What if Dreamchaser had won CCtCap

[Political Hack Wannabe]

This may have been covered elsewhere, but I find myself thinking about how the world would be different if Dreamchaser had been selected as a winner in CCtCap.  I�d love to know how close the selection process to picking it, and then what would�ve happened.  My thoughts/questions include
1) Would Dreamchaser already be flying?
2) Would that have positively or negatively impacted Orbital Reef? 

Thoughts?

(BTW, if this needs to move, moderators, I apologize.  Wasn�t sure which thread to put this in)

[abaddon]

Choosing DreamChaser would have meant no SoaceX, so an unmitigated disaster as neither contractor would be flying yet.

[eric z]

 Maybe the crystal ball/speculation would be more fun if the subject was "What if Dreamchaser had been picked instead of Starliner"? Wasn't it pretty much a given , at the time the decisions were made, that NASA would go OLD Space [Boeing] for one of the two slots? I always thought people should land on runways like the Stars intended!

[Political Hack Wannabe]

Maybe the crystal ball/speculation would be more fun if the subject was "What if Dreamchaser had been picked instead of Starliner"? Wasn't it pretty much a given , at the time the decisions were made, that NASA would go OLD Space [Boeing] for one of the two slots? I always thought people should land on runways like the Stars intended!

That was more my thinking.  What if we had Dragon and Dreamchaser instead of Starliner?

[Jim]

This may have been covered elsewhere, but I find myself thinking about how the world would be different if Dreamchaser had been selected as a winner in CCtCap.  I�d love to know how close the selection process to picking it, and then what would�ve happened.  My thoughts/questions include
1) Would Dreamchaser already be flying?

Highly doubtful

[abaddon]

After the fact it was revealed that NASA almost chose Boeing as the sole source provider.  SpaceX was only allowed because they were the second option.  SpaceX and SNC was never in the cards regardless of what was rumored at the time.

[DanClemmensen]

Maybe the crystal ball/speculation would be more fun if the subject was "What if Dreamchaser had been picked instead of Starliner"? Wasn't it pretty much a given , at the time the decisions were made, that NASA would go OLD Space [Boeing] for one of the two slots? I always thought people should land on runways like the Stars intended!

That was more my thinking.  What if we had Dragon and Dreamchaser instead of Starliner?

I am not fond of alternate histories as they are by definition not going to happen, and any arguments about them are irrefutable. May as well argue theology.

This is all alternate history, and as with any such, you need some plausible event or condition that would create this situation. At the time of the award in actual history, NASA considered Starliner to be the best choice and the others were competing for the second slot, which was basically a long-shot or backup choice. The only plausible thing that might have dropped Boeing out would have been for Boeing to threaten to not bid at all and then actually follow through and drop out. Boeing actually did make this threat, but it was after the contracts had already been awarded. NASA agreed to pay them an extra $284 M and guarantee all six flights instead of the two guaranteed + four optional of the original contract. So, to get to your alternate history, NASA would have needed to call Boeing's bluff, Boeing would have needed to walk away, and NASA would have needed to resuscitate the Sierra Nevada bid. I don't think any of these things was at all likely.

That would have put us in about 2015 with two contenders, Crew Dragon still trying to launch by 2017, and SN trying for 2018. But in reality, we know Crew Dragon was 3 years late, launching in 2020. Could SN have succeeded in a 3-year development and flown by 2018? How about a 3-year slip to 2021? We'll never know. They might have ended up with an absurd 8-year slip, a first operational flight in 2025, and a serious worry about the availability of their Atlas V launch vehicles.

[TrevorMonty]

Going from dim memory DC LAS engines were issue at selection time. Had it been pick could be long pole in its development. Still think would flown by now as SNC were lot more motivated than Boeing.

[Zed_Noir]

Going from dim memory DC LAS engines were issue at selection time. Had it been pick could be long pole in its development. Still think would flown by now as SNC were lot more motivated than Boeing.

IIRC the LAS and main propulsion for the Dreamchaser were hybrid motors at selection time. SNC would encounter the same engine issues that plague Virgin Galactic with NASA likely axing the Dreamchaser. Of course my recall of the hybrid motor in the Dreamchaser might not be correct.

[JAFO]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

I know it's an apples to oranges comparison, but my company's 787s have just been delayed AGAIN, the Mickey D's merger has been a freakin' disaster. 78 is a great airplane to fly and she's through her teething problems, but the manufacturing... oy veh!

[abaddon]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

[JAFO]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

D'oh......

Last time I got it that backwards I was reminded it's "break ground and fly into the wind.", not the other way around....

[Coastal Ron]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

OK, but that would be fully funded for CRS-2 (cargo), though we don't know what "fully funded" means. And Dream Chaser was awarded a CRS-2 contract in December of 2015, so essentially restarting the development effort for the vehicle since the 2012 CCiCap contract ($212.5M + $100M from prior CCDev).

Compare what Dream Chase was awarded in relationship to the $2.6B SpaceX received for Crew Dragon, and the $4.2B Boeing received for Starliner.

I would think that Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), which is a private company, would have done a better job than Boeing, but maybe not as good as SpaceX.

However we will never know...

[Lee Jay]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

But the DC contract award was many years later than the SpaceX and Starliner awards.

[JAFO]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

OK, but that would be fully funded for CRS-2 (cargo), though we don't know what "fully funded" means. And Dream Chaser was awarded a CRS-2 contract in December of 2015, so essentially restarting the development effort for the vehicle since the 2012 CCiCap contract ($212.5M + $100M from prior CCDev).

Compare what Dream Chase was awarded in relationship to the $2.6B SpaceX received for Crew Dragon, and the $4.2B Boeing received for Starliner.

I would think that Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), which is a private company, would have done a better job than Boeing, but maybe not as good as SpaceX.

However we will never know...

Interesting take on that, sir. I wonder how much of SpaceX's experience with Cargo Dragon translated into the success of Crew Dragon?

 To continue the What if? Suppose SNC had better lobbyists and talked the gummint into buying a couple fewer F-35s and fully funded all 3 programs in CCiCap? I wonder how much further DC would be? Anyone think they'd have flown by now (aside from the Vulcan delays.)?

Add it to the Direct instead of SLS/Ares couldashouldawoulda speculations, I guess...

[Asteroza]

Potentially there might still be more Atlas V in the hangers due to the additional ones needed for Dreamchaser flights perhaps?

[Coastal Ron]

It does make you wonder if the delays in DC have been as a result of limited cash flow because they're mostly self-funding, or if it was the design and construction itself? IOW, if DC, cargo or crewed, had been fully funded from day one and SNC had gotten the kind of cash flow Boeing has gotten for Starliner, would it have flown by now?

You have it exactly backwards; DC cargo has been fully funded since the contract was awarded, Starliner (and Crew Dragon) were underfunded for years after contract award.

OK, but that would be fully funded for CRS-2 (cargo), though we don't know what "fully funded" means. And Dream Chaser was awarded a CRS-2 contract in December of 2015, so essentially restarting the development effort for the vehicle since the 2012 CCiCap contract ($212.5M + $100M from prior CCDev).

Compare what Dream Chase was awarded in relationship to the $2.6B SpaceX received for Crew Dragon, and the $4.2B Boeing received for Starliner.

I would think that Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), which is a private company, would have done a better job than Boeing, but maybe not as good as SpaceX.

However we will never know...

Interesting take on that, sir. I wonder how much of SpaceX's experience with Cargo Dragon translated into the success of Crew Dragon?

I would imagine a significant amount, because it is likely easier to take a working system and improve it (Dragon Cargo --> Dragon Crew), as opposed to building a brand new system (Starliner).

To continue the What if? Suppose {silly talk removed}... fully funded all 3 programs in CCiCap? I wonder how much further DC would be? Anyone think they'd have flown by now (aside from the Vulcan delays.)?

I covered that above.

[DanClemmensen]

Potentially there might still be more Atlas V in the hangers due to the additional ones needed for Dreamchaser flights perhaps?

Maybe, in some alternate history. In actual history, the number of available Atlas Vs was/is constrained by the number of available RD-180 engines. When Russia invaded Crimea, Congress directed DoD to quit buying launches using Russian engines, and ULA did a final order and purchased a number of these engines and had them physically present in the US. (Sorry, I'm a bit fuzzy on the exact details, but the resullt is the same) ULA will never buy more RD-180. In 2021, there were enough engines for 29 more launches. ULA announced that Atlas would retire after these and that all 29 of these launches had been allocated already, none to DC.

As of today, 17 Altas V launches remain: the last USSF mission, one Viasat mission, seven Starliner missions, and eight Kuiper missions.

In your alternate history, I think you could pick either the Kuiper missions or the Starliner missions and declare that they had been allocated to DC, depending on exactly how and when you think DC would have remained in contention for CCP.

[Zed_Noir]

<snip>
Maybe, in some alternate history. In actual history, the number of available Atlas Vs was/is constrained by the number of available RD-180 engines. When Russia invaded Crimea, Congress directed DoD to quit buying launches using Russian engines, and ULA did a final order and purchased a number of these engines and had them physically present in the US. (Sorry, I'm a bit fuzzy on the exact details, but the resullt is the same) ULA will never buy more RD-180. In 2021, there were enough engines for 29 more launches. ULA announced that Atlas would retire after these and that all 29 of these launches had been allocated already, none to DC.
<snip>

Will point out the RD-180 supply cutoff is for the DoD missions. In theory if ULA has a large number of NASA and commercial Atlas V launches booked. They could continued buying more RD-180s. Too bad the Atlas V commercial launches was like every few years at best and the Starliner is an also ran.

[DanClemmensen]

<snip>
Maybe, in some alternate history. In actual history, the number of available Atlas Vs was/is constrained by the number of available RD-180 engines. When Russia invaded Crimea, Congress directed DoD to quit buying launches using Russian engines, and ULA did a final order and purchased a number of these engines and had them physically present in the US. (Sorry, I'm a bit fuzzy on the exact details, but the resullt is the same) ULA will never buy more RD-180. In 2021, there were enough engines for 29 more launches. ULA announced that Atlas would retire after these and that all 29 of these launches had been allocated already, none to DC.
<snip>

Will point out the RD-180 supply cutoff is for the DoD missions. In theory if ULA has a large number of NASA and commercial Atlas V launches booked. They could continued buying more RD-180s. Too bad the Atlas V commercial launches was like every few years at best and the Starliner is an also ran.

The original cutoff was DoD-only, but if meant ULA needed a new rocket with a new motor. They went with the Vulcan design, confident that they would be able to fly it starting in 2019. It was supposed to become their only rocket, replacing both Atlas V and Delta IV, and that's still the plan. Since they were confident in Vulcan, continuing Atlas made no sense. Getting back to the topic, Dream Chaser was supposed to fly on Vulcan, not Atlas V, and this is still the case.