Is SpaceX still in running for America's Space Prize?

[barrykirk]

Now that SpaceX has the COTS contract, are they still allowed to compete in America's Space Prize?<br /><br />I thought one of the rules for the prize was the winner can't be government funded.

 

[nyarlathotep]

I think they'd be more interested in the multi-billion dollar servicing contract for half a dozen Nautilus stations. The $50m ASP is barely a drop in a bucket.

 

[spacester]

Mr Bigelow, in a radio interview (on the Space Show) pretty much said, IIRC, that SpaceX and RpK would both seem to be disqualified, pending review. He remained somewhat hopeful that other upstarts would appear, but also perhaps expectant that COTS will achieve the same goal as for the ASP. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[subzero788]

I don't think he'll be complaining if NASA saves him $50 million <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[barrykirk]

Yes, I agree that the COTS contract is much more valuable.<br /><br />1) It's an order of magnitude larger. <br />2) It's paid in advance.<br />3) There is no performance requirement just give it a good try.<br />4) For SpaceX and Kistler, it's a done deal.<br />

 

[themanwithoutapast]

<br />1) It's an order of magnitude larger. <br />Yes, but COTS money is not free, they have to do 3 test launches for that money for instance - that will eat up money without getting them revenue <br /><br />2) It's paid in advance. <br />Not true - COTS money is paid in steps over the whole contract time and ONLY if you meat the milestone criteria as outlined in their contracts.<br /><br />3) There is no performance requirement just give it a good try. <br />???<br /><br />4) For SpaceX and Kistler, it's a done deal. <br />Not sure what you mean with that, as said above you have to meet milestones to get the money, if you don't do a test flight in 2008 you don't get any more money from NASA etc.

 

[Boris_Badenov]

Bigelow also said that the winner would have a <font color="blue">shot </font> at a contract for, I think, 6 flights for US$200,000,000. But that the winner might not be the one that gets the contract. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"I thought one of the rules for the prize was the winner can't be government funded."<br /><br />They seem to go back and forth on that.<br /><br />http://uplink.space.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=businesstech&Number=312303&page=&view=&sb=&o=<br /><br />When I talked to Bigelow Aerospace last year, I asked whether the $100 million SpaceX recieved from DARPA supporting the Falcon I rocket would disqualify SpaceX from winning the ASP, and I was told no. At that time I was told the only disqualifying support would be government support for a project which fulfills the requirements of the ASP. Or another way it was put was, Bigelow doesn't want a government actor to buy victory in the contest.<br /><br />Whether SpaceX or RPK are eligable or not, it's probably all academic anyway. The standards for winning the America's Space Prize are so extraordinarly high no one has any reasonable chance, government funded or not, of winning the prize. Bigelow wants a space vehicle system that is 80% reusable, and that includes the rocket launcher! Plus the system must re-fly within 60 days! And have a crew of five or more. And accomplish this capability by 2010.<br /><br />Unlike the X-prize, the ASP tries stretching things too far. So far as I was aware only SpaceX was actually trying to win the constest, but even they are no longer eligable because they won the COTS money. What good is a contest which no one is even trying to win?

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="yellow"> Bigelow wants a space vehicle system that is 80% reusable, and that includes the rocket launcher!</font><br /> You would have to ask Suttleguy to be absolutly sure, but I think the Shuttle is 80% reusable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

Maby, but could a single shuttle be turned around in 60 days? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">I don't think he'll be complaining if NASA saves him $50 million</font>/i><br /><br />You bet !!<br /><br />Bigelow wants someone to develop a capability to service his space habitats (cargo and human transport), and he must be tickled pink by the NASA COTS contract. He may end up with two companies he can negotiate with for contract services (better for him), and he doesn't have to pay the initial $50 million prize!</i>