Who do you think will win the Commercial Crew Downselect?

[EndOfTheEarth]

For those of you who don't know, NASA will soon be announcing which of the Manned space contractors will continue to receive funding, and will ultimately become the group that puts Americans back into orbit. The current three major contestants are:

SpaceX (with DragonV2)

Sierra Nevada (with Dream Chaser)

Boeing (with CST-100)

The downselect will reduce the funding from all three of these organizations to two, or possibly just one "winner". Who do you think will make it to the next round?

Pictures, for those of you who don't know the spaceships by heart:

[Mitchz95]

Sierra Nevada has stated that they will continue to develop the Dream Chaser even if they don't make it through. Not sure what impact that will have on the decision. They all look like nice ships, though the CST-100 doesn't seem to have a lot of hype surrounding it compared to the others.

[xenomorph555]

Well Nasa is definitely choosing 2 at this moment and will keep 2 unless Obama does what he does best.

They will choose Spacex for obvious reasons, and I believe Boeing for their massive experience in the field and their long term partnership.

[montyben101]

The cst-100 is so boring. Why do NASA need two capsules!?

Dream chaser has an airlock

[Streetwind]

I of course have my personal preferences, but as to what I think will actually happen? I've read into the issue, and the more I learn the less I'm sure. There are many reasons for each of the three competitors to win, and I imagine that whoever is/was making the choice at NASA is/was agonizing over it for ages. I'm going to abstain from the poll and just keep crossing my fingers for my personal favorite(s).

[Javster]

The Dream Chaser will probably be most recognised by the average person as "a small version of the space shuttle"

[cantab]

I'm going with Boeing and SpaceX. Boeing are the big megacorp and are bound to get a contract I think, and SpaceX seem a little further along with their design and I think will be seen as lower-risk in financial terms.

[Nibb31]

The cst-100 is so boring. Why do NASA need two capsules!?

Dream chaser has an airlock

"Exciting" and "airlock" were not in the requirements. They have no use for an air lock on a LEO taxi and they will favor safety and dependability more than cool looks.

[Nibb31]

They will choose Spacex for obvious reasons, and I believe Boeing for their massive experience in the field and their long term partnership.

What obvious reasons? SpaceX already has the commercial cargo contract to keep it running. NASA isn't interested in subsidizing Dragon reusability.

A clever thing to do would be to award the contract to Sierra Nevada and Boeing, which actually provides sustainable business to the three competitors, instead of cutting one of them out.

[xenomorph555]

What obvious reasons? SpaceX already has the commercial cargo contract to keep it running. NASA isn't interested in subsidizing Dragon reusability.

A clever thing to do would be to award the contract to Sierra Nevada and Boeing, which actually provides sustainable business to the three competitors, instead of cutting one of them out.

I never said anything about re-usability, I meant how they have completed a lot of the work needed for Dragon, they regularly supply the station and other reasons. Plus if they weren't selected they would spark a public outrage.

I like your idea though, give them the cargo contracts and SN the crew.

[Nibb31]

I never said anything about re-usability, I meant how they have completed a lot of the work needed for Dragon, they regularly supply the station and other reasons. Plus if they weren't selected they would spark a public outrage.

Dragon V2, being a whole new vehicle compared to Cargo Dragon, is at pretty much the same stage as the other vehicles. Other than a parachute drop test, it hasn't even tested its landing systems yet.

I don't think there would be any outrage, except from the SpaceX fanboys. It most likely wouldn't even make mainstream headlines.

[gooddog15]

I personally think SpaceX and SNC will win.

why?

Well SpaceX's is a well known, proven aerospace company, overly capable of developing its Dragon V2 by 2017. It's a good bet that they will make it. also their dragon has something that none of their competors have: the ability to carry unpressurized cargo.

SNC on the other hand, has a space plane. It's more capable than the dragon/CST-100, landing wise. While the dragon/CST-100 lands randomly in the middle of a desert, the Dreamchaser can glide in and land on a runway, having it's crew/cargo safely secured faster. it has a airlock on it, enabling it to take over for EVA's on one part of the ISS, if that sections airlock failed. Also, it lacks a non-reusable Service module, making the spacecraft itself, completely reusable.

Boeing's CST on my 3rd hand, however presents a capsule, with the same capabilities as it's competitors. Even if it seems bland, it's going to be built by a legendary aerospace company. that's all of pluses I could think about that capsule. I think boeing could care less if it lost, as they've got billions of dollars from other military contracts.

[Nibb31]

Well SpaceX's is a well known, proven aerospace company, overly capable of developing its Dragon V2 by 2017. It's a good bet that they will make it. also their dragon has something that none of their competors have: the ability to carry unpressurized cargo.

Yes, but this is not a NASA requirement. It might prove to be useful one day, but it won't be part of NASA's decision. Cargo Dragon is already operational for the unpressurized cargo requirements.

SNC on the other hand, has a space plane. It's more capable than the dragon/CST-100, landing wise. While the dragon/CST-100 lands randomly in the middle of a desert, the Dreamchaser can glide in and land on a runway, having it's crew/cargo safely secured faster. it has a airlock on it, enabling it to take over for EVA's on one part of the ISS, if that sections airlock failed. Also, it lacks a non-reusable Service module, making the spacecraft itself, completely reusable.

It's not a space plane, it's a lifting body. It's closer to the X24A/B, the M2-F3 or the HL10 than to an airplane. It doesn't "glide" like an airplane. It comes in unpowered like a capsule, with slightly more manoeuvrability. Lifting bodies are unforgiving things to fly, just ask Bruce Peterson (or Steve Austin!). They have a slightly higher L/D ratio and have a little bit more crossrange, but they typically land hard!

DreamChaser also has some serious shortcomings in abort situations. There are doubts that it could actually be survivable throughout the flight profile because aborting to a runway might not always be possible. It also has some serious development problems with its hybrid engines (similar to those on SS2). If they have to switch to liquid engines, the CoM changes and it pretty much needs to start from scratch.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Nibb31