Not specifically SpaceX, but a nice article on the rise of commercial launchers by Loren Grush:
This was the decade the commercial spaceflight industry leapt forward
This was the decade the commercial spaceflight industry leapt forward
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
This article is really good. It's more SpaceX against everyone though.
The best way to make a profit as an aerospace company is to fail
I changed the thread title to better fit the current landscape of current military aerospace. As opposed to 2014, when SpaceX was just fighting to break in. Now it is the good old boy old school contractors fighting against the upstart that is disrupting their lucrative government contracts.
The best way to make a profit as an aerospace company is to fail
I changed the thread title to better fit the current landscape of current military aerospace. As opposed to 2014, when SpaceX was just fighting to break in. Now it is the good old boy old school contractors fighting against the upstart that is disrupting their lucrative government contracts.
Last edited:
Nikxice
Active Member
It seems SpaceX is making a strong argument for a piece of that contract and is also willing to put up a good fight in court on 3/2. So the Air Force thinks SpaceX's Starship is “too risky for an LSA award”? I wonder how the development of Starship is any riskier than investing in Blue Origin rockets that still haven't exceeded 3,000 mph. Also, note to Bezos. After reading the news today, the Air Force would probably prefer that you don't share info with your girlfriend concerning future national security launches.
I just saw this article and it looks like SpaceX is run very differently from the competition,
The Long-Forgotten Flight That Sent Boeing Off Course
The Long-Forgotten Flight That Sent Boeing Off Course
Brutal, but deserved takedown of Boeing. Idiots.
When the Starlink 6 launch is successful, Falcon 9 will be the most flown current US rocket.
Falcon 9 to become U.S. rocket leader; Starlink “where are they now” edition - NASASpaceFlight.com
Falcon 9 to become U.S. rocket leader; Starlink “where are they now” edition - NASASpaceFlight.com
New Chinese spacecraft landing marks step toward future crewed lunar missions - SpaceNews.com
China continues to make progress on developing their own crewed vehicle for missions to LEO and beyond.
China continues to make progress on developing their own crewed vehicle for missions to LEO and beyond.
The numbers don’t lie—NASA’s move to commercial space has saved money
SpaceX crushes the competition in terms of results per dollar spent.
SpaceX crushes the competition in terms of results per dollar spent.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I sure do like Eric Berger's reporting. I think I learn something from every one of his articles.
In this case, SpaceX is the clear winner and it's ULA and Blue Origin fighting it out.
Political fight continues over Air Force launch services procurement - SpaceNews.com
Political fight continues over Air Force launch services procurement - SpaceNews.com
Nikxice
Active Member
BO hasn't performed a New Shepard test flight since late last year. I don't see the next one scheduled, but BO is still promising their first suborbital crewed launch in 2020.
Did come across this. Blue Origin Club for the Future | Welcome
Jeff appears to be preoccupied leading Blue Origin's "Club for the Future". Although perhaps he's not supposed to be talking about, "Future Club". At least he's staying grounded with a worthy distraction!
adiggs
Well-Known Member
Maybe the article is in error, or maybe I missed something as I read it - the article indicates that it's ULA, Blue Origin, and Northrup Grumman that are in the mix, with ULA and Blue Origin fighting over where there should be a 3rd launch provider.
That sure seems like a bad choice by the Air Force if true - SpaceX has to be the reliable and low cost launch provider at this point (F9 has a lot of history now, and is building up more history at an amazing pace).
Flip side, the future of space will be better served by pushing out anyone who isn't low cost and reliable. It's basically a parallel concept to the idea that NASA should focus on science and exploration and not on building big ass rockets. To that end Blue is really the ideal long term #2, and with the current game only allowing two winners (With SpaceX being the clear #1) its essentially a foregone conclusion that ULA will be #2.
Make no mistake, while blue may not have the same corporate approach, speed, or public presence as SpaceX, there's quite a bit of activity going on behind NDAs. They are real. NG is real.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I'm thinking it's a mistake - the article indicates that SpaceX isn't in the mix at all (no mention)l. That's the mistake I see, and I think it's more likely the article (which makes for abysmal journalism) as opposed to the choice the Air Force has made (presuming that SpaceX bid for the contract) is abysmal.
EDIT: I'll leave what I've already written, but reading comprehension for the win (I fail). I see that SpaceX is listed right at the top of the article, and then isn't discussed further (presumably because they're so much better). And that makes sense.
SpaceX isn't part of the 2018 Launch Service Agreements.
"This funding was awarded in October 2018 to Blue Origin, ULA and Northrop Grumman."
They are in the running for the National Security Space Launch Phase 2 launch services procurement. "Blue Origin, United Launch Alliance, Northrop Grumman and SpaceX are competing for two contracts to fly approximately 34 missions from 2022 to 2027."
Similar threads
- Article
