5 ms·

Same way Orbital was awarded vastly more for CRS contract, by even larger margin. Reason is simple and completely valid: both Orbital in 2008 and Boeing in 2014

Same way Orbital was awarded vastly more for CRS contract, by even larger margin. Reason is simple and completely valid: both Orbital in 2008 and Boeing in 2014 have much higher chances to perform to the expectation. So SpaceX makes a discount for risk. In 2008, SpaceX did only 4 launches, of which only 1 successful, of much smaller light Falcon 1 vehicle, Orbital built 2 distinct successful launch vehicles - Taurus and Pegasus - and apart from that, it built complex satellites, being a company with 25+ years of experience and much more funding and track record. Should 2008 CRS contract be awarded today, it would be probably much different because now SpaceX appears more qualified. Same applies to Boeing today - for all achievements of SpaceX, Boeing is a nearly 100 year old company which was in space business since before the space age, and about two orders of magnitude larger - for them, CST-100 is a simple device not presenting much technical risk.

greglindahl 12y ago
Actually, the CST-100 vs. Manned Dragon comparison is more complicated than that. Manned Dragon is based on Cargo Dragon, which has already flown six times. While Manned Dragon is eventually planned to land on rockets, it can start by landing in the water with parachutes, just like Cargo Dragon, while Cargo Dragon is flown a bunch of times with rocket landing to work out the bugs. Since the CST-100 is only used for people, it will have a much lower flight rate and much less testing before humans fly in it. Finally, Manned Dragon will have its abort test flown within the next few months; CST-100 is a bit behind.
treebeard04 12y ago
Pegasus has a 5% failure rate. Taurus has a 33% failure rate. Taurus has three failures in its last four flights. Not impressive. SpaceX had a perfect launch record on the Falcon 9. Not bad for a 12 year old company. And regarding Boeing being 100 years old, I'll drive a Tesla and not a Model T, thank you.
- anovikov 12y ago
  Please read my post carefully. Right now yes, SpaceX is more qualified. That was not the case in 2008 when CRS contract for SpaceX and Orbital was awarded, both SpaceX track record and success rate were far inferior.

greglindahl 12y ago

Actually, the CST-100 vs. Manned Dragon comparison is more complicated than that. Manned Dragon is based on Cargo Dragon, which has already flown six times. While Manned Dragon is eventually planned to land on rockets, it can start by landing in the water with parachutes, just like Cargo Dragon, while Cargo Dragon is flown a bunch of times with rocket landing to work out the bugs. Since the CST-100 is only used for people, it will have a much lower flight rate and much less testing before humans fly in it. Finally, Manned Dragon will have its abort test flown within the next few months; CST-100 is a bit behind.

treebeard04 12y ago

Pegasus has a 5% failure rate. Taurus has a 33% failure rate. Taurus has three failures in its last four flights. Not impressive. SpaceX had a perfect launch record on the Falcon 9. Not bad for a 12 year old company. And regarding Boeing being 100 years old, I'll drive a Tesla and not a Model T, thank you.

anovikov 12y ago
Please read my post carefully. Right now yes, SpaceX is more qualified. That was not the case in 2008 when CRS contract for SpaceX and Orbital was awarded, both SpaceX track record and success rate were far inferior.