There’s going to be an announcement at 4PM on NASA TV. Jay Barbree says it’s going to be Boeing and SpaceX. Which if true means two capsules, no wings.
[Update a while later]
Here‘s another similar report from the WaPo.
[Update a few minutes later]
Joel Achenbach has more, including the (bizarre, to me) part of the story about ULA getting a new engine for the Atlas from Blue Origin.
[Late-morning update]
OK, now James Dean is reporting that there will be two full awards, not “leader-follower.” I wonder if they have the money for that with a CR?
[Update just before noon]
Alex Brown has a story at National Journal. Annoyingly, everyone is calling them space “taxis” when, at least for NASA, it’s more of a rental-car model (if you insisted on a new car every time you rented). Also, everyone’s regurgitating NASA’s 2017 date. I’d at least note that SpaceX could possibly fly as early as next year, unless there is something else on the critical path than abort tests. Final point:
Boeing’s program is reported to be further along in its development goals.
I think that Pasztor story is BS. How can Boeing be in the lead when they haven’t even flown anything? I love this:
But people familiar with the process said Boeing, with its greater experience as a NASA contractor, appears to have become the favorite partly because it has met earlier development goals in the same program on time and on budget.
Everyone hits their budget. It’s a fixed-price contract. And who cares if they’re hitting program goals, if those are trivial goals (like design reviews)? How anyone can think that a paper vehicle is ahead of one that’s going to have its abort tests in the next few months?
[Update a few minutes before the announcement]
Here’s the link.
[Update after the announcement]
Well, no surprises, except amounts. Here’s Eric Berger’s take.
[Update a while later]
Here is Jeff Foust’s story.