TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
  1. TMC is currently READ ONLY.
    Click here for more info.

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

Discussion in 'SpaceX' started by Bgarret, Apr 25, 2014.

Tags:
  1. Cosmacelf

    Cosmacelf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2013
    Messages:
    8,229
    Location:
    San Diego
    Should have been the other way 'round, but I guess SpaceX can't complain too much. It may end up being the other way around in the end anyways since ULA still has to integrate and test the BE-4 engine from Blue Origin. Anyways, a fairly rational award. Can we put the Space Force in charge of NASA? :D
     
    • Funny x 1
  2. e-FTW

    e-FTW New electron smell

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2015
    Messages:
    3,216
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    • Like x 1
  3. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    None of those articles comments on the 60/40 split in launches between ULA and SpaceX. Just another example of the military’s bias towards old space. It should be 50/50, though if the military actually cared about cost it should be primarily SpaceX with ULA getting just enough launches to maintain a viable program that would serve as a backup to SpaceX
     
    • Love x 3
    • Like x 1
  4. mongo

    mongo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,857
    Location:
    Michigan
    For fiscal year 2022, ULA is getting $337 million for two launches and SpaceX is getting $316 for one.
    So number of launches is apparently not proportional to payments (as part of this award).
     
  5. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    There is something else going on there that we aren’t aware of. Even a single FH launch could not cost that much, and we know that SpaceX launches are significantly less costly than ULA launches.
     
  6. mongo

    mongo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,857
    Location:
    Michigan
    It may be partly a fixed yearly cost for access to capability plus an additional amount per launch. From random Twitter posts, it seems like ULA already has capability funding from other government sources. If so this could explain the pricing difference with ULA having more launch cost and less support cost.
     
  7. Cosmacelf

    Cosmacelf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2013
    Messages:
    8,229
    Location:
    San Diego
    SpaceX must be getting better at playing the beltway game of extracting the most amount of $$ from the government. "Unless you pay us more $$, we're planning on retiring the F9, you know", or something like that.
     
    • Like x 1
  8. Grendal

    Grendal SpaceX Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    5,661
    Location:
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    As part of this deal the military is paying for a Vertical Integration tower for SpaceX at LC-39A. A lot of their important satellites call for hidden VI and SpaceX currently doesn't have that capability.

    Even though this is 60% ULA/40% for SpaceX, this is a huge upgrade coup for the young (in terms of government contracting) upstart. It leads to the next contract being 60% for SpaceX. I expect SpaceX to continue to do even better in the random add-on launches too. They'll be throwing a few bones at BO too once they have New Glenn launching.
     
    • Informative x 5
    • Like x 1
  9. miimura

    miimura Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,971
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    So, let me see if I understand this. There are national security launches that require launching satellites that must remain vertical at all times from integration through launch. In order for SpaceX to launch these satellites, the government is paying for a vertical integration facility. Are they going to pay for a special wheeled vehicle to roll the vertical F9 to the pad too? Or is the "vertical integration tower" somehow part of the LC-39A pad so the integration is done when the F9 is already vertical on the existing transporter-erector?
     
    • Like x 1
  10. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    My guess is the latter. But that is only a guess.
     
    • Like x 1
  11. SwTslaGrl

    SwTslaGrl Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2016
    Messages:
    594
    Location:
    Sweden
    • Like x 1
  12. miimura

    miimura Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,971
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    • Like x 1
  13. Xepa777

    Xepa777 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2017
    Messages:
    155
    Location:
    California
    FYI, Pressurized volume on a Starship is expected to be around a 1000 cubic meters. The entire ISS pressurized volume is 916 cubic meters. So... yeah. Let that sink in.
     
    • Informative x 2
  14. e-FTW

    e-FTW New electron smell

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2015
    Messages:
    3,216
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    • Like x 1
  15. e-FTW

    e-FTW New electron smell

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2015
    Messages:
    3,216
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #516 e-FTW, Aug 10, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2020
    I am reminded that it took SpaceX to finally have a fully American rocket in the lead for total launches. And to be able to launch National Security missions without Russian engines:
    ULA was forced to build a brand new first stage (Vulcan) without Russian engines and they are getting those new engines from Blue Origin. Centaur upper-stage gets upgraded.
    But fear not /sarcasm, they have a big stash of Russian RD-180s in case Vulcan is delayed...
     
    • Informative x 1
    • Like x 1
  16. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    Russia’s space leader blusters about Mars in the face of stiff budget cuts

    Dmitry Rogozin continues to promote fantasies about the future of the Russian space program.

    QUOTE: “Rogozin made the fantastical claim that his country's space program has the technical means to reach Mars and land cosmonauts there within eight to 10 years. If Russia is ready to finance such a plan, Rogozin guaranteed that Roscosmos stands ready to deliver. Russia, Rogozin also recently said, is ready to do reuse better than SpaceX and the United States. SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, he said, is only "semi-reusable," and Russia aspires to build a 21st-century rocket capable of 100 flights.“

    There is zero evidence that any of that will happen. Russia has no rocket in development that would be capable of sending humans to Mars, and no money to enable such a program. The only truth to be found in his delusional musings is that yes, the F9 is partially reusable, not 100% reusable as Starship is designed to be.

    In a rare example of Eric Berger not being completely clear, he wrote; “SpaceX has flown its Falcon 9 first-stage rockets five times, and it plans to push toward reusing each booster 10 times.” That sounds like SpaceX has re-flown a total of five first stages.

    Obviously where he meant to write is something like this; SpaceX has re-flown individual Falcon 9 first-stage boosters up to five times, and it plans to push toward reusing each booster 10 times.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1
  17. mongo

    mongo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,857
    Location:
    Michigan
    English is hard...
    Five reflights would be 6 flights total:D
     
    • Like x 2
  18. Grendal

    Grendal SpaceX Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    5,661
    Location:
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    There is even talk that SpaceX will be building a VI tower at Vandenberg too for military launches.
     
    • Like x 1
  19. mongo

    mongo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,857
    Location:
    Michigan
    Hummm. Time for 'A Shortfall of Gravitas'.

    Aka, we're gonna need another boat.
     
    • Funny x 2

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC