Updates Boeing's CST-100 Starliner

[orb]

Florida Today - The Flame Trench: KSC, Boeing set to announce spacecraft work

 

[orb]

NASA:

• Boeing to Build Commercial Spacecraft at Kennedy, Create 550 Jobs
  
  
• RELEASE : 11-349 - NASA Signs Agreement with Space Florida to Reuse Kennedy Facilities - Boeing to Build Commercial Spacecraft at Kennedy, Create 550 Jobs

NASASpaceflight: Boeing’s CST-100 leases OPF-3 following NASA agreement with Space Florida


Florida Today - The Flame Trench: Boeing, NASA sign deal to build spacecraft at KSC


SPACE.com: Boeing to Build Private Space Taxis in Old NASA Shuttle Hangar


Parabolic Arc: Boeing to Build Commercial Spacecraft at KSC, Create 550 Jobs


Universe Today: Boeing To Use Shuttle Hangar for CST-100 Space Taxi


CBS News Space: Boeing leases shuttle processing facility for commercial CST-100 capsule


Spaceflight Now: Boeing to use shuttle facility for commercial capsule


Discovery News: Boeing to Bring Space Taxis to Old Shuttle Hangar

Click on images to enlarge:





​

 

[Wood]

A very interesting paper (pdf) and presentation (pdf) with some very nice images, including several of the internal structure and how it has evolved during the project.

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc:

• Boeing CST-100 Abort Engine Successfully Tested in Mojave Desert
• Boeing Completes PDR on CST-100

NASA Press Release: RELEASE : 12-083 - NASA'S Commercial Crew Partner Hot-Fires Launch Abort Engine

NASA: Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Hot-Fires Launch Abort Engine

Aviation Week: PWR Analyzing CST-100 Abort Engine Tests

 

[IronRain]

Not the test mentioned above but a previous (but similar) one:

 

[RGClark]

...

Aviation Week: PWR Analyzing CST-100 Abort Engine Tests

Interesting it's using the same "pusher" type launch abort system SpaceX plans to use on the Dragon capsule.
The CST-100 also holds 7 passengers/crew like the Dragon and can be launched on the Falcon 9, so presumably is of comparable mass as the Dragon. Anyone know what the development cost of the CST-100 is?
Presumably it will be multiple times less than the Orion, also like the Dragon.

Bob Clark

 

[RGClark]

Interesting it's using the same "pusher" type launch abort system SpaceX plans to use on the Dragon capsule.
The CST-100 also holds 7 passengers/crew like the Dragon and can be launched on the Falcon 9, so presumably is of comparable mass as the Dragon. Anyone know what the development cost of the CST-100 is?
Presumably it will be multiple times less than the Orion, also like the Dragon.

The CST-100 is largely privately financed by Boeing, though they have gotten some commercial crew development dollars from NASA as has SpaceX. This is a very important point that the CST-100 is primarily privately financed. I can guarantee you Boeing is not spending several billion dollars of their own money developing the CST-100 like what Orion is costing using government money. (Note to Boeing: come up with a better name for your capsule.)

My guess is that it's costing a few hundred million dollars tops, comparable to what the Dragon cost SpaceX to develop. Note this once again means a privately financed spacecraft can be developed for 1/10th the cost of a government financed one. That Boeing was able to do this just as SpaceX has done overwelmingly implies this is valid as a general principle. Note this also strongly implies that the large launch providers such as Boeing can produce a launcher capable of manned flight as privately financed for 1/10th the cost of the billion dollar estimates given for such launchers, so in the few hundred million dollar range, just as SpaceX has done with the Falcon 9.

This also strongly implies the same is true for the space programs in other countries. In the thread http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?p=343242&postcount=1 "A low cost, all European, manned launcher" I argued the ESA could produce a manned launcher for a few hundred million dollars if privately financed. On another forum, it was argued the same kind of cost savings SpaceX made wouldn't apply in that case.

However, the ESA is a government organization which supplies government finances from the ESA member countries to the private companies that build the Ariane 5 launcher. Then all that would be required is that the ESA also, like NASA, make a proposal of European aerospace companies to privately develop launchers and spacecraft, perhaps with some amount of seed money as NASA is doing, and that the ESA would make a commitment to purchase such launchers and spacecraft even if such launchers undercut the prices of the Ariane 5.

Note that Boeing originally lost out to Lockheed to build the Orion capsule. But with the CST-100 it will be able to make more manned launches to orbit, at an earlier start date, and at much reduced cost than the Orion. And in fact several different companies will now have the opportunity to offer manned launch services to NASA.

The same would be true of the European aerospace companies, to allow several different companies to operate offering launch and spacecraft services to the ESA, not just EADS Astrium with the Ariane 5. This will have the effect of increasing the European space industry not reducing it.


Bob Clark

 

[FADEC]

this once again means a privately financed spacecraft can be developed for 1/10th the cost of a government financed one.

While one should note that Dragon is not a privately financed spacecraft, nor is SpaceX a privately financed company. It's eyewash spread by the media. The reality is that NASA pays more than 50% of all SpaceX's costs. But development is less expensive though, as you mentioned.

And as far was I know, the development of the CST-100 also profits from COTS, i.e. NASA. It would be interesting to know how much Boeing and how much NASA does pay for the CST-100.

So I have a problem to talk about privately financed spacecraft because without NASA there wouldn't be any privately financed spacecraft. Although development costs are relatively low.

 

[RGClark]

While one should note that Dragon is not a privately financed spacecraft, nor is SpaceX a privately financed company. It's eyewash spread by the media. The reality is that NASA pays more than 50% of all SpaceX's costs. But development is less expensive though, as you mentioned.
And as far was I know, the development of the CST-100 also profits from COTS, i.e. NASA. It would be interesting to know how much Boeing and how much NASA does pay for the CST-100.
So I have a problem to talk about privately financed spacecraft because without NASA there wouldn't be any privately financed spacecraft. Although development costs are relatively low.

Whatever that formula is between government financing and private financing that allowed SpaceX and likely Boeing to build spacecraft at 1/10th the cost of fully government financed ones, I'd like to see the ESA follow that same formula to develop low cost launchers and crewed spacecraft.

Bob Clark

 

[FADEC]

Whatever that formula is between government financing and private financing that allowed SpaceX and likely Boeing to build spacecraft at 1/10th the cost of fully government financed ones, I'd like to see the ESA follow that same formula to develop low cost launchers and crewed spacecraft.

Bob Clark

Of course.

On the other hand: that's development costs. Those spacecraft did not yet carry humans into space as part of a space program. So it will be interesting to see how this influences operating costs...

 

[orb]

Parabolic Arc: Boeing Completes CST-100 Parachute Drop Test:

HOUSTON, April 3, 2012 (Boeing PR) – Boeing successfully completed a parachute drop test of the company’s Crew Space Transportation (CST)-100 spacecraft today at the Delamar Dry Lake Bed near Alamo, Nev. CST-100 is part of the Boeing Commercial Crew Transportation System (CCTS), which will provide the United States with the capability to transport people and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS), the Bigelow Aerospace Complex and other destinations in low Earth orbit.

An Erickson Sky Crane helicopter lifted the CST-100 test article to about 11,000 feet and released it. Three main parachutes deployed to slow the capsule’s descent before six airbags inflated, providing a smooth ground landing. The event was the first drop test of the fully combined vehicle landing system, including all elements.

“This successful test is a tremendous milestone that brings Boeing one step closer to completing development of a system that will provide safe, reliable and affordable crewed access to space,” said John Mulholland, vice president and program manager, Boeing Commercial Programs.

{...}

The team is planning a second test later this month, following parachute inspection and re-packing. This second drop test will include a drogue parachute deployment sequence on top of the main parachute deployment, demonstrating the full, nominal parachute system performance.

Boeing has scheduled additional tests to be performed in 2012, including a landing air bag test series in May, a forward heat shield jettison test in June, and an orbital maneuvering/attitude control engine hot fire test in June — all to gather additional data on key functional elements of the spacecraft design.

{...}

Aviation Week: Boeing CCDev Entrant Has Parachute Drop Test

 

[MattBaker]

It's nice to see so many different concepts for reentry in the CCDev: Dragon lands in the Pacific Ocean, CST-100 goes down over the desert and the Dream Chaser landing like the Shuttle.

 

[FADEC]

I'm curious whether it will be the CST or Dragon transporting humans into earth orbit / to the ISS first. Although it seems that we are living in depressing times of manned space flight with all that back and forth going on at NASA, we actually have much more activities going on than ever before in history. But sadly none of it is related to exploration for now. Dragon and the CST are actually just a continuation / improvement of the Apollo Command Module, 35 years later, but with an uncertain future though. Somehow a bitter taste. Most people during the early to mid 1970's certainly thought we would be way ahead past the year 2000. But nonetheless great to see that the capsule design gets a revival

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: Boeing's New Crew-Carrying Spaceship Taking Shape:

CLEAR LAKE, Texas — Boeing’s new private spaceship may be ready to carry astronauts to the International Space Station and other locales in low-Earth orbit by 2015, company officials say.

{...}

 

[GoForPDI]

I'm curious whether it will be the CST or Dragon transporting humans into earth orbit / to the ISS first. Although it seems that we are living in depressing times of manned space flight with all that back and forth going on at NASA, we actually have much more activities going on than ever before in history. But sadly none of it is related to exploration for now. Dragon and the CST are actually just a continuation / improvement of the Apollo Command Module, 35 years later, but with an uncertain future though. Somehow a bitter taste. Most people during the early to mid 1970's certainly thought we would be way ahead past the year 2000. But nonetheless great to see that the capsule design gets a revival

Isn't it ironic that many people believe that nobody does spaceflight anymore, yet there is so much going on right now?! It's exciting times!

Give us 20 years, and we will certainly have systems in place that are visually more ''futuristic''. Just look at some of the concepts for the DSH, FlexCraft and MMSEV that NASA have been floating around.

And the SpaceX Grasshopper RLV is a brilliant concept too.

As for capsules.. Well, as they say, physics doesn't change, and with the advantage of wings not being as large as it was once thought, capsules are definitely here to stay for a long time.

 

[FADEC]

Isn't it ironic that many people believe that nobody does spaceflight anymore, yet there is so much going on right now?! It's exciting times!

Give us 20 years, and we will certainly have systems in place that are visually more ''futuristic''. Just look at some of the concepts for the DSH, FlexCraft and MMSEV that NASA have been floating around.

And the SpaceX Grasshopper RLV is a brilliant concept too.

As for capsules.. Well, as they say, physics doesn't change, and with the advantage of wings not being as large as it was once thought, capsules are definitely here to stay for a long time.

Spaceflight is going right now more than ever before. But there is no manned space "exploration". My understanding of exploration is to go to places where nobody has been before. And that's something which did not happen for 40 years. Flying to LEO is no space exploration anymore. It was in the 1960's. The ISS is useful for science. The shuttle also was (Hubble for example). But none of it is something I consider space exploration. And as long as Orion/Dragon/CST remain stuck in earth orbit, I see no exploration either.

 

[RGClark]

SPACE.com: Boeing's New Crew-Carrying Spaceship Taking Shape:

​

I like this passage:

Nevada-based company Bigelow Aerospace, a Boeing partner that is developing large, expandable space habitats, played a key role in the drop test.
Company founder and president Robert Bigelow noted in a press statement: "If astronauts had been in the capsule during these drop tests, they would have enjoyed a safe, smooth ride… further proof that the commercial crew initiative represents the most expeditious, safest, and affordable means of getting America flying in space again."

Bob Clark

---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:37 PM ----------

I'm curious whether it will be the CST or Dragon transporting humans into earth orbit / to the ISS first. Although it seems that we are living in depressing times of manned space flight with all that back and forth going on at NASA, we actually have much more activities going on than ever before in history. But sadly none of it is related to exploration for now. Dragon and the CST are actually just a continuation / improvement of the Apollo Command Module, 35 years later, but with an uncertain future though. Somehow a bitter taste. Most people during the early to mid 1970's certainly thought we would be way ahead past the year 2000. But nonetheless great to see that the capsule design gets a revival

I'm optimistic that SpaceX with the Falcon Heavy can do a lunar landing with the Dragon capsule ahead of the 2021 first manned flight of the SLS carrying the Orion capsule.
The Falcon Heavy which SpaceX intends to be man-rated is planned to do a test launch next year. And SpaceX plans the Dragon to do its first manned test flight on a Falcon 9 in 2014.
There is a lot of debate over on NasaSpaceFlight about the Falcon Heavy's ability to do lunar and/or Mars landing missions with the Dragon capsule. For lunar missions, a key question is whether the launch abort system (LAS) has enough delta-V both to land and takeoff from the lunar surface.
The Dragon LAS, as is the Boeing CST-100 LAS, is to use pressure-fed, hypergolic engines. The Apollo lunar lander engines were of this type and were able to get a vacuum Isp of 301 s. So likely the Dragon LAS can have a vacuum Isp in this range. But what's key is what is the amount of propellant the Dragon itself can carry.
With a 53,000 mT payload to LEO capability, the Falcon Heavy could carry a lander stage that could bring the Dragon to the lunar surface and takeoff. But Elon appears to prefer the architecture where the Dragon itself does its own takeoffs and landings. That's the part I'm uncertain about.


Bob Clark

 

[Sky Captain]

A lander and takoff stage will be required. There is no way a LAS could provide all deltaV to brake from orbital speed, land un the Moon and then take off again, that is ~3400 m/s of deltaV. Also LAS engine likely are optimized for high thrust not ISP so they would be suboptimal for use in vacuum.

 

[francisdrake]

Do you think it would be realistic to replace the currrent Dragon-trunk with a descent/ascent stage? The Dragon is built quite small and light, but has the disadvantage that the heat shield mass would have to be landed and relaunched again from the moons surface.

The scenario would require 2 Falcon Heavies, the first one with a lunar injection stage, the other one with a Dragon/Lander vessel.

(Sorry for distracting the thread from the CST-100 topic.)

 

[RGClark]

Do you think it would be realistic to replace the currrent Dragon-trunk with a descent/ascent stage? The Dragon is built quite small and light, but has the disadvantage that the heat shield mass would have to be landed and relaunched again from the moons surface.

The scenario would require 2 Falcon Heavies, the first one with a lunar injection stage, the other one with a Dragon/Lander vessel.

(Sorry for distracting the thread from the CST-100 topic.)

Should be doable, even with a single Falcon Heavy.

Bob Clark