SpaceX vs. Everyone - ULA, NG, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

[S'toon]

This week on Quirks and Quarks:
SpaceX sticks the landing and sticks it to the competition

Ashlee Vance, a technology journalist, feature writer for Bloomberg Businessweek. and author of Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future, has been tracking how SpaceX and other new aerospace start-ups are disrupting the space-launch industry.

He thinks they may be threatening the monopoly of the old-guard of government and defence contractors, who have controlled access to space, and failed to reduce costs and increase access. This might mark a new era in space exploration and exploitation, with implications for space science and for human missions to Mars.

Podcast:
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/quirks_20160416_78049.mp3

 

[ecarfan]

Ms. Shot well is very impressive. I like her attitude as described in that article.

 

[Grendal]

ULA is getting desperate to clean house:

ULA plans second, bigger round of job cuts in 2017 - SpaceNews.com

The consensus in the comments is that ULA is dead in the water. The only thing keeping them alive is the block buy contract.

 

[Bgarret]

ULA is getting desperate to clean house:

ULA plans second, bigger round of job cuts in 2017 - SpaceNews.com

The consensus in the comments is that ULA is dead in the water. The only thing keeping them alive is the block buy contract.

Another article by Motley Fool....almost seems like piling on:
SpaceX Surges, and United Launch Alliance Announces Mass Layoffs -- The Motley Fool

My favorite quotes, excerpts- the subtitle:
This story will end badly.
And the closing hypothetical quote for a ULA memo: "Layoffs will continue until morale improves."

I feel for the ULA employees - but not for Senator Shelby or the arrogant leadership of ULA.

 

[ecarfan]

ULA is doomed to becoming a much smaller company existing on a small number of US government contracted launches and the money NASA gives them for the Mars program which I predict will never put a human on Mars but will go on for another decade or so before finally being defunded when it is obvious that SpaceX is on track to put a lot of humans on Mars before 2030.

 

[glhs272]

I think most folks on this thread already know this, but to be fair to the folks at ULA, it needs to be mentioned that their hands are tied when it comes to trying to be an innovative, competitive space launch company. The whole companies existence is based on the Boeing and Lockheed not competing with each other and instead focusing on extracting as much cash from government contracts as politically possible (while still getting very good mission success). ULA was only ever meant to be a cash cow and all of the profits made by the company funneled to their corporate parents. This has left them with no domestic hydrocarbon engine supply and little funds to design a new rocket. Really this is a failure of leadership in Boeing and Lockheed for they are in ultimate control.

My biggest gripe with ULA leadership is that they continue to deride SpaceX and reusable boosters as "dumb". All while SpaceX continues to collect boosters and ULA is running out of engines. I agree with most of the folks on this thread. ULA is doomed. There business model can no longer function in this environment. They must be allowed to adapt or they will continue this slow death spiral. After their bankruptcy I expect their misc. parts to be sold off to Orbital ATK and Aerojet Rocketdyne. But I see no hope for the Delta IV so I think a re-worked Atlas V with an AR-1 engine is about the only thing AJR could do with ULA's parts.

 

[chickensevil]

I feel for the ULA employees

To clarify for everyone, I don't think anyone is wishing for bad things to happen to individual people. If they are smart engineers with good qualifications, they will certainly land on their feet. The space launch industry on the whole is growing... not shrinking... this is just one company that has failed to adapt with the times. This is like contract work with the government... if it looks like your company isn't going to win the contract re-bid, it is time to start looking around for another company. It will likely be the same for these employees. They have some pretty smart people working there (I mean they are actually launching rockets into space! I couldn't do that...)

This reminds me of the season premiere of Silicon Valley, if we have to keep saying that "Richard is great but you know..." we are going to be here all night...

 

[Grendal]

It looks like the government is finally catching on to the expensive shenanigans:

White House "strongly objects" to defense bill's launch provisions - SpaceNews.com

The Air Force would like to spend 75% of its space rocket propulsion system development dollars on a new main engine capable of replacing the RD-180.

Isn't that nice of the Air Force to pay for a replacement engine for ULA?

 

[GoTslaGo]

Thanks for posting!

From what I interpret from the article, the Air Force doesn't want to spend that amount. It's the House Armed Services Committee.

From the article:

"The House Armed Services Committee voted April 28 to require the Air Force to spend all but 25 percent of its rocket propulsion system development dollars on a new main engine capable of replacing the RD-180 that powers United Launch Alliance’s workhorse Atlas 5 rocket. A pair of amendments pending as the full House prepares to debate H.R. 4909 this week would raise the cap on non-main-engine-related work to 31 percent.

The Air Force, which has said it does not want to fund development of a main engine the U.S. launch industry might not want to use, recently awarded contracts totaling $130 million in 2016 to Orbital ATK, SpaceX and ULA to work on a new upper stage and next-generation launcher concepts. Aerojet Rocketdyne, meanwhile, was given $115 million this year to develop the AR1 engine that it is pitching as a flexible replacement for Atlas 5’s RD-180."

- See more at: White House "strongly objects" to defense bill's launch provisions - SpaceNews.com

Seems the Air Force knows when it has something good, and it's the Politicos that want to bring back the pork...

The comments for the article are pretty interesting as well. Worth a read.

 

[Grendal]

Someone referenced this article in one of the stories about yesterday's launch and landing:

SpaceX Gets an Air Force Funding Infusion for Raptor Engine at Parabolic Arc

It's an old article from January. A lot of good information on the Raptor next-gen SpaceX engine. The comments from the article are very interesting to read as well.

 

[Grendal]

The DOD is investigating ULA over what Brett Tobey let out of the bag.

DOD Inspector General Initiates Investigation Into Air Force Awards to ULA

 

[Grendal]

The fight is picking up in Congress about the RD-180:

Highlights from the Senate’s floor debate on the RD-180 - SpaceNews.com

 

[hockeythug]

Looks like ULA will be allowed 18 engines through 2022.

 

[Grendal]

Looks like ULA will be allowed 18 engines through 2022.

As McCain points out, ULA gets their political cronies to put extensions into legislature to remove the limitation. They've already done this twice, I think. Definitely once.

 

[Grendal]

ULA and SpaceX will go head to head in a bid for a new GPS-3 launch. The first opportunity to competitively bid was passed up by ULA. Their ex-executive said it was because they knew they couldn't compete. The backlash from that incident and lack of competing almost lost them their $900+ million "readiness" fee. So they are definitely competing this time and every time they have an opportunity. It will be interesting to see whether they will win a bid. I'll guess it is 2/3 SpaceX to 1/3 ULA, or 6 for SpaceX and 3 for ULA.

SpaceX and the United Launch Alliance may finally compete to launch a military satellite

 

[Cosmacelf]

Almost lost them their $900M kick back, I mean fee? Talk about corruption in plain sight.

 

[hockeythug]

So I assume ULA finally got around to getting the proper accounting system? That was what their initial excuse was until that former exec with on some rant about how they couldn't compete.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Ms. Shot well is very impressive. I like her attitude as described in that article.

There was an excellent interview with her that shows how she's lasted at a Musk company: she's very clearly a workaholic.

(And I'm sure you can say Mrs Shotwell. She took her husband's name. He's a NASA engineer.)

 

[Grendal]

So I assume ULA finally got around to getting the proper accounting system? That was what their initial excuse was until that former exec with on some rant about how they couldn't compete.

ULA can't compete against SpaceX on cost. There is no chance for them in that arena. They can still compete on scheduling and quality. SpaceX has an enormous backlog of launches that they need to work through. ULA doesn't have that problem since no satellite company would ever want to pay their crazy high pricing. ULA also has an outstanding successful launch track record that SpaceX cannot match for a few more years as long as no other RUD incidents occur. So it will all come down to how the military chooses to prioritize their needs. I expect SpaceX to get 6 out of the 9 available. JMHO though.

 

[hockeythug]

ULA can't compete against SpaceX on cost. There is no chance for them in that arena. They can still compete on scheduling and quality. SpaceX has an enormous backlog of launches that they need to work through. ULA doesn't have that problem since no satellite company would ever want to pay their crazy high pricing. ULA also has an outstanding successful launch track record that SpaceX cannot match for a few more years as long as no other RUD incidents occur. So it will all come down to how the military chooses to prioritize their needs. I expect SpaceX to get 6 out of the 9 available. JMHO though.

I agree. My comment was more tongue in cheek related to their excuses.