[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

starship-design: Fwd: New shutle

In a message dated 10/9/03 6:20:09 AM, starksk@gdls.com writes:

>
>
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=878
>
>         NASA Changes The Focus Of Future ISS Cargo Delivery Plans
>
>
>Keith Cowing, NASA Watch
>Tuesday, October 07, 2003
>
>NASA has decided to dramatically alter its approach to developing new means
>of cargo transport to the International Space Station (ISS). In a meeting
>held at NASA headquarters on Tuesday, four companies under contract to
>study so called "Alternate Access" ("Alt Access") concepts, were given
>details of NASA's new direction.
>
>
>The initial idea of Alt Access was to find ways to augment the planned
>cargo capability for the Space Shuttle, Europe's ATV (Automated Transfer
>Vehicle), Japan's HTV (H-II Transfer Vehicle) and Russia's Progress
>vehicles.
>
>
>NASA now uses the phrase "Assured Access" to supplant "Alternate Access"
>to
>describe its interest in new cargo capabilities to the ISS.
>
>
>The companies originally under contract to participate in the Alt Access
>effort (funded out to the Space Launch Initiative - SLI) were: Andrews
>Space and Technology ($2.9 million); Lockheed Martin,($3 million); Boeing
>($2.6 million); and Constellation Services International ($2.3 million).
>
>
>These contracts were set to expire in July 2003. After concerns over this
>termination were raised in Congress, NASA decided to extend these
>contracts. $4 million in additional funds was divided among these companies
>for additional work to be performed in 2003. Data is due to be delivered
>to
>NASA no later than the end of December regarding cost and performance
>concepts. Final contract deliverables are due to NASA In January 2004.
>
>
>NASA is now interested in having a reliable or "assured" means of
>delivering cargo to the ISS in the 2011 time frame. "Alternate" means of
>delivering cargo is no longer the highest driver - making sure that cargo
>can be delivered is. This "assured" capability is needed to replace the
>cargo carrying capability of the Space Shuttle which NASA now feels
>pressured to retire (at least as a vehicle carrying humans) much sooner
>than it had planned to - and to replace its human transport capabilities
>with the Orbital Space Plane (OSP).
>
>
>In essence NASA is now looking to replace the capability of the Shuttle
>immediately aft of the crew compartment bulkhead - the trailer behind the
>cab, if you will.
>
>
>Studies are reportedly under way at Code B at NASA Headquarters which look
>at the implications of halting shuttle missions sooner rather than later.
>At Tuesday's meeting NASA made mention of the fact that Congress and the
>CAIB were indeed calling for NASA to stop flying the Shuttle as soon as
>possible.
>
>
>However strong the call NASA hears to stop flying humans aboard Space
>Shuttles, NASA still sees the need to have a heavy cargo carrying capacity
>in place - just in case future projects should require it. As such, NASA
>is
>still reluctant to do away with the Shuttle system entirely. Alas, NASA
>has
>no identified heavy lift requirements after the ISS is completed to
>actually drive future planning. Discussions are being held at the White
>House on possible new directions - but so far these discussions are, only
>discussions.
>
>
>Providing this Assured Access capability will be run under a separate
>budget than the OSP - that of the NGLT (Next Generation Launch Technology).
>Moreover, the additional funds to develop this capability, (certainly to
>be
>in the billions) will also have to be found since no mention is made in
>current budget projects.
>
>
>Dennis Smith from NASA MSFC as making the rounds on Capitol Hill last week
>and told Congressional staff that the cost of getting to a CRV (crew
>return) capability for the OSP - by 2008 - will cost between $11-12
>billion. The cost to get the OSP to have a CTV (crew transport) capability
>atop an EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) is still not known - at
>least Smith has not been able to provide those numbers to Congress.
>
>
>Attendees at Tuesday's meeting were provided with details of a Design
>Reference Mission (DRM) which is based upon the needs of the ISS program.
>The DRM calls for the transport of 48,700 kg (107,140 lbs) in upmass and
>packing and 34,800 (76,560 lbs.) in downmass and packing every year. There
>also needs to be the capability to carry at least two ISPRs (international
>Standard Payload Racks) up and down on any given flight. NASA claims that
>such a downmass requirement is needed in case there is a shortage of ORU's
>(Orbital Replacement Units) in the future - things that might no longer
>be
>manufactured by the original vendors.
>
>
>No specific direction has been given by NASA as to whether such an Assured
>Access cargo capability is - or should be - a derivation of OSP systems
>-
>or of existing Shuttle systems. However, it is clear that NASA is looking
>to replace the a cargo bay of a Shuttle orbiter - and its ability to bring
>things back to Earth while human transport responsibilities are to be
>assigned to the OSP.
>
>
>Also, instead of embracing the notion of multiple capabilities to deliver
>cargo to the ISS (as was the implication under Alt Access) NASA is now
>clearly looking in the direction of a capability that would have a single
>implementation.
>
>
>
>----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
>Return-Path: <starksk@gdls.com>
>Received: from  rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225])
>by air-zd01.mail.aol.com (v96.8) with ESMTP id MAILINZD14-38f3f85608315b;
>Thu, 09 Oct 2003 09:20:09 -0400
>Received: from  maiss02h.gdls.com (maiss02h.gdls.com [192.136.15.144])
>by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (v96.8) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINZD11-38f3f85608315b;
>Thu, 09 Oct 2003 09:20:03 -0400
>Received: from maiss04h.gdls.com (maiss04h.gdls.com [136.180.1.4])
>   by maiss02h.gdls.com (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h99DK1n6002840;
>   Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from IS002023.gdls.com (is002023 [136.180.45.23])
>   by maiss04h.gdls.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h99DK1a26370;
>   Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:20:01 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from IS002018.gdls.com ([136.180.45.18])
>          by IS002023.gdls.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.8)
>          with ESMTP id 2003100909200042:278930 ;
>          Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:20:00 -0400 
>Subject: New shutle 
>To: rhonda.elpers@mindspring.com, hanked@gdls.com, kryswalker@aol.com,
>        kellyst@aol.com, ben@b2foundation.com
>X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8  June 18, 2001
>Message-ID: <OFC975BCC9.2C12F659-ON85256DBA.0048A0CB@gdls.com>
>From: starksk@gdls.com
>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:20:00 -0400
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on STL01/SRV/LS/GDYN(Release 5.0.8 |June
>18, 2001) at
> 10/09/2003 09:20:00 AM,
>   Itemize by SMTP Server on STLHUB/SRV/LS/GDYN(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001)
>at
> 10/09/2003 09:20:00 AM,
>   Serialize by Router on STLHUB/SRV/LS/GDYN(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001)
>at
> 10/09/2003 09:20:01 AM,
>   Serialize complete at 10/09/2003 09:20:01 AM
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>X-AOL-IP: 192.136.15.144
>X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:XXX:XX
>X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
>
>
--- Begin Message --- 

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=878

         NASA Changes The Focus Of Future ISS Cargo Delivery Plans


Keith Cowing, NASA Watch
Tuesday, October 07, 2003

NASA has decided to dramatically alter its approach to developing new means
of cargo transport to the International Space Station (ISS). In a meeting
held at NASA headquarters on Tuesday, four companies under contract to
study so called "Alternate Access" ("Alt Access") concepts, were given
details of NASA's new direction.


The initial idea of Alt Access was to find ways to augment the planned
cargo capability for the Space Shuttle, Europe's ATV (Automated Transfer
Vehicle), Japan's HTV (H-II Transfer Vehicle) and Russia's Progress
vehicles.


NASA now uses the phrase "Assured Access" to supplant "Alternate Access" to
describe its interest in new cargo capabilities to the ISS.


The companies originally under contract to participate in the Alt Access
effort (funded out to the Space Launch Initiative - SLI) were: Andrews
Space and Technology ($2.9 million); Lockheed Martin,($3 million); Boeing
($2.6 million); and Constellation Services International ($2.3 million).


These contracts were set to expire in July 2003. After concerns over this
termination were raised in Congress, NASA decided to extend these
contracts. $4 million in additional funds was divided among these companies
for additional work to be performed in 2003. Data is due to be delivered to
NASA no later than the end of December regarding cost and performance
concepts. Final contract deliverables are due to NASA In January 2004.


NASA is now interested in having a reliable or "assured" means of
delivering cargo to the ISS in the 2011 time frame. "Alternate" means of
delivering cargo is no longer the highest driver - making sure that cargo
can be delivered is. This "assured" capability is needed to replace the
cargo carrying capability of the Space Shuttle which NASA now feels
pressured to retire (at least as a vehicle carrying humans) much sooner
than it had planned to - and to replace its human transport capabilities
with the Orbital Space Plane (OSP).


In essence NASA is now looking to replace the capability of the Shuttle
immediately aft of the crew compartment bulkhead - the trailer behind the
cab, if you will.


Studies are reportedly under way at Code B at NASA Headquarters which look
at the implications of halting shuttle missions sooner rather than later.
At Tuesday's meeting NASA made mention of the fact that Congress and the
CAIB were indeed calling for NASA to stop flying the Shuttle as soon as
possible.


However strong the call NASA hears to stop flying humans aboard Space
Shuttles, NASA still sees the need to have a heavy cargo carrying capacity
in place - just in case future projects should require it. As such, NASA is
still reluctant to do away with the Shuttle system entirely. Alas, NASA has
no identified heavy lift requirements after the ISS is completed to
actually drive future planning. Discussions are being held at the White
House on possible new directions - but so far these discussions are, only
discussions.


Providing this Assured Access capability will be run under a separate
budget than the OSP - that of the NGLT (Next Generation Launch Technology).
Moreover, the additional funds to develop this capability, (certainly to be
in the billions) will also have to be found since no mention is made in
current budget projects.


Dennis Smith from NASA MSFC as making the rounds on Capitol Hill last week
and told Congressional staff that the cost of getting to a CRV (crew
return) capability for the OSP - by 2008 - will cost between $11-12
billion. The cost to get the OSP to have a CTV (crew transport) capability
atop an EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) is still not known - at
least Smith has not been able to provide those numbers to Congress.


Attendees at Tuesday's meeting were provided with details of a Design
Reference Mission (DRM) which is based upon the needs of the ISS program.
The DRM calls for the transport of 48,700 kg (107,140 lbs) in upmass and
packing and 34,800 (76,560 lbs.) in downmass and packing every year. There
also needs to be the capability to carry at least two ISPRs (international
Standard Payload Racks) up and down on any given flight. NASA claims that
such a downmass requirement is needed in case there is a shortage of ORU's
(Orbital Replacement Units) in the future - things that might no longer be
manufactured by the original vendors.


No specific direction has been given by NASA as to whether such an Assured
Access cargo capability is - or should be - a derivation of OSP systems -
or of existing Shuttle systems. However, it is clear that NASA is looking
to replace the a cargo bay of a Shuttle orbiter - and its ability to bring
things back to Earth while human transport responsibilities are to be
assigned to the OSP.


Also, instead of embracing the notion of multiple capabilities to deliver
cargo to the ISS (as was the implication under Alt Access) NASA is now
clearly looking in the direction of a capability that would have a single
implementation.
--- End Message ---