|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
SNC Reveals DC4Science Dream Chaser Variant
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 06:49 PM |
Giant leap in race to replace space shuttle? Dream Chaser gets big boost. | [email protected] | Policy | 0 | January 31st 13 06:13 PM |
what TPS on Dream Chaser? | Joe Strout | Policy | 6 | June 30th 06 02:52 PM |