yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) (08/24/88)
Barbara Selby August 22, 1988
Headquarters, Washington, D.C. 4:00 P.M. EDT
Jerry Berg
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.
RELEASE: 88-117
NASA ISSUES ADVANCED SOLID ROCKET MOTOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
NASA today issued a request for proposals inviting industry
to compete for the design, development, test and evaluation of a
Space Shuttle advanced solid rocket motor (ASRM) to replace in
the mid l990s the current redesigned solid rocket motor.
The planned development of a new motor will provide
substantial improvements in flight safety design margins and
reliability, and achieve improved Shuttle payload weight
capability. The program will use the latest technologies in
manufacturing, automation, and non-destructive testing and is
vital for maintaining a sound, competitive industrial base in the
U.S. solid rocket motor industry.
The request for proposals provides for full and open
competition and asks interested firms to propose how they would
design, build and test the ASRM and the necessary production and
testing facilities.
On July 26, the agency announced its selection of the
government-owned sites to be available as locations for the new
rocket motor production and test facilities, subject to
completion of the necessary environmental impact statements. The
Tennessee Valley Authority property known as Yellow Creek,
Mississippi, is the government site selected for the production
facility, and NASA's Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis,
Mississippi, is the site selected for the test facility.
Firms which respond to the request for proposals will use the
Yellow Creek and Stennis locations as a common basis for
proposing government-owned, contractor-operated facilities. The
companies also will include in their proposals a
private-financing option for construction of the same facilities
on those government sites.
Companies also will be encouraged to make use of available
manufacturing space and computing capabilities at NASA's Michoud
Assembly Facility and Slidell Computer Complex, both located in
southeastern Louisiana.
In addition, the request for proposals permits an optional
proposal under specified conditions for a privately-owned rocket
facility to be located on a site of the company's choice.
Firms will have 60 days to prepare and submit their
proposals. Following evaluation by a NASA source evaluation
board, a contract award is anticipated in early 1989.
The overall cost of the design, development, test and
evaluation effort is estimated at just under $1 billion,
including modern tooling and equipment and the supporting
governmental effort. An additional $200-$300 million cost is
anticipated for construction of the facilities. In addition to
the basic design and development, the contract also will include
delivery of rocket motors for six Shuttle missions.
The design, development, test and evaluation contract will be
for an approximate 5-year effort leading to delivery of the
first flight set by 1994 and a flight verification program of six
Shuttle missions. Plans call for full phase-in of the new motor
over an approximate 3-year period.
The performance goal is to provide a 12,000-pound increase in
the Shuttle's payload capacity. The improved ASRM performance
will help significantly in supporting deployment of Space Station
Freedom and other critical missions and will contribute to an
early payback of the development investment.dsmith@hplabsb.UUCP (David Smith) (08/25/88)
In article <13768@ames.arc.nasa.gov>, yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: > The performance goal is to provide a 12,000-pound increase in > the Shuttle's payload capacity. I had thought the payload capacity was limited by the landing weight in an abort. What gives? Does the 12,000-pound increase just put the payload back up to where it was originally supposed to be? -- David Smith HP Labs dsmith@hplabs.hp.com
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (08/30/88)
> The improved ASRM performance >will help significantly in supporting deployment of Space Station >Freedom and other critical missions ... I just had a wonderful thought. If they have to enlarge the launch pad structure to accommodate the more ferocious exhaust plumes from the ASRM boosters as the Space Station is boosted into orbit... might they name the modified launch structure the FREEDOM MAXI-PAD? -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Charles Lord) (08/31/88)
In article <6152@dasys1.UUCP>, tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: > > might they name the modified launch structure the FREEDOM MAXI-PAD? > No, no! Then the crews would start suffering from Pre-Mission Syndrome! -- Charles Lord ..!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!cjl Usenet Cary, NC cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu Bitnet #include <std.disclamers> #include <cutsey.quote>