A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 24th 14, 05:12 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 314
Default SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant

From article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/...haser-variant/


To use a baseball analogy, I gotta give Sierra Nevada a lot of credit for striking out swinging rather than on a called strike.

But realistically, the only way this is going to 'fly' is to convince a deep pocket socialist entity at this point. For several reasons. The primary one being SNC doesn't have a lift capacity to orbit on their own. Outside of a redesign to fit on the Stratolaunch, that leaves them only with options for ULA, SpaceX or ESA, assuming that ITAR would prevent them from launching atop a Soyuz rocket or Long March variant.

ULA and SpaceX have their own capsules, so it would make sense for them to persue the DreamChaser unless on behalf of a third client willing to fund putting it atop one of their existing rockets. I know DC was designed for the Atlas-5 so for ULA no problem there, I haven't looked at the specs closely enough to know if the DC as designed would fly atop an F9, but I have no doubt it could fly on an F9H.

So, back to baseball, to whom is this really being "pitched"? I'd have to say ESA. It would given them a very credible crewed capacity with little design effort required on their part, other than to adapt or design an Arianne variant to fly it.

Outside of that, the only other party of interest I can think of would be DARPA/Air-Force. So when do we see the mil-spec version? The DC2Spy4?

;-)

Dave
  #2  
Old October 25th 14, 03:26 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant

In article ,
says...

From article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/...haser-variant/

To use a baseball analogy, I gotta give Sierra Nevada a lot of credit for striking out swinging rather than on a called strike.

But realistically, the only way this is going to 'fly' is to convince a deep pocket socialist entity at this point. For several reasons. The primary one being SNC doesn't have a lift capacity to orbit on their own. Outside of a redesign to fit on the Stratolaunch, that leaves them only with options for ULA, SpaceX or ESA, assuming that ITAR would prevent them from launching atop a Soyuz rocket or Long March variant.

ULA and SpaceX have their own capsules, so it would make sense for them to persue the DreamChaser unless on behalf of a third client willing to fund putting it atop one of their existing rockets. I know DC was designed for the Atlas-5 so for ULA no problem there, I haven't looked at the specs closely enough to know if the DC as designed would fly atop an F9, but I have no doubt it could fly on an F9H.

So, back to baseball, to whom is this really being "pitched"? I'd have to say ESA. It would given them a very credible crewed capacity with little design effort required on their part, other than to adapt or design an Arianne variant to fly it.

Outside of that, the only other party of interest I can think of would be DARPA/Air-Force. So when do we see the mil-spec version? The DC2Spy4?


I was hoping someone would post this.

I seriously doubt they'll have takers for this. SpaceX has offered
DragonLab for similar "science" missions, but so far there have been no
takers.

Their real goal would seem to be to compete for future ISS cargo
contracts. From the article:

"SNC has made the decision to continue the development of the
Dream Chaser to flight, including a near term bid on NASA?s
CRS2 effort,"

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #3  
Old October 25th 14, 03:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Vaughn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant

On 10/25/2014 10:26 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
"SNC has made the decision to continue the development of the
Dream Chaser to flight, including a near term bid on NASA?s
CRS2 effort,"

I would love to see the Dream Chaser fly, but must agree that NASA made
the only decision possible, given that they had to down-select somebody.
After all, SpaceX was the only one of the three actually flying and so
represents a low risk option, plus Boeing is, well...Boeing! That left
the DC out in the cold and it's really hard to see how it could have
been any other way.
  #4  
Old October 26th 14, 03:16 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant

On Saturday, October 25, 2014 10:40:53 AM UTC-4, Vaughn wrote:
On 10/25/2014 10:26 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
"SNC has made the decision to continue the development of the
Dream Chaser to flight, including a near term bid on NASA?s
CRS2 effort,"

I would love to see the Dream Chaser fly, but must agree that NASA made
the only decision possible, given that they had to down-select somebody.
After all, SpaceX was the only one of the three actually flying and so
represents a low risk option, plus Boeing is, well...Boeing! That left
the DC out in the cold and it's really hard to see how it could have
been any other way.


6Boeing will definetely be the highest cost choice. Hopefully boeing will lose the lawsuit! Based on cost!
'
As a nation we can no longer afford congress giving prefered contracts being irresponsible with public money.

As such boeing should be deselected
  #6  
Old October 26th 14, 08:00 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

6Boeing will definetely be the highest cost choice.


It's a fixed cost contract. Yes, they had the highest cost bid. So,
why are you stating the obvious?

Hopefully boeing will lose the lawsuit! Based on cost!


Doubtful. They have deeper pockets and will have better lawyers. The
fact that they won shows they're better at keeping NASA happy.

As a nation we can no longer afford congress giving prefered
contracts being irresponsible with public money.


Commercial crew is a drop in the bucket. We can afford it.

As such boeing should be deselected


Dream on, Bob. As much as I was disappointed that Boeing was picked,
this isn't likely to change in court, IMHO.


Nope. And honestly, it's probably a good thing. I think it's a decent idea
to have one group that pushes the envelope (SpaceX) and one that while a
dinosaur has a decent track record and honestly, I'm confident if you throw
enough money at Boeing, they'll pull it off. I'd obviously rather avoid that
solution entirely (throwing more money at them) but it's a backup.



Jeff


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sierra Nevada Lays Off Dream Chaser Staff David Spain[_4_] Policy 3 October 7th 14 06:52 PM
Dream Chaser, any chance of this actually being flown? Brian Gaff[_2_] Space Station 6 August 25th 14 09:25 PM
Dream Chaser, the SUV of spacecraft? Anonymous Remailer (austria) Policy 32 February 11th 14 07:49 PM
Giant leap in race to replace space shuttle? Dream Chaser gets big boost. [email protected] Policy 0 January 31st 13 07:13 PM
what TPS on Dream Chaser? Joe Strout Policy 6 June 30th 06 02:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.