Category: Commercial

NASA's CCiCAP Partners Have Diverse Design Approaches

NASA's CCiCAP Partners Have Diverse Design Approaches

One factor that led NASA to choose the three companies it did for Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCAP) awards is their diverse design approaches to meeting NASA’s need to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS).

NASA announced the three winners today:  Boeing, $460 million; SpaceX, $440 million;and Sierra Nevada, $212.5 million.  The awards are milestone-based meaning that each company must meet agreed-upon milestones over the next 21 months to receive payments.  The award amounts are if all the milestones are met, but could be less if they are not met.

Boeing’s CST-100 and SpaceX’s Dragon are capsule-based systems while Sierra Nevada’s design is a lifting body that resembles a small space shuttle.  Boeing and Sierra Nevada plan to launch using an Atlas V rocket, while SpaceX would use its own Falcon 9.  By funding a diversity of approaches, NASA hopes to end up with at least two viable commercial crew service providers in the 2017 time frame. 

 

SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft (cargo version) berthed to the International Space Station, May 2012

Photo credit:  NASA

Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser during full scale captive carry test, May 2012

Photo credit:  Sierra Nevada

 

Artist’s concept of Boeing’s CST-100 spacecraft

Credit:  Boeing 

NASA and key members of Congress had agreed the agency would choose no more than “2.5” winners, creating the impression there would be two full awards and one partial award and the relative amounts suggest that is what NASA did.   NASA Commercial Crew and Cargo program manager Ed Mango, however, dismissed that paradigm during a news conference today.  He said NASA negotiated what each company could accomplish within the 21-month period and that determined the funding amounts.    NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations Bill Gerstenmaier said at a later media teleconference that the selections meet the congressional agreement in the sense that two of the companies — Boeing and SpaceX — are being funded to take their concepts all the way to Critical Design Review (CDR), but not Sierra Nevada. 

Gerstenmaier said four other companies submitted bids:  Space Operations, American Aerospace, Space Design, and ATK.  He said NASA determined early on that the first three companies did not meet the basic requirements of the announcement and discussions continued with the remaining four.  In the end, the three winners were judged to meet the objectives of the announcement “in a much stronger fashion” than ATK, Gerstenmaier said.

Since the space shuttle program ended last year, NASA has been relying on Russia to take astronauts to and from ISS.   NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden focused his remarks on how the CCiCAP awards will lead to systems built in America by American companies that will create American jobs rather than “outsourcing” to Russia.  He and NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Director stressed that some of those jobs will be at KSC or on the “Space Coast” in general, referring to the area of Florida that includes KSC and the adjoining Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.  That section of Florida was hard hit by the layoffs following termination of the space shuttle program.

Boeing’s CST-100  would be launched aboard Atlas V rockets, which are built by the United Launch Alliance, a joint Boeing-Lockheed Martin company.  Boeing already has received awards from NASA’s commercial crew program under two previous “commercial crew development” (CCDev) rounds.  Boeing was the prime contractor for the International Space Station, is part of the United Space Alliance that operated the space shuttle, and over the past decades acquired the companies that built the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules as well as the space shuttle orbiters.

SpaceX is developing the Dragon capsule, which is launched on SpaceX’s own Falcon 9 rocket.   The company successfully launched a cargo-carrying verison of Dragon in May which was developed through NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program.  NASA astronauts berthed it to the ISS and after several days it unberthed and returned to Earth, landing in the ocean.  SpaceX is developing a version capable of carrying people through CCDev2 and the new CCiCAP awards.  Elon Musk said today that his company had invested over $1 billion of its own money in Dragon and Falcon 9 on top of the money it has received through the NASA programs.

Sierra Nevada is developing the Dream Chaser spacecraft that, like CST-100, would be launched on an Atlas V.  However, DreamChaser is a “lifting body” with wings rather than a capsule.  The design is based on work done by NASA decades ago under the HL-20 program.   Sierra Nevada received awards under CCDev and CCDev2.  At a press conference, Mark Sirangelo, head of Sierra Nevada’s Space Systems, said the company had received a total of $125 million from NASA to date and the company had invested “more than half” that much.   He downplayed the significance of the discrepancy between the amount his company will receive under the CCiCAP award versus the others, emphasizing that Dream Chaser will be launched on a proven launch vehicle — the Atlas V has been launched over 30 times already — unlike the Falcon 9, and Dream Chaser is a “mature design” that NASA worked on for 10 years and Sierra Nevada has worked on for another eight.  Thus he believes his company is not lagging behind the others.

The Atlas V needs to be “human-rated” first.   Today it launches only satellites, not people, and additional systems — such as a launch abort system — must be added to make it safer for crews.    The Atlas V is powered by Russian RD-180 engines which may undermine the rationale that these are “American” systems.  Sirangelo dismissed that argument, however, noting that the system NASA currently depends upon — Soyuz — is 100% Russian while the majority of the Atlas V is American.

NASA IG Finds Parkinson Violated Advisory Committee Rules in LightSquared Case, But Not Intentionally

NASA IG Finds Parkinson Violated Advisory Committee Rules in LightSquared Case, But Not Intentionally

NASA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released the results of an investigation into whether Brad Parkinson and others on the government’s GPS advisory board violated conflict of interest rules when reviewing LightSquared’s proposal to build a broadband system that might interfere with GPS.  The OIG found that Parkinson did violate the conflict of interest rules, but did not do so intentionally.  The report faults NASA’s Office of General Counsel and the board’s executive director for not advising Parkinson sooner that it might be a problem.

Parkinson is credited as being “the father” of the GPS navigation satellite system and is Vice Chairman of the National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) Advisory Board.  NASA provides administrative support for the interagency board.  Board members are not compensated, but must submit financial disclosure forms that are reviewed by NASA’s Office of General Counsel to ensure members do not have financial conflicts of interest.  Board members also are briefed on their responsibilities to avoid conflicts of interest on “particular matters” while serving.

The OIG found that Parkinson owns “a substantial amount” of stock in Trimble Navigation, a manufacturer of GPS units.  By signing a letter along with the chairman of the advisory board in August 2011 to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging that LightSquared’s application be denied, the OIG found that he violated the conflict of interest rules because Trimble’s business could suffer if the application was granted.  Trimble had warned investors of that potential outcome in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

Lightsquared later complained and asked the NASA OIG to investigate if Parkinson or any other Board member violated the conflict of interest rules.  The OIG report says that it presented its preliminary findings to the Department of Justice, but it “declined to open a criminal investigation.”  

The OIG found that Parkinson had properly disclosed his holdings of Trimble stock and did not fault Parkinson “for not immediately recognizing that what he viewed as a general matter of public policy concerning the efficacy of the country’s existing GPS network was a ‘particular matter’ under the statute that he should avoid.”  Instead, the report faults NASA’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) for not overseeing the advisory board’s activities sufficiently to determine the potential for a conflict of interest and warning Parkinson earlier than it did to recuse himself.    It also faults the advisory board’s executive director who it says “could have acted more diligently.”  NASA’s OGC did advise Parkinson and four other board members in November 2011 to recuse themselves with regard to LightSquared matters and they complied.

LightSquared’s proposal to build a hybrid satellite-terrestrial mobile broadband network was attacked from many quarters because it would use frequencies adjacent to those used for, and could interfere with, GPS.   The company countered that the FCC assigned those frequencies and it complied with every FCC requirement; any interference problems were because the GPS receiver manufacturers did not design them correctly.   The FCC ultimately denied the company’s application and LightSquared filed for bankruptcy in May 2012.

 

Tauri Group Forecasts Robust Suborbital Market, House Hearing Examines Issues

Tauri Group Forecasts Robust Suborbital Market, House Hearing Examines Issues

The Tauri Group, an Alexandria, VA -based consulting firm, forecasts a robust business for suborbital reusable launch vehicles (SRVs) in a report prepared for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Space Florida.  Tauri Group President Carissa Christensen testified to Congress about the report yesterday.

The 102-page report assesses the demand for SRVs in eight markets:  commercial human spaceflight, basic and applied research, technology demonstration, media and public relations, education, satellite deployment, remote sensing, and point-to-point transportation.   It presents three different scenarios:  a baseline scenario, a growth scenario, and a constrained scenario.  It also differentiates between two user communities:  “individual” and “enterprise” (government, business, non-profit).

The report is full of caveats about the assumptions used in the six-month study and even has a section entitled “major uncertainties” that lays out the sensitivities that readers should bear in mind.  Nonetheless, it provides hard numbers forecasting the “seat/cargo equivalents” one might anticipate and revenue for companies involved in the business that are likely to be remembered long after the caveats are forgotten.

In its baseline scenario, the report forecasts 370 seat/cargo equivalents per year in the first year of operations, growing to 500 per year in the 10th year, for a total of 4,518 over 10 years.    Revenue over the 10-year period is forecast to be $600 million in the baseline scenario.  The growth scenario forecasts $1.6 billion in revenue while the constrained scenario forecasts $300 million. 

The report identifies six companies that are developing a total of 11 SRVs to serve the market.  The companies are UP Aerospace, Armadillo Aerospace, XCOR Aerospace, Virgin Galactic, Masten Space Systems, and Blue Origin.

Representatives of three of those companies — Virgin Galactic (SpaceShipTwo), Blue Origin (New Shepard), and XCOR (Lynx) — testified along with Christensen before the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee yesterday.  Alan Stern, Southwest Research Institute, and Stephan McCandilss, Johns Hopkins University, also testified.

George Whitesides of Virgin Galactic and Andrew Nelson of XCOR said their companies expect to begin commercial operations by the end of next year.   Brett Alexander of Blue Origin said his company’s system is still in development and did not provide a start-date for commercial operations.

The key message from the company representatives was that they want Congress to provide a full eight-year learning period before the FAA is allowed to issue new regulations governing passenger safety on these missions.   In 2004, Congress passed a law requiring only “informed consent” for passengers.  Essentially the company must explain the risks, and it is then up to the customer to decide whether or not to take those risks.  The FAA was prohibited from issuing any other regulations for eight years.

The eight years was to give the companies and the government time to gain experience with commercial human spaceflight to determine what, if any, regulations are needed.  Those eight years passed without any of the companies offering commercial flights, however.   Earlier this year, Congress extended the learning period to October 1, 2015, but since the earliest any of the companies will be operating is 2013, that would be only a two year learning period.   The companies want the full eight years — and eight years from the first commercial SRV flight, not eight years from whenever new legislation is passed — or even an indefinite prohibition on regulations.  Nevertheless, they said they welcome the FAA’s decision to begin what could be monthly telecons to discuss the issues.  The first is scheduled for later this month.

Stern and McCandliss discussed the utility of SRVs for scientific research.   Stern, a former NASA Associate Administrator for Science and principal investigator of the New Horizons mission that is on its way to Pluto, believes there will be a very strong market for scientific researchers.  He stressed that it is not that SRVs will go anyplace that is new, but that they will be launched routinely, providing researchers with frequent, inexpensive access to the space environment, unlike sounding rockets which have been used for decades for certain types of research.   McCandliss, an astrophysicist, focused on the differences between using SRVs and sounding rockets, emphasizing that each has their own unique capabilities and some experiments will continue to need sounding rockets.

Whatever the scientific demand may be, Christensen and the company representatives all conveyed that they expect human spaceflight to be the core business by far.

House Committee Postpones Markup

House Committee Postpones Markup

The House Science, Space and Technology Committee has postponed tomorrow’s scheduled markup of H.R. 4158.

No new date for the markup was set.  The bill would confirm full ownership rights for certain astronauts to items from their spaceflights.

Today’s subcommittee hearing on suborbital launch vehicles remains on schedule for 2:00 pm ET.

NASA to Announce CCiCAP Commercial Crew Winners on Friday

NASA to Announce CCiCAP Commercial Crew Winners on Friday

NASA will announce the winners of its Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCAP) awards on Friday, August 3, 2012.  The much anticipated decision will be released at 9:00 am ET on Friday, with a news conference from Kennedy Space Center at 10:00 am ET.

CCiCAP is the third in a series of NASA Space Act Agreement awards to facilitate the development of space transportation systems by companies instead of the government that can take people to and from low Earth orbit.  NASA’s interest is in transportation to and from the International Space Station (ISS), but some of the companies in the running also anticipate a broader “space tourism” market.

The first two rounds of the competition were under the Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program.  This round is called CCiCAP to emphasize that NASA now is interested in complete (“integrated”) concepts that include a rocket, spacecraft and associated systems.

NASA’s commercial cargo program received a lot of visibility earlier this year with the launch and reentry of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft.  SpaceX plans to develop a version of Dragon to meet the commercial crew requirements.   The competitors for the CCiCAP awards are not known officially since it is still in the competition stage, but industry rumors are that SpaceX, Sierra Nevada, Boeing, and ATK are among the bidders.

Congress and White House Agree on Six Month FY2013 Continuing Resolution

Congress and White House Agree on Six Month FY2013 Continuing Resolution

The House, Senate and White House agreed today that they will enact a 6-month Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the government operating from October 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013.  

A CR is necessary because the 12 regular appropriations bills for fiscal year 2013 have not cleared Congress.  The House has passed seven, but the Senate has not passed any.   The House and Senate both will begin a 5-week recess on Friday and will not return until September 10, after the Republican and Democratic conventions in late August and early September.  That will leave little time for work to be completed on the regular appropriations bills before FY2013 begins on October 1.

In a rare sign of unity, all agreed today on avoiding the brinkmanship that has characterized much of Washington politics in the past year and a half.  The CR itself is not scheduled to be brought to the floor of either the House or Senate until September, but by announcing their agreement now, agencies can better plan on what their spending levels will be for the first half of FY2013.  The agreement is to fund the government at $1.047 billion, the level agreed upon in last year’s Budget Control Act.

Some members of the appropriations committees reportedly are unhappy with the agreement because they wanted a shorter term CR and passage of the bills that they have been carefully crafting for the past several months.  Some conservatives apparently are unhappy that funding will be at the $1.047 trillion level instead of the $1.028 trillion they voted for earlier this year.   However, the Republican and Democratic leadership on both sides of Capitol Hill agreed that this is the best course of action and must believe they have the votes to pass the bill.

This deal does nothing to avoid the sequester that looms on January 2, 2013, but the spirit of compromise evidenced today may bode well for resolving that issue as well.

Editor’s note: The statements from House Speaker Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Reid clearly state that it is a 6-month CR.  Curiously, the White House statement says it will fund the government “for the first quarter” of FY2013, which is only 3 months.   We are inquring as to the reason for the discrepancy, but every news account we have perused says it is a 6-month CR.

GAO Wants FAA To Update Method for Calculating Liability Insurance Requirements

GAO Wants FAA To Update Method for Calculating Liability Insurance Requirements

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) wants the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to update how it calculates the amount of third party liability insurance companies must purchase when they conduct commercial space launches.  FAA indemnifies companies against certain amounts of damages if there is an accident that hurts the general public.  GAO is concerned that the government could end up paying more than expected if FAA does not correctly calculate how much insurance the company itself must purchase.

GAO testified to House and Senate committees in June about whether Congress should renew the FAA’s authority to indemnify commercial launch companies against potential third party claims.   Under current law, companies must purchase insurance up to $500 million for third party claims, the government agrees to cover claims between $500 million and $2.7 billion, and the company must cover claims above that.  The authority expires on December 31, 2012.

The FAA and the commercial launch industry want the authority extended.  FAA is asking for a 5-year extension while industry representatives told the House committee that they would like the authority to be permanent. 

Today’s report adds little to what the GAO witnesses said at the hearings.  GAO supports extending the third party liability indemnification authority on a short term basis, but wants the FAA to update how it calculates the amount of insurance commercial launch companies must purchase.  The exact amount may be less than the $500 million set in law.   It depends on the FAA’s calculation of the Maximum Probable Loss (MPL) if there is an accident that harms the general public or property.  GAO found that the insurance industry is willing to sell up to $500 million of coverage, but the FAA requires companies to buy only $99 million of coverage on average.  The insurance costs about one percent of the dollar amount of coverage, which means launch companies are paying less than $1 million for that coverage now.

In today’s report, the GAO said that FAA has used the same method to calculate MPL since 1988 and insurance officials it interviewed said the method is outdated.  “An inaccurate calculation that understates the amount of insurance a launch provider must obtain would increase the likelihood of costs to the federal government; a calculation that overstates the amount of insurance needed would raise the cost of insurance for the launch provider,” GAO argued.

GAO’s recommendation is that the FAA periodically update and review its methodology.   George Nield, who heads the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation, said at the House hearing that he is open to doing so as long as he has the requisite funds.

 

Events of Interest: Week of July 29-August 4, 2012 – UPDATE

Events of Interest: Week of July 29-August 4, 2012 – UPDATE

UPDATE: The Senate Appropriations subcommittee markup of the FY2013 defense funding bill on Tuesday has been added.

The following events may be of interest in the coming week.  The House and Senate both are in session this week.

During the Week

This is the last week of scheduled legislative activity for the next five weeks.  Both chambers are taking their traditional August recess, which is a little longer than usual because of the Republican and Democratic conventions (August 27-30 and September 4-6, respectively).  They will return on September 10 according to their current schedules to face the need to deal with appropriations for the coming fiscal year, FY2013, which begins on October 1.   The Senate has not passed any of the 12 appropriations bills yet.  The House has passed seven of them.  There is no question that a temporary Continuing Resolution (CR) will be needed to keep the government operating; the major issue is whether it will be for a few weeks or months or as long as six months as some Members of Congress are proposing.

 Sunday-Wednesday, July 29-August 1

Monday-Tuesday, July 30-31

Tuesday, July 31

Wednesday, August 1

Thursday, August 2

Friday-Sunday, August 3-5

 

FAA Begins Advisory Committee Meetings on Regulations to Protect Commercial Spaceflight Passengers

FAA Begins Advisory Committee Meetings on Regulations to Protect Commercial Spaceflight Passengers

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is set to begin a series of what could become monthly meetings with its Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) to begin early work on developing regulations to protect occupants of commercial suborbital or orbital spacecraft.

Existing law is very permissive about commercial passengers on suborbital or orbital spaceflights, essentially taking a “buyer beware” approach where passengers must be informed about the risks by the company offering the service and then sign a waiver saying that they understand the risks and want to fly anyway.  That law was passed in 2004 and Congress said that the FAA could not set more stringent regulations for eight years, with the expectation that commercial flights would soon commence and eight years would provide sufficient experience on which to base any needed additional regulations.   However, those years elapsed without any of the commercial suborbital or orbital spaceflight companies offering such trips, so earlier this year Congress extended the prohibition on regulations until October 1, 2015.

Although the FAA is precluded from issuing regulations, it wants to gather information so it is well informed by the time it might be called upon to do so.   The first step in the process is three telecons that will be held by COMSTAC’s Systems Working Group in August, September and October.   The FAA’s announcement said it may schedule up to 10 more such teleconferences in the coming months.

Anyone wanting to participate in any of the telecons needs to contact Susan Lender by telephone or email (see below) in advance by dates that are listed in the Federal Register notice.   The public is invited to provide written statements as well, also in advance so they can be distributed to committee members.  The dates for the first three telecons and the associated dates Ms. Lender must know if you want to participate or submit a written statement are as follows:

  • August 14 (notify her by August 7)
  • September 18 (notify her by September 11)
  • October 23 (notify her by October 16)

The contact information provided in the Federal Register notice is as follow. 

Susan Lender (AST-5), Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST), 800 Independence Avenue SW., Room 331, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-8029; Email susan.lender@faa.gov.

The notice also has additional details about what the FAA hopes to learn via these telecons. 

The FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation facilitates and regulates the commercial space launch industry.

 

GAO Gives DOD Mixed Report Card on EELV Acquisition

GAO Gives DOD Mixed Report Card on EELV Acquisition

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) gave the Department of Defense (DOD) mixed grades on how well the department is responding to earlier GAO recommendations on how to improve its acquisition of Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELVs).

DOD had been planning to buy 40 core EELVs — Atlas V and Delta IV rockets — to be launched over 5 years.   Both vehicles are produced and sold by the joint Lockheed Martin-Boeing United Launch Alliance (ULA).   One rationale was that a block buy of that magnitude would help stabilize the industrial base.   Other companies, notably SpaceX, objected that such a contract would preclude “new entrants” from competing for a share of the government launch market. 

GAO issued a report last year that was critical of DOD’s acquisition strategy.  In particular, GAO found that DOD was relyingon  contractor data rather than independent analysis about the state of the industrial base.  GAO made seven recommendations and in the FY2012 defense authorization act, Congress directed DOD to report on how it was complying with them and for GAO to assess that information.   The new report provides GAO assessment.

Of the seven recommendations it made, GAO reports that DOD completed two, has action underway on two others that it expects DOD to complete, has action underway on another two that GAO assesses needs more work, and one where no action has been taken.  GAO noted that DOD concurred with its assessment. 

The two that are completed were for DOD to work closely with NASA to ensure it had adequate information about NASA’s heavy lift launcher program to facilitate DOD’s ability to negotiate EELV contract prices that maximize the government’s investment, and to refrain from waiving government contracting requirements for contractor and subcontractor certified cost and pricing data.

The two that GAO expects DOD to complete are conducting an independent assessment of the health of the U.S. launch industrial base, and to reassess the length of its new block-buy contract.

The two that need more work are for DOD to ensure that mission assurance activities “are sufficient and not excessive” and to incentivize the prime contractor to implement efficiencies without affecting mission assurance, and to examine how greater interagency coordination might increase efficiencies and cost savings.

The one recommendation on which DOD has taken no action is to develop a science and technology plan for improving and evolving launch technologies.

GAO did not make any new recommendations in this report.