SNC Unveils Dream Chaser Cargo Variant
Dream Chaser cargo ship docking with International Space Station. (Credit: SNC)
SPARKS, Nev. March 17, 2015 (SNC PR) – Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) unveiled a new Dream Chaser® mission variant today, the Dream Chaser Cargo System, SNC’s complete system solution for NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) contract.
The Dream Chaser Cargo System features include: an innovative folding-wing design which allows the Dream Chaser spacecraft to fit inside existing fairings, making it compatible with a suite of launch vehicles; the ability to exceed all of NASA’s cargo requirements for pressurized and unpressurized cargo during flights to the International Space Station (ISS); high reusability, allowing it to serve the required number of missions for the full life expectancy of the ISS; non-toxic, non-hypergolic propulsion system and other fluids; low-g entry to a runway landing with immediate access to cargo.
“SNC is proud to offer NASA a complete system that exceeds all criteria set forth by NASA in the proposal,” said Mark N. Sirangelo, corporate vice president and head of SNC’s Space Systems. “The autonomous and upgraded Dream Chaser Cargo System is a mission variant of the Dream Chaser Space System, whose heritage includes over 10 years of development and maturation, the last five of which were complete as part of an ongoing public-private partnership between SNC and NASA.
“Our Dream Chaser Cargo System provides unrivaled capability for pressurized and unpressurized cargo transportation, including accelerated return of cargo and critical science on every mission. It also enables a wide portfolio of other space exploration capabilities, including servicing/construction for future space stations, satellite servicing and deployment, as well as retrieval and orbital debris removal. SNC continues to grow its U.S. team which has expanded to 30 states. We are also expanding our international partnerships, and have agreements in place with many of the current ISS partners and global space agencies. Our SNC team looks forward to becoming a cargo transportation provider for NASA missions.”
18 responses to “SNC Unveils Dream Chaser Cargo Variant”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
So this is now the third variant on Dreamchaser that SNC has unveiled. Whilst this looks like a very capable ship for the CRS-2 contract isn’t this stretching themselves very thinly for a company that hasn’t yet won any major contracts?
Are they still working on the original variant and the scaled down Stratolaunch version as well? And if so, how much compatibility is there between the vehicles, their components and the economics of scale? Are they effectively creating a new production line with each version?
Keep in mind that Sierra Nevada is an aerospace company about the same size as SpaceX. they are a military contractor as well. So their profit margins can handle some R&D for the Dream Chaser.
those are good questions. I hope SNC answers at least some of them sometime.
Unfortunately some answers can already be gleaned from their prior moves. They do satellites well but are still a smaller player in that field. Their attempt to branch out into delivery systems, halfhearted at best and comical at worst. The strategic reasoning behind this seems like net casting
Actually, SNC has a number of large contracts. If they win a contract for servicing, I have no doubt that they will have no issues with finding money to finish any of these versions.
But, SNC should have to show their cards to NASA . As it is, LM’s proposal is going to be hard for NASA to pass up.
Without casting aspersions on any of the actual or proposed vehicles involved, why would NASA award a contract to a company that not only can’t show a tested, production vehicle already exists, but also has no plans to even build the vehicle and become a competitor in the market unless they win a government contract?
Who says that they have no plans to continue ? SNC is still working on it.
I don’t know whether SNC plans to continue or not. Do you know if L-M has committed to building their vehicle in the absence of a contract? Do you know if SNC is actually “bending tin” or just drawing pictures with a CAD program? If they had possessed a second test article when they crashed the first one, they may have been able to continue the program and may have won the contract that ended up going to Boeing. We know that the only reason that CST 100 is still a going concern is because NASA awarded them a contract. We also know for sure that the reason there is no Dream Chaser is because NASA didn’t award SNC a contract.
So far the only company with any entrepreneurial spirit seems to be SpaceX and they are reaping the benefits of getting an early start.
SNC is still bending metal. Not at a fast pace, though …..
I have to get ahold of 1 of the guys that I know that worked on it (I knew more, but they were laid off).
As to entrepreneurial spirit, plenty of companies have it. SNC IS one, but, there are reasons that I can not go into that they are currently limited.
However, Bigelow, BO, and Mastek all come to mind, with others out there.
And it is still too early to tell if bruno is going to restore that entrepreneurial spirit to ULA, or not.
Well, I hope that the spirit is still alive. I may quarrel with SpaceX’s labor practices but I will give Elon Musk proper credit for recognizing a business opportunity and having the confidence in both his engineering and the market to put his own money into his vehicles. The same goes to the others who bet on themselves with their own capital. This is what I see “Private Space” as being about.
It looks very capable. I can’t help but remember that SNC turned their only working engineering test article into a tumbleweed.
They unveiled a _concept_ for a variant, not an actual product. The same applies to the scaled down version for stratolaunch. Unless they get a contract, I doubt any additional variants will ever be built. Even if they stay true to their “we will slowly build it anyway” agenda, they will only build the one variant which they themselves think is the most likely to be sold to potential customers.
So how is pondering and proposing different ideas and variants lead to “stretching themselves very thinly”?
Will their latest and greatest actually have a nose wheel?
No need. Dream chasers actually roll until they reach a point where they can slide to a stop.
All these new spaceships are very exciting. Anybody ready to bet that one or both companies will have tested, working models ready to haul cargo when the CRS-1 contract expires?
Dream Chaser is in any case an interesting counterpoint to the Shuttle concept. The Shuttle was a do-everything-pay-for-itself-cargo-bay-of-dreams that wasted most of the lift of a Saturn V class launch vehicle on wings, landing gear, and airframe, that all came back down again. The main goals being to avoid dropping those expensive liquid fuel engines in the ocean and having to recover astronauts at sea.
The engines would have been cheaper to drop in the ocean- which is where the RS-68 comes from- and bringing those 40 odd tons of space glider back to spend huge sums making it ready to go back up did not pay for itself. What is really interesting is the 100 to 200 billion dollar (by various pricing methods) space station to nowhere was unnecessary. Some solar panels and a couple life support pallets would have allowed the orbiter to stay up for a 6 month astronaut tour.
But a microgravity debilitated astronaut cannot safely land a shuttle. And the astronaut corps insisted on a pilot being required. Of course they could have sent another shuttle up to rendezvous and gave the returning orbiter a healthy pilot to land it. NASA considered all the years of valuable “experience” assembling the ISS to be the point I guess. I don’t buy that considering a wet workshop can put up an ISS sized crew compartment in one afternoon.
It would be good to have low G return to a runway capability, plus they could hopefully transition to a manned version in the future (considering all the work they’ve already done in that regard), thus diversifying our capabilities and providers beyond just SpaceX and Boeing, and also beyond just capsules. Even aside from winged craft, the nation has invested a lot of time, money and effort in lifting bodies (since the M2-F1‘s debut in 1963) and it would be good to see that finally come to fruition. I’d really like to see it, plus I’d like to see a company that has put its own skin in the game be rewarded.
I truly wonder if Sierra Nevada can pull it off though. They *still* haven’t done a second drop test (after messing up their test article on its one and only flight) and the last I heard they still didn’t have a propulsion system (after finally dropping the rubber/nitrous plan). And then there’s the matter of the launcher.
Also, Lockheed’s space tug proposal is likewise intriguing in the capabilities and potential future developments it could offer beyond the cargo contract in question. Boeing’s cargo CST-100 would probably be more capable in terms of capacity and re-boost possibilities, and SpaceX is of course not only proven and cheaper, but also provides a purely US booster. Heck, Orbital’s Cygnus is proven too and its new extended version provides lots of cargo room and potential future uses.
I’d like to see Sierra Nevada and its lifting body succeed, but the competition has picked up and other options offer their own attractions. We’ll see…
The major flaw in this bid is the use of the docking system rather than the berthing system. It severely limits the type of cargo the system can handle due to the rings used are MUCH smaller!
If it is LIDS, then it can berth and dock.