NASA Exercises Authority to Proceed with Commercial Crew Contracts
“On Oct. 9, under statutory authority available to it, NASA has decided to proceed with the Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) contracts awarded to The Boeing Company and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. notwithstanding the bid protest filed at the U.S. Government Accountability Office by Sierra Nevada Corporation. The agency recognizes that failure to provide the CCtCap transportation service as soon as possible poses risks to the International Space Station (ISS) crew, jeopardizes continued operation of the ISS, would delay meeting critical crew size requirements, and may result in the U.S. failing to perform the commitments it made in its international agreements.”

Biologist, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA Space Biologist and Payload integrator, Editor of NASAWatch.com and Astrobiology.com, Lapsed climber, Explorer, Synaesthete, Former Challenger Center board member...

10 replies on “NASA Tells Boeing and SpaceX to Proceed Despite SNC Protest”

  3. I assume this means that CCtCap can just launch to the ISS in time. Any delay will cause the program will be late. There is no way the contractors could catch up with the delay produced by a 3 month shut down whilst the SNC appeal is heard.

    edit:grammer

  4. So they said failure would “poses risks to the International Space Station (ISS) crew, jeopardizes continued operation of the ISS, would delay meeting critical crew size requirements, and may result in the U.S. failing to perform the commitments it made in its international agreements”.

    Anyone care to explain these convincingly? The only one that seems to make possible sense is the crew size one, as either of these craft would enable the additional one one crew member, whose time could be committed to science (until the ISS starts breaking so rapidly that the new person’s time will be taken up with fixing things).

    1. I suspect that it is implying that the Soviets Russians will get uncooperative, or conversely, we will get fed up and become the uncooperative ones. Maybe we should begin funding on trampolines.

    2. The new contract would be up for adoption. I believe NASA would like to be flying by then or else Russia will REALLY put the screws to the U.S. because they know it will be the last monopoly contract they will have. NASA will still be buying/bartering seats from Russia for the Soyuz but they will get a better deal if Boeing and SpaceX are operational.

  5. This is exciting! Two worthy contenders, from the old and new worlds, are once again vying to be the first to launch a human into orbit. Nearly half a century after Apollo, the race is on!

  6. Boeing really pulled out all the stops ( above and below boards) to assure they get the CST 100 capsule commitment regardless of how the political winds blow. Perhaps the overlooked fact that Boeing already has a working orbjting reusable spaceplane , albeit unmanned , having a crew capsule keeps them in all the games at the casino. They know that spaceplanes work and can be reused. After all, Boeing built the secretive X-37B now circling above us.

    The prime question that needs an honest, transparent, fully sunlit response is what criteria did NASA actually use to award Boeing and not Sierra Nevada ? That record of decision needs to be FOIA’d at the very least if it is not forthcoming by year’s end.

    I find it disturbing what Keith said here earlier, that the Wall Street Journal has leaked documents saying Boeing’s paper proposal and plywood mockup capsule actually scored higher with NASA than SpaceX’s Dragon-Falcon already flying. That really has a stink to it.

    All the more reason that NASA must be compelled to release all that it used to determine Boeing had the better proposal , if much more expensive. After all, if this decision stands we will end up with three manned space capsules and no crewed spaceplanes. NASA’s own Rolls Royce manned capsule Orion and white elephant SLS will burn more money than all three of the commercial crew programs many times over.

    What’s wrong with that picture?

  7. It is truly amazing the political power the 3rd largest corporate lobbyist (Boeing) have in Washington. This decision has nothing to do with Human Safety, capabilities or fair Commercial competition. This is Pay me if you want my vote!

  8. Aviation Week quotes another document on Why NASA Rejected Sierra Nevada’s Commercial Crew Vehicle

    From Gerst:

    “I consider SNC’s (Sierra Nevada Corp.) design to be the lowest level of maturity, with significantly more technical work and critical design decisions to accomplish. The proposal did not thoroughly address these design challenges and trades.” Gerstenmaier goes on to say that Sierra’s proposal “has more schedule uncertainty. For example, some of the testing planned after the crewed flight could be required before the crewed flight, and the impact of this movement will greatly stress the schedule.”

Comments are closed.