N
nuaetius
Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Space System/Loral's proposed solution is essentially a made-in-America version of teammate Constellation Services International's LEO Express cargo system, which NASA passed over for COTS funding last year in part because of its heavy reliance on flight-proven Russian hardware. The very thing that made it technically achievable also made it politically unpalatable to a space agency trying to lessen its dependence on Russia.<br /><br />Instead of using a Russian Progress supply spacecraft to retrieve a separately launched pressurized cargo vehicle and guide it back to the space station for unloading, the Space System/Loral-team would use the company's proven 1300-series satellite bus as a refuelable space tug that would remain in orbit for as long as 10 years. After docking with and escorting an essentially dumb cargo vessel to the station, the vehicle would also remove it from the station and allow it to be de-orbited over an ocean. Hoeber said Space Systems/Loral submitted a similar COTS bid with Constellation Services International last year that NASA rejected because the proposed system relied on development of a new water-launched rocket, dubbed Aquarius, that would give up reliability for low-cost operations – a sensible trade off, the company argued at the time, considering that most of the consumable cargo NASA needs to launch to the station can be readily and cheaply replaced.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />article on Space.com http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/071210-busmon-cots-loral.html<br /><br />pdf flyer http://www.constellationservices.com/SSL_COTS_Fact_Sheet_Dec_2007.pdf<br />home page http://www.constellationservices.com/<br /><br />L