mission, NASA managers...

Domestic Crew Capability:

Since the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet, NASA astronauts have been launched to the ISS on Russian Soyuz vehicles, a requirement that ensures the continuation of a US presence on a Station that was mainly funded and constructed by the United States.

While some argue the end of Shuttle was premature, the three orbiters successfully completed their unique role of hauling huge amounts of hardware and supplies to the orbital outpost, marking the start of a major transitional period for the US space agency.

With the ISS moving from assembly to utilization, and the orbiters receiving an honorable retirement, NASA looked forward to refocusing Shuttle’s yearly cost of around $4.5 billion into a new fleet of commercial vehicles that would take over some of the Agency’s Low Earth Orbit (LEO) obligations, freeing the US to plan for a return to Beyond Earth Orbit (BEO) exploration.

On paper the plan appears to be a perfect mix of propelling commercial space into the Premier League of space missions – initially supplying cargo to the ISS, prior to launching NASA astronauts to the giant laboratory in the heavens – followed by NASA’s flagship missions to explore deep space as far as Mars, enabled by the world’s biggest launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS).

In reality, NASA’s $17-18 billion budget is spread over many projects, each of which tend to come with their own political backers, who then fight over how the NASA pie will be sliced up.

While NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) drive is up and running – with Orbital recently enjoying the successful debut launch of the Antares, ahead of Cygnus supply runs, and SpaceX already completing two CRS missions – the path towards the Commercial Crew missions to the ISS is suffering from funding concerns.

The initial plan aimed at regaining US domestic launch capability for NASA astronauts by around 2015.

Although the three main competitors involved in the Commercial Crew Program – SpaceX, Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) – are currently making good progress on their respective vehicles, the lower-than-requested levels of funding in the NASA budget over the past three years has resulted in the 2015 target slipping by at least two years.

The shortfall is “only” in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year, which is ironically about the same amount of money that is being sent to Roscosmos for the purchase of seats on the Soyuz – a scenario that has been once again extended, to June, 2017 – in order to cover the slip in the Commercial Crew Program’s Full Operational Capability (FOC) date.

“NASA has signed a $424 million modification to its contract with the Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) for full crew transportation services to the International Space Station in 2016 with return and rescue services extending through June 2017,” noted a NASA release on Tuesday, confirming a deal that had been known for several months.

“This firm-fixed price modification covers comprehensive Soyuz support, including all necessary training and preparation for launch, flight operations, landing and rescue of six space station crew members on long-duration missions. It also includes additional launch site support, which was provided previously under a separate contract.

“The modification will allow for a lead time of about three years Roscosmos needs to build additional Soyuz vehicles.”

This Catch 22 situation leaves General Bolden fighting to ensure funding for Commercial Crew isn’t once again starved during the FY13 Budget Proposal discussions, with the release relaying comments the NASA head has made many times previous.

“Full funding of the administration’s Fiscal Year 2014 budget request is critical to making these domestic capabilities possible by 2017.”

However, NASA planners appear to be resigned to the fact they will require Soyuz support through to the end of 2017, after a full one year slip was observed on the Flight Planning Integration Panel (FPIP) document, available in L2.

This first Commercial Crew mission to the ISS is known as US Crew Vehicle -1 (USCV-1), with a launch date now penciled in for November 30, 2017, followed by a docking on December 2, 2017.

The USCV-2 through to USCV-6 are shown to launch at intervals of six months, with a Russian Soyuz penciled in to provide a back up role “in the event the US Crewed Vehicle is unavailable” through to the USCV-4 mission in 2019.

Partly responsible for the funding constraints has been the large political support for SLS and Orion, which may also play a part of the bigger picture.

Per the 2010 Authorization Act, the language guided NASA to bringing SLS on line by 2017 – much earlier than the required per its primary role of lofting large upmass for deep space missions.

The reason 2017 was selected was partly related to the “back up” role of using Orion for NASA crew transportation to the ISS, in the event Commercial Crew suffered a major schedule delay.

The language was written at the time Commercial Crew was scheduled to begin in 2015, but with the ongoing slips, there is a slight possibility lawmakers may gaze towards what would be an overpowered 70mt SLS for an Orion mission to the ISS.

Although the ISS wasn’t mentioned, intimations towards Orion being initially used in LEO were recently made during the NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) meeting at the Goddard Space Flight Center, with panel member John Frost noting the “conservative” process would be to fly a crewed Orion mission in LEO before flying crewed Exploration Mission -2 (EM-2).

“However, this would require one more flight than is currently budgeted,” he added, before requesting he would “like to see the rationale for flying first-time crewed to BEO rather than LEO (and) the rationale for not flying flight-configuration before flying crew.”

Click here for Commercial Space Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/news/commercial/

Flying the BEO-tasked Orion on an ISS mission would be last resort, with extending the Soyuz agreement likely to be the route NASA would take in the event of further delays to Commercial Crew. However, General Bolden states he is focused on avoiding further slips by stressing the need for stable funding, starting with FY13.

“Three years ago, the Administration put forward a public-private partnership plan, the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), to ensure that American companies would be launching our astronauts from U.S. soil by 2015,” he wrote on Tuesday. “If NASA had received the President’s requested funding for this plan, we would not have been forced to recently sign a new contract with Roscosmos for Soyuz transportation flights.”

“Because the funding for the President’s plan has been significantly reduced, we now won’t be able to support American launches until 2017. Even this delayed availability will be in question if Congress does not fully support the President’s fiscal year 2014 request for our Commercial Crew Program, forcing us once again to extend our contract with the Russians.

“Further delays in our Commercial Crew Program and its impact on our human spaceflight program are unacceptable. That’s why we need the full $821 million the President has requested in next year’s budget to keep us on track to meet our 2017 deadline and bring these launches back to the United States.”

(Images: L2 Content and NASA)

(NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and CRS/CCP, to European and Russian vehicles.

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ – to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet.)

Related posts:

1. Progress M-66 launches, heads for the International Space StationThe Russian cargo ship Progress M-66/32P has launched from the...
2. Boeing’s CST-100 conducts a successful full landing system testThe CST-100 crew transport vehicle successfully conducted its second parachute...
3. Progress M-18M docks with ISS following same day launchA Russian Progress resupply vehicle launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome...

Commercial Crew:

NASA’s Commercial Crew Program is currently funding three private companies to build transportation systems that can remove NASA’s reliance on the Russian Soyuz to ferry American astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS).

This process is currently in the Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCAP) stage, maturing from the Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) drive that resulted in three companies earning NASA money to develop their spacecraft to be able to carry NASA astronauts.

It is likely that only one of the contenders will be selected to win the long-term NASA contract to carry out the role of ferrying NASA crews to the ISS.

The current favorite is understood to be SpaceX, who have already conducted three successful missions to the ISS with the cargo version of their Dragon spacecraft, launched via the company’s Falcon 9.

However, they are by no means runaway favorites, with Boeing’s CST-100 already setting up base at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), and Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser spaceplane offering NASA “dissimilar redundancy” as the only option that isn’t a capsule.

Both CST-100 and Dream Chaser will also use the hugely reliable Atlas V as their launch vehicle of choice.

All three companies have been reporting steady progress during the development phase, with Boeing the latest to make a positive announcement about their crew-capable spacecraft

Friday’s update noted they had successfully completed a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) on the Launch Vehicle Adapter (LVA) – the component that will be used to connect the CST-100 to the Atlas V’s Centuar Upper Stage.

The review is one of six performance milestones Boeing has completed for the CCiCap initiative, a process that totals 19 milestones under NASA’s $460m award. The company also completed the recently completed the Engineering Release (ER) 2.0 software review and the Landing and Recovery Ground Systems and Ground Communications design review.

“The PDR was an outstanding integrated effort by the Boeing, ULA and NASA teams,” said John Mulholland, vice president and program manager of Boeing Commercial Programs. “The ULA design leverages the heritage hardware of the Atlas V to integrate with the CST-100, setting the baseline for us to proceed to wind tunnel testing and the Launch Segment-level PDR in June.”

All three CCiCAP companies have confirmed they are targeting a crewed test of their spacecraft sometime in the 2016 time frame – with SpaceX hinting they may be ready by 2015. Notably, the crews will be selected internally, from within the company roster, as opposed to using NASA astronauts.

Should the test missions prove to be successful, a winning company will be selected by NASA to conduct the first crewed mission to the International Space Station – a mission known as US Crew Vehicle -1 (USCV-1).

As of November of last year, the launch date for USCV-1 was November 30, 2016 – per the Flight Planning Integration Panel (FPIP) presentation (L2), resulting in a docking to the Node 2 Forward port – via the use of an ISS Docking Adapter (IDA) attached to PMA-2 – on December 2, 2016.

However, the March update for the FPIP presentation (L2) shows a full one year slip to the USCV-1 mission, with a launch date penciled in for November 30, 2017, followed by a docking on December 2, 2017.

The USCV-2 through to USCV-6 are shown to launch at intervals of six months, with a Russian Soyuz penciled in to provide a back up role “in the event the US Crewed Vehicle is unavailable” through to the USCV-4 mission in 2019.

The slip is not official and the FPIP presentation is a planning document, meaning its information is preliminary. However, like its Shuttle equivalent – the Flight Assignment Working Group (FAWG) documents (L2) – changes to the schedule always begin at this stage of planning, and almost always become the reality.

Click here for Commercial Space Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/news/commercial/

As to the reason for the slip, sources point to the squeeze on long-term funding projections as the major schedule driver.

Also, according to Russian media, NASA began negotiations with Roscosmos in February, with a view to extending their deal to purchase seats on the Russian Soyuz by another year, taking the arrangement into the middle of 2017.

A confirmed delay to the USCV flights will impact the ISS in several ways, not least because the USCV missions will carry four crewmembers, meaning that once they dock to the ISS, the crew of the station will be boosted to seven – allowing significant extra research activities to be performed.

Notably, one of the crewmembers on the USCV will be Russian – just as one American crewmember will continue to be rotated on the Soyuz. This is done in order to ensure that a US crewmember is always present on the ISS, even when no USCV is docked to the station.

It is not known at this point whether the seat on the USCV will be provided to Russia in exchange for a US seat on the Soyuz.

(Images: L2 Content, SNC, ULA, Boeing)

(NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and CRS/CCP, to European and Russian vehicles.

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ – to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet.)

Related posts:

1. NASA managers announce February 7 launch date for Dragon ISS missionIn what will be a highly historic mission, NASA managers...
2. ATV-3 launch slipped to late March 23 due to cargo issueESA are set to announce a new launch date for...
3. Soyuz TMA-04M sends three new crewmembers for busy mission to ISSThe Russian Soyuz TMA-04M spacecraft, known by its US designation...

SpaceX Crewed Path:

The latest Dragon spacecraft is currently preparing for its third flight to the International Space Station (ISS) under their Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract with NASA.

This next flight (CRS-2/SpX-2) – scheduled to launch at 10:10am on March 1 from Cape Canaveral – will be carrying critical supplies to the orbital outpost, ahead of completing its mission by providing what is now the rare commodity of downmass capability for returning hardware and experiments.

The mission is pending a final go-ahead from NASA, after SpaceX briefed the agency’s Mike Suffredini and William Gerstenmaier on what is now understood to be a confirmed root cause of the Engine 1 failure during Falcon 9′s previous launch with the CRS-1 (SpX-1) Dragon.

The first stage issue related one of the nine Merlin 1C engines, after – it is understood – the fuel dome above the nozzle ruptured. The engine did not explode, but did cause the fairing that protects the engine from aerodynamic loads to rupture and fall away from the vehicle due to the engine pressure release.

According to SpaceX’s Commercial Crew project manager, Garrett Reisman, some details into the root cause of the failure will be revealed to the public in the coming weeks. However, due to the proprietary nature of SpaceX’s hardware, only SpaceX – and their customer, NASA – will ever get to see the full overview from the joint CRS-1 Post-Flight Investigation Board report.

The results are also likely to include details of the second issue, relating to the upper stage that failed a propellant mass check at SECO-1, resulting in its secondary payload passenger – an Orbcomm satellite – being left in an unworkable orbit, prior to deorbiting.

The key to the continued confidence NASA have in SpaceX comes via the success of the primary mission objectives, as Dragon behaved well on orbit and suffered no ill effects of its launch vehicle having a tantrum during the ride uphill.

With the Dragon that is already flying being a vehicle that is partly crew-rated already, SpaceX are working a parallel process to their current campaigns to complete the drive that will fully enable their spacecraft to safely carry astronauts to the ISS.

This process is currently in the Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCAP) stage, maturing from the Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) process that has resulted in three companies earning NASA money to bring their spacecraft up to spec for NASA astronauts.

However, as reported by NASASpaceflight.com’s Pete Harding, it is unlikely that any NASA astronauts will get to ride on a commercial vehicle until late 2016 – as shown in ISS Flight Planning Integration Panel (FPIP) charts (available on L2) on the current plan for ISS crew rotations using what are tagged as USCVs (US Commercial Vehicles).

According to the FPIP chart, the first USCV will launch in December 2016, for a docking to the Node 2 Forward port – via the use of an ISS Docking Adapter (IDA) attached to PMA-2. A Soyuz spacecraft is also pencilled in for the same date as a back-up (all USCVs on the chart have Soyuz back-ups assigned, should the USCV not be available).

The USCV will carry four crewmembers, meaning that once it docks to the ISS, the crew of the station will be boosted to seven – allowing significant extra research activities to be performed. However, one of the crewmembers on the USCV will be Russian – just as one American crewmember will continue to be rotated on the Soyuz.

This is done in order to ensure that a US crewmember is always present on the ISS, even when no USCV is docked to the station. It is not known at this point whether the seat on the USCV will be provided to Russia in exchange for a US seat on the Soyuz.

Per the commercial crew update briefing, only SpaceX have said they will be able to conduct crew launches as early as 2015 – meaning the crew will be selected in-house, as opposed to being assigned by NASA.

This “crew ability” date is based on the milestones laid out past the current range of objectives currently provided through to the end of the CCiCAP phase in 2014, allowing for a notional forward roadmap based on the projections per company.

“We laid out a plan that gets us to flying the first test flight in the middle of 2015, followed by flying a crew to the ISS by the end of 2015,” noted Mr Reisman. “That would be done with a test pilot crew.

Click here for recent Dragon Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/tag/dragon/

“(However,) because this would be done prior to final (NASA) certification, we are not legally allowed to use NASA astronauts to be part of that test pilot crew – so it will be SpaceX test pilots for that crew. We’re not selling tickets, so don’t call our toll-free number.”

Mr Reisman, a two-time Shuttle astronaut, intimated he is not interested in becoming one of the test crew.

In order to get to the promised land of being the first commercial company to launch humans to the ISS, several key elements of the Dragon spacecraft require development – not least the Launch Abort System (LAS).

Dragon sports a series of eight liquid SuperDraco engines, built into the side walls of the Dragon spacecraft, capable of producing up to 120,000 pounds of axial thrust to drive the Dragon away from its failing launch vehicle.

Advantages of the SuperDraco liquid thruster – when compared to the traditional use of solid propellent – includes how the engine can be put through a series of throttling ranges, in turn allowing for redundancy, with SpaceX claiming they could lose one of the eight abort engines and still recover the vehicle and crew successfully. The engines can also be restarted multiple times.

Another advantage is the fact it’s not a tower system, which normally requires jettison shortly after first stage flight. Any failure of this key sequence of ascent would end the mission, given the flight profile wouldn’t be designed for carrying the LAS along for the ride.

Because the system is integrated into the Dragon itself – as opposed to departing the spacecraft during jettison – the spacecraft can technically abort within much longer periods than the tower version. With Dragon returning with the engines on board, they can also be reused on future launches.

There is also a large amount of commonality between the 18 maneuvering engines built into Dragon and the SuperDraco LAS engines – bar the fact the SuperDraco engines would burn through propellant 200 times faster.

The additional applications of these thrusters, when unused during a nominal mission – is the ability for them to enable a return to a landing strip on land. This is a key goal as part of the fully reusable launch system SpaceX are working on, along with the potential use for landing on exploration missions, such as the surface of Mars.

A large amount of testing has already been conducted via the CCDev-2 portion of the Commercial Crew association with NASA, with the CCiCAP phase taking this literally to new heights.

First up will be the Pad Abort Test Review in March of this year, a key review ahead of a detailed plan – expected in the summer. The actual pad abort test itself will take place in December, resulting in a full-up Falcon 9 and Dragon being integrated on the Cape Canaveral launch site, prior to aborting the Dragon from the pad for a full test.

During the year, reviews will take place into the second abort test, which will result in a Falcon 9 with Dragon launching as per usual, prior to aborting at the “worst possible time” during ascent. That “In Flight Abort Test” is expected in April of 2014.

Large amounts of work will continue with upgrading the flight systems, ranging from displays to the crew to the implementation of the Merlin 1D on the upgraded Falcon 9.

However, SpaceX do not lack the drive to push foward with their human space flight ambitions, not least because their founder, Elon Musk, wants to be on a SpaceX flight to Mars while he’s still young enough.

(Images: via L2′s SpaceX Dragon Mission Special Sections – Containing presentations, videos, images (Over 2,500MB in size), space industry member discussion and more. Now includes CRS-1 Image Dump, every single hi res photo taken from the ISS – 350 Hi Res images - of which produced the lead image for this article).

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ – to view how you can support NSF and access the best space flight content on the entire internet).

(Don’t forget to share this article with your friends by using the new social buttons directly below):

Related posts:

1. NASA managers announce February 7 launch date for Dragon ISS missionIn what will be a highly historic mission, NASA managers...
2. SpaceX scrub launch attemptSpaceX have scrubbed their launch attempt today, which was set...
3. SpaceX reveals Falcon 1 Halloween dateAt a private space complex on a tiny Pacific Atoll,...

SNC are one of the three companies who won through to the next stage of NASA’s commercial crew program, following their $212.5 million Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCap) initiative award back in August.

The Agency’s initiative is a competition, with Dream Chaser facing off against two capsules – namely SpaceX’s Dragon and Boeing’s CST-100 – ahead of a down-select that will choose which spacecraft will return a domestic crewed launch capability to the United States. Both Dream Chaser and CST-100 have opted to use the reliable Atlas V as their launch vehicle.

With NASA refocused on Beyond Earth Orbit (BEO) exploration goals, the keys to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) have been handed over to the commercial sector – with the Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contracts already resulting in two cargo resupply missions of SpaceX’s Dragon to the ISS. Orbital – via their Cygnus spacecraft – are set to follow in 2013.

However, 2012 was the first full year where American astronauts had no option but to hitch a ride to the ISS on the Russian Soyuz, following the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet in 2011. This highly undesirable scenario is likely to continue until the middle of the decade, before being breached by America’s own blossoming commercial space sector, supported by NASA money and guidance.

With even the “contract-wealthy” SpaceX admitting they would not have survived past their early years without NASA’s support, the joining of forces between government and commercial space is an encouraging light at the end of the tunnel, as new spaceships are born out of the premature retirement of NASA’s three world famous Shuttle orbiters.

One of those new spaceships – SNC’s Dream Chaser – is winning the hearts and minds of the space flight community, directly associating itself with the re-birth of America’s domestic capability, partly due to its appearance of a “baby” shuttle orbiter.

However, spaceships are built on capability, with Dream Chaser holding an advantage by design, simply by being different to its two capsule competitors. SNC class this as “dissimilar redundancy”.

Dream Chaser has already flown, with the ETA enjoying its first taste of the outside like most youngsters – on the end of a safety harness.

That event was the Captive Carry test near the Rocky Mountain Metropolitan airport, lofted on the end of a tether by a Sikorsky Skycrane helicopter.

The results of the test were fed into the planning for the final CCDev-2 (Commercial Crew Development) objective of a high-altitude free flight, or “drop-test”, involving the vehicle riding with a carrier aircraft, such as a helicopter,  before being released for a landing attempt at Dryden at Edwards Air Force Base in California.

“The Dream Chaser ETA will leave Louisville, Colorado for Edwards Air Force Base prior to the scheduled free flight/drop test. The final date is still to be determined. The test will be conducted in conjunction with NASA Dryden,” noted Mark Sirangelo, Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Space Systems Corporate Vice President to NASASpaceFlight.com.

“The Dream Chaser Engineering Test Article (ETA) drop test is currently scheduled to take place by the end of the first calendar quarter 2013. SNC will conduct multiple flight tests of the vehicle.”

SNC also noted that Preparatory work has already begun on the next Dream Chaser, known as the Flight Test Article (FTA).

*Click here for other Dream Chaser articles*

While Mr Sirangelo noted the future activity of the FTA will be determined on the results of their previous flight tests, this vehicle will likely be the Dream Chaser involved with unpowered high altitude, approach and landing testing.

This stage of testing will be historic for several reasons, not least because it mirrors the early days of the Space Shuttle Program, when Enterprise carried out her ALT (Approach and Landing Tests) at the same Dryden facility back in the late 1970s.

This historic commonality is not lost on Mr Sirangelo.

“Edwards is a historical place where many of America’s most famous planes and spacecraft have gotten tested and we like history in that regard. We think there’s a lot of value to it and so we’re going to be doing virtually the same thing that the first Shuttle tests did,” he noted in an early interview with NASASpaceflight.com’s Lee Jay Fingersh. “It is like Enterprise and you could look at it like that way.”

It’s also likely that former Space Shuttle commander Steve Lindsey will be at the controls for the first crewed test of the FTA, although SNC cautioned that “Steve Lindsey is the Director of Flight Operations for Dream Chaser and flight decisions will be made as appropriate.”

SNC added they are also determining the forward path for both the FTA and the third Dream Chaser – known to be the Orbital Vehicle (OV) – meaning there is no official word on whether the FTA will be the first Dream Chaser to fly a test flight in space, ahead of the OV which will be the Dream Chaser capable of carrying out commercial crew missions to the ISS.

Regardless, SNC are continuing to make impressive progress in positioning their Dream Chaser Space System (DCSS) as a viable option to remove the reliance on Russia to launch American astronauts to an orbital outpost that was mainly constructed – and paid for – by the American public.

(Images via SNC, L2 and Lee Jay Fingersh/NASASpaceflight.com)

(With the shuttle fleet retired, NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and Commercial Cargo/Crew, to European and Russian vehicles.

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ – to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet and directly support NSF’s running costs).

Related posts:

1. Boeing’s CST-100 conducts a successful full landing system testThe CST-100 crew transport vehicle successfully conducted its second parachute...

Blue Origin:

At the center of Blue Origin’s human space flight ambitions is their biconic-shape capsule, which was initially targeted to launch with the Atlas V launch vehicle, prior to hitching a lift uphill via its own Reusable Booster System (RBS).

The vehicle is capable of carrying seven passengers – with an ability for cargo runs – to the ISS, and will be available for independent commercial flights for science, adventure and trips to other orbital destinations.

It is also capable of a 210 day ISS lifeboat role, something Orion (MPCV) was going to be tasked with during its dark days surrounding the cancellation of the Constellation Program (CxP), prior to being re-promoted as a Beyond Earth Object (BEO) vehicle by NASA.

The Blue Origin vehicle has mostly shunned the public limelight, although some details on the key development milestones have been made public via the CCDev-2 process, relating to the Space Vehicle Mission Concept Review and Pusher Escape Test Vehicle shipment.

However, Blue Origin did receive a set-back on August 24 in Texas, when an in-flight failure of their second test vehicle – known as the Vertical-Takeoff, Vertical-Landing (VTVL) test vehicle was suffered at 45,000 feet/Mach 1.2, caused by flight instability triggering the range safety system and shut down the vehicle’s engines.

Originally, the Pusher Escape Pad Escape Test was scheduled for April, 2012, followed by the Systems Requirement Review (SRR) in May. As such, the successful pad abort test shows a six month schedule slip to Blue Origin’s original milestones.

The good news is Blue Origin are now finalizing their CCDev-2 work, marked by the completion of their SRR, an overview where engineers and technical experts representing NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration and the company assessed the spacecraft’s ability to meet safety and mission requirements to low-Earth orbit.

That review also included results from more than 100 wind tunnel tests of the vehicle’s aerodynamic design, stability during flight and cross-range maneuverability.

The successful Pad Escape test was conducted last week at its West Texas launch site, firing its pusher escape motor and launching a full-scale suborbital Crew Capsule from a launch vehicle simulator. The Crew Capsule traveled to an altitude of 2,307 feet under active thrust vector control before descending safely by parachute to a soft landing 1,630 feet downrange.

Blue Origin’s pusher escape system has been designed and developed to allow full-envelope crew escape in the event of an emergency on ascent for its suborbital New Shepard system. As part of an incremental development program, the results of this test will inform the design of the escape system for its orbital Space Vehicle.

“The use of a pusher configuration marks a significant departure from the traditional towed-tractor escape tower concepts of Mercury and Apollo,” said Rob Meyerson, president and program manager of Blue Origin. “Providing crew escape without the need to jettison the unused escape system gets us closer to our goal of safe and affordable human spaceflight.”

Traditional tractor escape systems are not compatible with reuse, giving Blue Origin an edge, given its pusher escape system is a key enabler of full-vehicle reusability, as well as improving the safety of human access to space. SpaceX’s Dragon is also targeting full reusability with its Draco-thruster based system.

“The first test of our suborbital Crew Capsule is a big step on the way to safe, affordable space travel,” said Jeff Bezos, founder of Blue Origin. “This wouldn’t have been possible without NASA’s help, and the Blue Origin team worked hard and smart to design this system, build it, and pull off this test.”

NASA’s release on the successful test noted their continued effort to “foster the development of a US commercial crew space transportation capability with the goal of achieving safe, reliable and cost-effective access..” However, Blue Origin will not receive any more NASA money at their conclusion of their CCDev-2 efforts.

That decision was made back in August via the Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCap) awards, with NASA managers deciding to push forward with SpaceX and their Falcon 9/Dragon duo, along with Boeing’s CST-100 and Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser – the latter two both set to launch with United Launch Alliance’s Atlas V.

However, the money has not been wasted on Blue Origin, as they will mature to a specific point of development, even if the lack of NASA funding slows down their forward plans. As such, should the worst case scenario occur with any of the leading CCiCAP, the Agency could effectively call on Blue Origin to pick up the slack.

“The progress Blue Origin has made on its suborbital and orbital capabilities really is encouraging for the overall future of human spaceflight,” CCP Manager Ed Mango said. “It was awesome to see a spacecraft NASA played a role in developing take flight.”

And that level of maturity also relates to their own launch vehicle, past any use of the Atlas V, as Blue Origin successfully fired the thrust chamber assembly for its new 100,000 pound thrust BE-3 liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen rocket
engine recently.

As part of Blue’s Reusable Booster System (RBS), the engines are designed eventually to launch the biconic-shaped Space Vehicle the company is developing.

“Blue Origin continues to be extremely innovative as it develops a crew-capable vehicle for suborbital and orbital flights,” added Mr Mango. “We’re thrilled the company’s engine test fire was met with success.”

The test took place early this month on the E-1 test stand at NASA’s Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis, Miss. Blue Origin engineers successfully completed the test by powering the thrust chamber to its full power level.

“We are very excited to have demonstrated a new class of high-performance hydrogen engines,” added Blue Origin’s Mr Meyerson. “Access to the Stennis test facility and its talented operations team was instrumental in conducting full-power testing of this new thrust chamber.”

(Images: Blue Origin and SNC)

(NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and COTS/CRS/CCDEV, to European and Russian vehicles. 

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ - to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet.)

Related posts:

1. Boeing’s CST-100 conducts a successful full landing system testThe CST-100 crew transport vehicle successfully conducted its second parachute...

Atlas V Human Rating:

The Atlas V has an esteemed history, including launching astronauts during the early days of the space program. It was an Atlas booster that launched John Glenn into space inside Friendship 7 in 1962, sending the first American into orbit around the planet.

While its more recent history – as the Atlas V – has enjoyed a near-flawless record in lofting payloads that have included national security spacecraft uphill, its ambitions to once again launch biological cargo has only become a real possibility in the last few years.

Plans were afoot to provide Atlas V as the crew transport via an agreement between Lockheed Martin, SpaceDev and Bigelow Aerospace in 2006, at a time certain leaders at NASA embarrassingly claimed the rocket suffered from an Achilles’ heel relating to “Black Zones” – a key concern for safely aborting during ascent.

With those claims fully dismissed, and NASA’s need to find a domestic launch vehicle capable of regaining American independence for its astronauts since the premature end of the Shuttle Program, two rockets are leading the way towards winning a contract to remove the requirement of hitching rides on the Russian Soyuz in order to get to destinations such as the International Space Station.

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Dragon combination are arguably leading the race, with the duo already into Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) operations, ahead of Dragon’s outfitting into a crew-capable spacecraft.

They are one of the three winners of the Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCap) award, aimed at providing US crew launch capability to the ISS by the middle of this decade. The other two winners are both aiming to fly on the Atlas V – namely Boeing and their CST-100 spacecraft, and Dream Chaser, currently being tested by Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC).

Atlas V leads the way in flight experience, but has yet to launch with either of its crewed spacecraft companions. Those first test flights are also at risk of never occurring for political and funding reasons.

While the desired scenario would be to have both Falcon 9 and Atlas V launching crewed vehicles, in turn providing redundancy and schedule protection in the event of mishap – such as one more serious than the engine shutdown on the latest Falcon 9 launch – some lawmakers want an immediate down-select to just one vehicle combination.

This request is believed to be related to the protection of funding for the Space Launch System (SLS) – NASA’s new Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLV) that some NASA leaders have been targeting as the source for additional commercial crew funding, following recent cuts.

SLS is currently scheduled to launch in 2017, but recently started to show signs it will slip into 2018 – even at this early stage of development – after a core stage design issue was revealed. (Info restricted to L2 at this time, LINK).

In order to pass the NASA requirements to launch CST-100 and/or Dream Chaser, the Atlas V – under the control of the United Launch Alliance (ULA) – has undergone a set of milestones to understand its design risks, its capabilities, how it can be used within the context of flying NASA crew and maturing designs for the Emergency Detection System (EDS), launch vehicle processing and launch architectures under a crewed configuration.

With an unfunded SAA allowing ULA to work with NASA’s Commercial Crew Program to establish an Atlas V system baseline compliance with NASA Crew Transportation System (CTS) requirements and processes, ULA announced on Monday that they had completed the fifth and final milestone for its Commercial Crew Development Round 2 (CCDev2) phase.

“The ULA team did an outstanding job outlining how it plans to integrate its launch vehicle with completely different spacecraft designs,” said Ed Mango, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program manager.

“We commend ULA for taking on the challenge of human spaceflight, and we look forward to learning more about their innovative and cost-saving solutions as we continue to move forward in developing a crew transportation capability for America.”

ULA’s obligations included; continuing to advance the Atlas V CTS concept, including design maturation and analyses. Conduct ULA program reviews as planned, Perform a Design Equivalency Review (DER). Develop Hazard Analyses unique for human spaceflight. Develop a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). Document Atlas V CTS certification baseline. Conduct Systems Requirements Review (SRR).

ULA established requirements for its dual-engine Centaur configuration and selected the design approaches it would take for accommodating a spacecraft and its crew at the company’s launch facility in Florida, Space Launch Complex 41 on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

However, a key element of the work was on the Emergency Detection System (EDS) that will teach the Atlas V to monitor critical launch vehicle and spacecraft systems and issue status, providing warning and abort commands to crew during their mission to low Earth orbit.

The resulting Hazard, System Safety and Probabilistic Risk Assessment detailed how ULA’s Atlas V rocket launch system hardware would ensure crew safety during launch and ascent.

“This has been a tremendous team effort between NASA, ULA and our commercial crew partners and we have made a great deal of progress toward safe, affordable human spaceflight,” noted George Sowers, ULA’s vice president of human launch services.

“This baseline will be used by both Boeing and SNC as they proceed into the CCiCap phase, providing them with the confidence that the flight-proven Atlas V will be ready to safely, reliably and cost-effectively launch.”

(Images via L2′s Commercial Crew section, with additional images via ULA and SNC.)

(With the shuttle fleet retired, NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and COTS/CRS/CCDEV, to European and Russian vehicles. 

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ - to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet and directly support NSF’s running costs)

Related posts:

1. LIVE: ULA Atlas V launches WGS-2 for USAFUnited Launch Alliance (ULA) has launched the WGS-2 satellite on...
2. Atlas V launches classified PAN satellite for US GovernmentA United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket has launched with PAN,...
3. ULA Atlas V launches with classified NROL-41The United Launch Alliance (ULA) have launched an Atlas V...

ULA At The Cape:

ULA currently launch satellites and spacecraft from both Cape Canaveral in Florida and Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. However, they are currently working with two commercial crew partners – Boeing and their CST-100 capsule, and Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), who are making progress on their Dream Chaser spacecraft.

Both Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCap) funding initiatives winners have already opted to launch on a human-rated version of the ULA Atlas V rocket, should they win the ultimate prize of launching American astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) later this decade.

At present, Atlas V’s launch from Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex 41 (SLC-41), originally built as a Titan IIIC launch pad in the 1960s and subsequently the Titan IIIE and Titan IV.

The first launch from the complex, then designated LC-41, occurred in December 1965, when a Titan launched the LES-3, LES-4, Oscar 4 and OV2-3 satellites. In April 1999, the last Titan launch from SLC-41 failed to deploy a Defense Support Program missile defence satellite.

The complex was renamed Space Launch Complex 41, or SLC-41, in 1997, ahead of the fixed and mobile service towers being demolished in controlled explosions, beginning work to convert the pad for use by the Atlas V – debuting in 2002. It will host its 29th Atlas V launch in late October, when OTV-3 is lofted uphill by the reliable rocket.

ULA also operate Space Launch Complex 37B (SLC-37B) at the Cape for their Delta IV vehicles.

Originally built in the 1960s as a backup launch complex for the Apollo programme, it was used to test hardware which would be used in the moon landings. The first launch from the complex was of SA-5, the first all-up test of the Saturn I, and the first orbital launch of a Saturn rocket, on 29 January 1964.

The original Launch Complex 37 consisted of two pads, but with a single mobile service tower (MST) which could be moved between the two pads. Pad A was never used, whilst pad B, the same pad used by the Delta IV, was used by six Saturn I rockets followed by two Saturn IBs.

The last launch from the complex came in January 1968, when a Saturn IB launched Apollo 5; the first test flight of the Lunar Module in Earth orbit.

Following the launch of Apollo 5, LC-37 was mothballed along with Launch Complex 34 ahead of the Apollo Applications programme, which would have seen additional flights of the Apollo spacecraft to Low Earth orbit, via the use of the Saturn IB.

Of all the Applications proposals, only one ever flew; Skylab. And with only three manned flights required to support this, it was decided that it would be cheaper to convert Launch Complex 39 to accommodate the Saturn IB than to reactivate either LC-34 or LC-37, and the complex was demolished in the 1970s

Construction of the new complex began in the late 1990s, with the first Delta IV launch from the pad occurring in 2002. The June Delta IV launch of the classified NROL-15 payload for the United States National Reconnaissance Office was the sixteenth Delta IV to launch from SLC-37B.

With ULA a major player in the launch business, an expanding order book can be catered for within the confines of their current infrastructure. However, the company is aware they need to look towards the future, especially if they also become the launch provider for a commercial crew vehicle.

“We still have a lot of untapped capacity in both the production and launch infrastructure. So we can increase rate by increasing staffing,” noted Dr George Sowers, ULA VP for Human Launch Services, during a Q&A session with NASASpaceFlight.com members.

“At some point depending on where the demand was coming from, we would have to increase launch infrastructure – e.g., additional MLP (Mobile Launch Platform or VIF (Vehicle Integration Facility) for Atlas.”

Taking another pad in the area – namely at Complex 39 at KSC – was also classed as an option by Dr Sowers, citing the studies and discussions that have taken place with the famous spaceport. Moving forward with such a plan would depend on the viability of such an agreement.

Click here for ULA Atlas V Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/tag/atlas-v/

“ULA is interested in the possibility in launching Atlas or Delta from LC-39. We have participated in the KSC led studies looking at options,” added the ULA VP. “Technically it’s feasible. The biggest hurdle right now is devising a business model that works.”

Notes and graphics from the studies were acquired by L2 (LINK) earlier in the year, showing an integration path involving an Atlas V being stacked inside the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), atop of a former Shuttle MLP, prior to being rolled out to Complex 39.

Such an arrangement is part of KSC’s drive to become a multi-user spaceport, allowing for dual flows inside the VAB for both a commercial vehicle and the Space Launch System (SLS) – with work ongoing at this time to remove and replace platforms that were dedicated to the Shuttle stack.

The Kennedy Space Center’s Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program recently noted how they expect to transition their three MLPs, with MLP-1 set to retire, MLP-2 to be dedicated to a liquid fueled vehicle – such as Atlas V, and MLP-3 to be used by a Solid Rocket Motor vehicle – such as the Liberty rocket.

With SLS taking over the former Ares Mobile Launcher, the overall plan fits with the range of potential vehicles that could utilize KSC as their home port.

Previous comments that Liberty would require a second Ares-style ML no longer apply for the short to medium term, with source information noting ATK are now planning to concentrate on unmanned payload missions, as opposed to crewed flights - after missing out on the CCiCap funding – launching the vehicle from a modified platform (MLP-3).

The plan – should Liberty progress – would be to host the vehicle on one of the SRB Hold Down Posts (HDPs) previously used by a Shuttle booster, next to a minimal umbilical tower, per source notes (L2).

For Atlas V, a standard Atlas MLP would be placed over one of the SRB HDPs locations (Side 4) on MLP-2. The Atlas V – with graphics depicting a human rated vehicle with notional spacecraft on top – would then be integrated on to its standard launch mount.

A crew access tower would then be built over the location of the other SRB HDP, rising above the Atlas V MLP and reaching over – or around – to allow for access to the spacecraft the Atlas V was tasked with launching.

The entire set of hardware and rocket would then be rolled out of the VAB by the Crawler Transporter (CT) likely to Pad 39B – a clean pad capable of hosting both commercial crew vehicles and SLS.

Should this option become a reality, both Dream Chaser and CST-100 would not have far to travel for their mating operations with the Atlas V. CST-100 has already agreed a deal to be processed inside the former Shuttle Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF-3), while SNC are close to deciding on a KSC facility to host their spaceplane.

Images via L2′s Commercial Crew section, with additional images via ULA and SNC)

(With the shuttle fleet retired, NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and COTS/CRS/CCDEV, to European and Russian vehicles. 

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ - to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet and directly support NSF’s running costs)

Related posts:

1. Atlas V launches classified PAN satellite for US GovernmentA United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket has launched with PAN,...
2. Atlas V/Solar Dynamics Observatory launches at second attemptAn Atlas V rocket has launched with NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory...
3. LIVE: ULA Atlas V launches WGS-2 for USAFUnited Launch Alliance (ULA) has launched the WGS-2 satellite on...

OPF-3 For CST-100:

The start date for the conversion of OPF-3 follows the announcement last October of a 15 year lease deal, agreed between NASA and Space Florida – the State’s aerospace economic development agency.

The deal between NASA and Space Florida included the use and modification of OPF-3, the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) Processing Facility and Processing Control Center (PCC).

This agreement then allowed Space Florida to lease OPF-3 to the Boeing Company to manufacture and test the company’s Crew Space Transportation (CST-100) spacecraft, creating up to 550 jobs along the Space Coast.

In addition to the October announcement, Boeing announced it would be locating its Commercial Crew Program headquarters at the world famous spaceport.

Boeing have made good progress through their CCDev-2 (Commercial Crew) contract milestones – worth over $92m – centered around their CST-100 capsule, a vehicle configurable to carry up to seven crew/passengers or an equivalent combination of passengers and pressurized cargo to LEO destinations, including the International Space Station.

Based on their early progress via CCDev-2, NASA opted to select the spacecraft as one of their three Commercial Crew integrated Capability (CCiCap) award winners last month, tasking Boeing with 19 milestones for their $460m funding, culminating in an integrated critical design review milestone, along with significant propulsion system, avionics, and wind tunnel development and testing.

This vehicle will be using a human rated Atlas V launch vehicle, currently set to launch from SLC-41 at Cape Canaveral. NASA estimate that a crewed demonstration flight could occur as early as mid 2016, based on long term funding expectations.

With Discovery now retired away from KSC, soon to be followed by Endeavour, only one OPF is in use for the orbiters – OPF-2 with Atlantis, as she prepares for a trip down the road to a new facility at the Visitor Center in the not too distant future.

A large amount of work will be required to convert OPF-3 from its role with the Shuttle, with the facility still sporting the giant platforms which were used to surround an orbiter during her processing flow. That removal work will begin on September 10, as OPF-3 transitions to to C3PF.

“Space Florida has initiated work to modernize Orbiter Processing Facility-3 (OPF-3 or K6-0696) for commercial spacecraft assembly and production operations,” noted a Transition and Retirement (T&R) note on L2. “Through this effort, OPF-3 will become the Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility (C3PF).”

Click here for T&R Articles: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/tag/tr/

“Work begins on Monday, Sept. 10. Removal of the high bay orbiter work stands is expected to be complete in late 2012, with full facility modernization complete in summer 2013. The Processing Control Center (PCC or K6-1094) also will be renovated under the effort.”

The transition of OPF-3 is the latest step KSC is making to transition from a historically government-only launch complex to a multi-user spaceport.

“This exciting project is the result of a first-of-its-kind partnership between NASA, Space Florida, and the commercial space industry and represents a major concrete step towards transforming KSC for the future by enabling commercial space operations,” the notes added.

However, two of the OPFs remain without a future customer and only the Space Launch System (SLS) is confirmed as a future user of the pad facilities at Complex 39 – and not until 2017.

There is hope Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) will be the next company to move into KSC, as they continue to evaluate facilities at the spaceport for their Dream Chaser vehicle, another CCiCAP award winner.

“We’ve been in discussions with the Kennedy Space Center and Space Florida about facilities (at the spaceport),” noted Jim Voss, SNC director of advanced programs and program executive for Dream Chaser to NASASpaceFlight.com.

“(However,) an OPF may not be the ideal facility for our vehicle, because they have all the structures that were specific to the shuttle that would have to be removed.

“We need a large open area, because our vehicle is much more accessible than the Shuttle was, and we don’t need hazardous operations because of our non toxic propellants we have on-board. But we are looking at using a facility at KSC for our processing.”

A potential solution for Dream Chaser to take up residency in an OPF could mirror the Space Florida work for CST-100, where the building is converted into a clean floor processing facility, again by removing all the structures that were designed to care for a Shuttle orbiter.

As previously reported, documentation has also shown that KSC’s “wish list” is for all three OPFs to house new vehicles, namely CST-100, as already agreed, Dream Chaser in OPF-2 and the US Air Force’s X-37B in OPF-1. All of these vehicles are currently expected to launch from Cape Canaveral, as opposed to Complex 39 at KSC – with the X-37B already with two missions under its belt.

However, official discussions have taken place to potentially open up Complex 39 – and indeed the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) – to crewed Atlas V launches.

Graphics – available in L2 LINK - show VAB integration and plans to modify one of the Shuttle Mobile Launch Platforms (MLPs) for Atlas V, while ULA noted the main area of discussion relates to the business model for using KSC’s facilities. An article on Atlas V at KSC will follow next week.

(Images via L2′s SNC and CST-100 Sections, ULA, SNC, Boeing and Philip Sloss/NASASpaceFlight.com)

(With the shuttle fleet retired, NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and COTS/CRS/CCDEV, to European and Russian vehicles. 

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ - to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet and directly support NSF’s running costs)

Related posts:

1. ULA Atlas V finally launches with NROL-36The Atlas V launch – believed to be carrying a pair...
2. Boeing’s CST-100 conducts a successful full landing system testThe CST-100 crew transport vehicle successfully conducted its second parachute...

Atlas V and Human Space Flight:

The Atlas V first flew in August 2002, under the operation of International Launch Services, carrying a payload for Eutelsat’s Hot Bird 6 satellite (which has since been renamed Hot Bird 13A).

However, the vehicle has a rich history ranging back to the early days of US space flight. It was an Atlas booster that launched John Glenn into space inside Friendship 7 in 1962, sending the first American into orbit around the planet.

The vehicle continued to evolve, gaining upper stages – first with the Agena, followed by the Centaur – as the vehicle was entrusted with a range of high profile missions, such as the Mariner Program spacecraft to Mars.

The booster itself continued to advance over the years, via the Atlas II and Atlas III ranges, prior to the debut of the Atlas V, and a subsequent flight history of successful launches, that recently saw the highly reliable vehicle mark its tenth anniversary.

This latest era has seen it entrusted to launching spacecraft ranging from commercial satellites to national defence spacecraft, and also flagship missions, such as the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) now making a highly successful name for itself on the surface of Mars.

Those missions will continue, at the same time as Atlas V takes aim on the next chapter of its famous history, this time returning to the mission of launching biological payloads in the form of NASA astronauts destined for the International Space Station (ISS).

Top of NASA’s priority list is to regain independence from Russia, lost since the retirement of the Shuttle fleet last year. However, such a drive will not be to the detriment of safety, with all the commercial partners having to adhere to strict NASA rules and guidelines.

The United Launch Alliance (ULA) are fully aware of this, using both their current experience in providing mission success for their lifeless – yet hugely expensive – passengers, in tandem with additional safety fail-safes.

“One of the challenges facing ULA as we get into human spaceflight is building a culture of safety to the same level of rigor we currently treat mission success,” noted Dr George Sowers, ULA VP for Human Launch Services, during a Q&A session with NASASpaceFlight.com members.

“We are in the process of establishing an internal safety organization with independent reporting, but more important is to instil the idea that safety is everyone’s responsibility.

“As to the specific process of how safety issues are handled, that will be worked out in conjunction with the prime contractors (e.g. BA and SNC) in conjunction with NASA during CCiCap. NASA’s 1100 series requirements provide a lot of guidance.”

Per the progression to the CCiCap stage of the commercial crew drive, ULA’s Atlas V is the confirmed launch vehicle of choice for Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser spaceplane and Boeing’s CST-100 capsule.

While the level of funding over the coming years will be the ultimate driver as to when both vehicles will be ready to finally ride uphill, Dr Sowers noted ULA will be in a position to provide the first human rated Atlas V’s for a test launch as early as late 2015, again based on required funding.

Notably, the Atlas V does not require a large amount of modifications to be able to launch humans, with early claims that it would suffer from the abort restriction of “Black Zones” during evaluations into the Shuttle’s successor, immediately denied by Lockheed Martin sources and once again by Dr Sowers during the Q&A.

“It was never a real problem,” Dr Sowers added. “A trajectory has to be designed from the beginning to close black zones, but that’s a fairly standard process.”

In fact, the bulk of the work relates to the implementation of an Emergency Detection System (EDS), a system ULA have been working on under a Space Act Agreement (SAA) with NASA.

“NASA’s assistance during the SAA was invaluable,” added Dr Sowers. “We also profited by the direct and frequent interaction with NASA HSF experts. The limitation of the SAA was the inability of NASA to provide any formal feedback on the acceptability of our proposed approaches.”

While an EDS is required for the safety of the crew, the essence of the Atlas V will be the same vehicle that launches with its current range of payloads. However, the task is to educate the vehicle to remember its new payloads will be humans, that it has to prioritize their safety, but not to the point it panics itself into aborting.

“We are trying to change the launch ops as little as possible while accommodating crew. Flight ops does require a bit of adjustment. For example, today’s flight software is designed to always keep trying (to reach orbit) no matter what the vehicle is doing around it. With crew, the software mind set has to change to ‘save the crew first’,” Dr Sowers explained.

“The trick is eliminating false aborts (really minimizing), while ensuring every flight failure is survivable (really maximizing). In safety speak, minimize LOC (Loss Of Crew) without increasing LOM (Loss Of Mission).”

Further articles in this series will be published over the coming weeks.

(Images via ULA, SNC, Boeing and L2 – via the impressive DC section, *L2 members click here*)

(With the shuttle fleet retired, NSF and L2 are providing full transition level coverage, available no where else on the internet, from Orion and SLS to ISS and COTS/CRS/CCDEV, to European and Russian vehicles. 

(Click here: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/ - to view how you can access the best space flight content on the entire internet and directly support NSF’s running costs)

Related posts:

1. SpaceDev announce Dream Chaser agreement with ULA Atlas VSpaceDev have announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with United...
2. Atlas V launches classified PAN satellite for US GovernmentA United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket has launched with PAN,...
3. LIVE: ULA Atlas V launches WGS-2 for USAFUnited Launch Alliance (ULA) has launched the WGS-2 satellite on...