Soon, three companies will be able to perform resupply missions for the International Space Station, and that may be one too many:
How Sierra Nevada's "Dream Chaser" Could Become a Nightmare for Northrop Grumman
[Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC)] intends to perform its obligations under [Commercial Resupply Services (CRS-2)] using its new "Dream Chaser" spaceplane, a privately developed space shuttle (but only one-quarter the size of the Space Shuttle) that will launch into orbit atop a rocket, make its delivery, then land back on Earth under its own power like an airplane.
[...] Dream Chaser is designed to be reusable, with a service life of 15 missions. In this regard, the SNC is similar to SpaceX, which sends cargo to ISS aboard reusable Dragon space capsules launched into orbit by also-reusable Falcon rockets. Utilizing reusable spacecraft, both SNC and SpaceX should be able to save considerably on the cost of their missions, because they will not need to build new spacecraft for each supply run. In contrast, Northrop Grumman performs its ISS resupply missions using disposable Cygnus cargo capsules carried by expendable Antares rockets -- likely a more expensive proposition.
[...] Currently, plans are for SNC to purchase Atlas V rockets from United Launch Alliance for this purpose. But in 2016, SNC's then-VP of Space Systems John Olson let on that SNC was designing the spaceplane to be "agnostic" as to which launcher it uses to get into orbit. So in theory, at least, SNC could use a SpaceX Falcon rocket to carry Dream Chaser instead. Because SpaceX's Falcons are cheaper than the expendable rockets used by other space launch companies, this would probably result in a lower launch cost for SNC (and the cost could be even cheaper if SNC uses reusable Falcons).
Granted, this would necessitate giving money to a competitor. However, seeing as Sierra Nevada is going to have to buy its launch vehicles from somebody, it might as well buy them from the cheapest provider. And if it does so, this will almost certainly mean that not only SpaceX, but SNC, too, can bid below what Northrop Grumman must charge to perform CRS-2 supply missions for NASA -- giving SNC a leg up in future competitions to resupply ISS.
Related: United Nations to Launch a Space Mission
NASA to Continue Funding Private Spaceflight, Considers Sixth Hubble Upgrade Mission
Related Stories
http://spacenews.com/united-nations-to-fly-first-space-mission-on-dream-chaser/
The United Nations plans to purchase a dedicated mission on a Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) Dream Chaser spacecraft in 2021 to give developing nations an opportunity to fly experiments in space. At a press conference during the International Astronautical Congress here Sept. 27, the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) said the agreement to fly the dedicated Dream Chaser mission is part of a broader effort by the office to increase access to space to emerging nations.
"Our project is the first-ever United Nations space mission," said Simonetta Di Pippo, director of UNOOSA. "The mission has one very important goal: to allow United Nations member states to conduct research that cannot be done on Earth." The mission, she said, will be open to all nations, but with a particular emphasis on those nations that don't have the capabilities to fly their own experiments in space. UNOOSA will soon start the process of soliciting payload proposals, with a goal of selecting payloads by early 2018 so that the winning countries have time to build them for a 2021 launch.
Neither SNC nor UNOOSA disclosed the cost of the mission. Mark Sirangelo, corporate vice president of SNC's Space Systems division, said that the mission will be financed in several ways, with the countries selected to fly experiments paying at least some of the cost of the flight.
- See more at: http://spacenews.com/united-nations-to-fly-first-space-mission-on-dream-chaser/#sthash.Pz4SgTNO.dpuf
The Wall Street Journal has reported that the White House is considering a proposal to send a manned mission to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope for a sixth time. The mission would use a Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser Space System miniature space shuttle and could act as an "insurance policy" in case of issues with the launch and deployment of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). The JWST will be located at the Earth-Sun L2 point, over 2,700 times further away from Earth than Hubble.
NASA's recent trend of partnering with private companies will continue under President Trump:
NASA will continue tapping the private sector to fund space exploration efforts under President Trump, marking a continuation in policy that first began under former president Barack Obama. "Public-private partnerships are the future of space exploration," Dava Newman, a former NASA deputy administrator who resigned before Trump took office, told CNBC on Tuesday. "I call it the new NASA."
In total, 22 companies—all American—have won contracts with the agency across a diverse range of sectors, from in-space manufacturing to engine development. Boeing and Elon Musk's SpaceX will be delivering NASA astronauts to international space stations, while Orbital ATK, Sierra Nevada and SpaceX will transport NASA cargo to space stations, said Newman, who is now chair of the Apollo Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The European Space Agency is partnering with NASA on a 2021 orbital mission around the Moon.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday January 08 2019, @11:04AM (6 children)
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 08 2019, @11:27AM (2 children)
If the competitor doesn't consider the market big enough for the both of you.
In the old days, at least in some industries, it used to be possible for multiple companies to compete in the same market, even sometimes forgoing a project to allow a struggling competitor to have it, because they had enough on their own plate and didn't need to own the whole market themselves. There are many other examples that refute this, but it has become increasingly less likely to see this occuring in the modern world, where every dog MUST eat every other dog, or they aren't doing their 'due diligence'.
Truly a sickness of the modern era.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by nitehawk214 on Tuesday January 08 2019, @02:29PM (1 child)
An Atlas V launch costs a lot more than a Falcon 9 or an Antares. Heck, when an Antares blew up OrbitalATK had to launch Cygnus on top of an Atlas V, and just a couple of years they are getting bought by Northrup Grumman. Probably not a coincidence.
Antares is just a toy for military contractor companies to pretend to be doing commercial services. ULA is Boeing and Lockheed, so you can't get much more military than that. Atlas V was designed back when there were no-bid contracts, so it wasn't made to be cost effective.
If Blue Origin ever gets their big New Glenn rocket flying, Dream Chaser could easily fly on that. Supposedly it could beat even Falcon Heavy on price, but that is easy to say when it hasn't even flown yet.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/7xem8y/launch_vehicle_capabilities_and_costs_compared_wip/ [reddit.com]
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday January 08 2019, @07:57PM
>If Blue Origin ever gets their big New Glenn rocket flying, Dream Chaser could easily fly on that. Supposedly it could beat even Falcon Heavy on price, but that is easy to say when it hasn't even flown yet.
And unfortunately the problem for them is that by the time they get it flying, they probably won't be competing against the Falcon Heavy anymore, or at least not for long. Instead they'll be facing the Falcon Super-Heavy(aka BFR), which will supposedly be cheaper per-launch than the current Falcon R, while also carrying a larger payload than anything since the Saturn V (and more pressurized volume than the ISS, which will be very relevant to tourism and the like)
I'm rooting for New Glenn, but I'm just not sure they'll be able to overcome SpaceX's first-mover advantage - though perhaps government "multiple vendor" priorities will give them enough room to thrive and grow until they can.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday January 08 2019, @03:21PM (2 children)
Maybe the competitor (SpaceX) would not be interested in money from SNC?
Why should SpaceX launch a competitor's cargo capsule when SpaceX already has its own cargo capsule and can directly compete for the ENTIRE contract for ISS resupply missions?
The alternative would be that SNC gets the entire contract and then treats SpaceX as a subcontractor for launch services. Why would SpaceX want that when it already has the entire capability to resupply the ISS? And soon will have the capability to send humans?
Maybe I'm missing something. I cannot see any reason why the SNC Dream Chaser atop Falcon 9 launcher would ever come to pass (at least for ISS resupply missions). Wishful thinking by SNC.
I would speculate that any scenario for putting a dream chaser atop an F9 / FH / BFR is probably something that SpaceX is already working on using its own payloads / capsules.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday January 08 2019, @05:39PM (1 child)
If NASA mandates two spacecraft suppliers, then SpaceX launching both makes a lot of sense for SpaceX, while saving money for SNC, and therefore for NASA on the next bid round.
That requires two things:
1) NASA is ok with an almost-exclusive first stage, defeating redundancy if the competitors remove their rarely-used Dream-chaser-compatible launchers.
2) congresscritters somehow resist bribing by the big guys
Might happen. Not holding my breath
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday January 08 2019, @07:22PM
You make a good point that SpaceX launching both Dragon and Dream Chaser payloads eliminates the 1st stage redundancy -- which is probably a bad thing. It would be good for us as a nation to have more redundancy, not less. But only so much redundancy as can be paid for by the available launch contracts.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday January 08 2019, @11:31AM (1 child)
There it is: yet another 'could' title [soylentnews.org].
Reply: "Bullshit, it won't happen!". Simple explanation: highly diversified, with good cash flow, Northrop Grumman [wikipedia.org] needs only to buy the controlling stock in SNC to profit from and/or control it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Interesting) by nitehawk214 on Tuesday January 08 2019, @02:47PM
Exactly. Sierra Nevada and SpaceX are not competitors of Northrup Grumman. Boeing and Lockheed are. They bought OrbitalATK for their military contracts. I am willing to be that once the ISS contract is complete, Antares will never fly again.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh