Transformational Space Corp. Wins Lunar Exploration Contract

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

arobie

Guest
"Transformational Space Corporation press release:<br /><br />t/Space Wins NASA Lunar Exploration Contract<br />MENLO PARK, CA – Sept. 1, 2004 – NASA has awarded a $3 million contract to the Transformational Space Corporation LLC to develop a comprehensive plan for renewed lunar exploration and development.<br /><br />Transformational Space Corp. ("t/Space") was chosen by NASA based on a proposed lunar architecture powered by market-based competition, spurred initially by NASA incentives. In the t/Space scenario, companies will design, build and own the lunar infrastructure (vehicles, habitats, power stations, greenhouses and the like) from which NASA will buy services to support its explorers.<br /><br />The t/Space team includes Burt Rutan’s Scaled Composites Inc., which made history recently by rocketing the first commercial pilot into suborbital space aboard SpaceShipOne. Another key player is AirLaunch LLC, which is under contract with the Defense Dept. to develop a low-cost responsive launch vehicle. These two companies will collaborate on the design of a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to carry NASA astronauts to the Moon in the next decade, and eventually to Mars. Their design will demonstrate how the CEV can be developed on an affordable basis by private industry via NASA incentives, saving the government billions of dollars compared to traditional contracting approaches.<br /><br />Commercially operated CEVs may be the key to opening the space frontier, because passenger travel to orbit is a potentially huge market. Tapping into public demand for travel to space will create economies of scale, transforming the launch business from vehicles that operate three or four times a year into rockets that routinely fly several times a week – dramatically bringing down the cost of sending people and cargo off-planet. In the t/Space scenario for the future, NASA’s lunar and Mars expeditions will be able to stand on the shoulders of this vibrant Earth-orbit economy to achieve f
 
A

arobie

Guest
<font color="yellow">"...companies will design, build and own the lunar infrastructure (vehicles, habitats, power stations, greenhouses and the like) from which NASA will buy services to support its explorers."</font><br /><br />That's absolutely awesome!! It sounds like what some here have envisioned with Nasa utilizing private industry.
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow">That's absolutely awesome!!</font>/i><br /><br />I agree!!<br /><br />I have lots of thoughts running through my head on this, but too much work to do. Maybe later I can put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard).</i>
 
P

propforce

Guest
A $3 million dollar contract split between 8 companies? <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />This is sad and laughable. No worthwhile technical work will be accomplished in this 'study'. This 'plan' will be so full of holes with many of its assumptions unable to be validated due to this poorly low funding level. <br /><br />What's also really sad is, NASA probably retain $7 million to hire its own people to 'oversee' this contract <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
I

igorsboss

Guest
The plan is to work with UNLV to turn that $3M into $300M, using local independent contractors such as Bellagio, Sahara, and MGM.
 
W

wvbraun

Guest
I'd like to know that, too. Where did you get this information? UNLV is the Universitiy of Las Vegas, right?<br /><br />I can't find anything like this with google...
 
W

wvbraun

Guest
Judging from the small pics on their website they're planning to revive Hudson's design for the HMX transfer vehicle proposed under NASA's Alternate Access to Station program. It looks exactly the same. <br /><br />Maybe they should team up with SpaceX.
 
N

nacnud

Guest
I’d though I would drag up the concepts from the Alternative Access to Space program for those that haven’t seen them. This program was quietly canned a while back which is very unfortunate as it is exactly the kind of program needed to keep the ISS viable and would be provided a great boost to commercial access to space. Out of a field of 17 small business bidders, four were chosen for 90 day concept studies of alternate methods for "contingency" resupply of the International Space Station. Each link will take you to the concepts for AAS proposed by the respective company.<br /><br /><ul type="square"><li>HMX 4M pdf (where a full description of the above pictured concept can be found)<li>Microcosm, <li>Andrews Space & Tech, and<li>Kistler Aerospace<br /></li></li></li></li></ul> <br /><br />Other contracts were awarded non-competitively, to<br /><ul type="square"><li>Boeing,<li>Lockheed,<li>Orbital<li>Coleman<br /></li></li></li></li></ul><br /><br />I find it a real shame that this program was cancelled as it would current be operational and able to support the ISS. I have no idea why the program was cancelled but there are suggestions from some of the companies that developing this capability would threaten the shuttle as the man method of station resupply something that NASA was very wary of at the time. <br />
 
Y

yree

Guest
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/65852main_tSpace.pdf<br />SpaceDev, developer of the engine for Burt Rutan's SpaceShipOne suborbital spaceplane, has been awarded $1.5 million by the US Air Force to continue development of a new four-stage small launch vehicle.<br /><br />The award will fund the ..<br /><br />Please Note<br />Whereas Flight International exhibits many free articles within this website, this article is within the archive section and would therefore require subscription for further viewing.<br /><br />Are you a subscriber already?<br />If so, click the link below to go directly to the Login page for the full article.<br />Login<br /><br />For information about Flight International, please click here <br />http://www.flightinternational.com/FALANDING_189886.htm<br />
 
S

soyuztma

Guest
The overal concept seems solid but there's one strange thing: they seem to want to use a huge White Knight as a first stage to launch stuff into orbit. I doubt if this method is efficient. There will have to be a lot of lauches before this huge plane pays off its cost. But there plan seems to call for just that: more than 50 launches for one mission to the moon. A few launches seems ok, but 50 seems a bit too much. But i like there presentation: a lot of cool pictures. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
W

wvbraun

Guest
"A few launches seems ok, but 50 seems a bit too much."<br /><br />High flight rate=low launch costs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts