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

[chickensevil]

ULA's homeboy?

"AMENDMENT TO THE RULES COMMITTEE
PRINT FOR H.R. 1735
OFFERED BY MR. COFFMAN OF COLORADO

At the end of subtitle A of title XVI, add the fol-
lowing new section:

1 SEC. 1616. ASSURANCE OF FULL LAUNCH CAPABILITY.
2 The Secretary of the Air Force may not award a con-
3 tract to a certified launch provider of the United States
4 unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that the launch
5 provider has one or more launch vehicles that is able to
6 accommodate all medium-weight and heavy-lift classes of
7 payloads included in the national security manifest."


http://amendments-rules.house.gov/amendments/COFFMA_0345715100933933.pdf

Uh, this buys time only to the moment when Falcon Heavy is certified. Needs to be worded like "two launch families" to help ULA... ;P

Figures they wouldn't go down without a continued fight to the death. Never mind that the current medium laugh class for SpaceX would save the taxpayers around 300M per launch... Sigh... If this fails it wouldn't surprise me to see ULA up their cost of Heavy Launch's by like 400M and claim it has gone up because they are launching fewer rockets.

 

[Doug_G]

That is sickening. There is no plausible reason for that rule except blatantly excluding SpaceX. I would hope that amendment would be rejected.

Uh, this buys time only to the moment when Falcon Heavy is certified. Needs to be worded like "two launch families" to help ULA... ;P

Of course, they could simply increase it to "three launch families" when Falcon Heavy is ready.

 

[dsm363]

That also is possible, but remember that Tesla's von Holzhausen came from GM, so there's an analogous precedent.

Didn't he come from Mazda?

 

[bxr140]

Of course, they could simply increase it to "three launch families" when Falcon Heavy is ready.

So, there's an interesting phenomenon in the space industry where those looking to get to orbit are starting to look past the smaller launchers like Minotaur, Antares, and Vega (though, not so much Dnepr...) and essentially understuffing a F9 throwing away the rest of its the mass-to-orbit because its so affordable.

Going even a bit further, or the tweener-sized spacecraft (or multiple unit/constellation launches), the trend may go toward solving some design/cost problems by simply adding mass, which is typically a total no-no. If you have a board on the limit of radiation exposure, just increase the wall thickness of its tray. If you're looking to cut costs, ditch the carbon composites and make parts out of aluminum. Its crazy brilliant...

 

[ggr]

Didn't he come from Mazda?

Both; GM->Mazda->Tesla.

 

[palmer_md]

Both; GM->Mazda->Tesla.

also VW on the new beetle according to Wikipedia

 

[HVM]

That is sickening. There is no plausible reason for that rule except blatantly excluding SpaceX. I would hope that amendment would be rejected.



Of course, they could simply increase it to "three launch families" when Falcon Heavy is ready.

Ok both amendments seems to be withdrawn...

152 Coffman (CO), Perlmutter (CO) Withdrawn
153 Coffman (CO), Perlmutter (CO) Withdrawn
(Clarifies the test for a waiver on the use of Russian engines is based solely on national security determinations to maintain competition in the EELV program.)

 

[chickensevil]

Ok both amendments seems to be withdrawn...

152 Coffman (CO), Perlmutter (CO) Withdrawn
153 Coffman (CO), Perlmutter (CO) Withdrawn
(Clarifies the test for a waiver on the use of Russian engines is based solely on national security determinations to maintain competition in the EELV program.)

Funny how they weren't so worried about maintaining competition when they signed the sole source deal many years ago... so dumb.

 

[artsci]

yet another example of an effort to determine how much graft can be placed on a functional system before it ceases to function....
We have corrupt people in charge of the purse strings.

Regrettably in military procurement and the the corporations that suck on the military tit corruption knows no bounds. The whole thing is run by a bunch of thieves. This I know personally as one of the thieves is a very distant relative.

 

[AudubonB]

How can SpaceX solve THIS problem?
Thought I'd be nice and present this in query an on-going thread -

I was thinking about ULA and some of its strengths and weaknesses, and a datum that is from either news reports or possible Vance's biography of Musk came to mind, as follows. I followed that thought and came across this, from ULA's website:

ULA is proud to provide approximately 3,400 high-skilled jobs for Americans. In addition, we support a robust network of more than 1,600 suppliers, including 650 small businesses, across 46 states and 50,000 direct supplier and support jobs.


Now, SpaceX and any number of contributors here have seized upon this "1,600 suppliers" figure as something to be derided - and rightfully so. SpaceX has demonstrably shown how much more economical it is to build rockets with 80% of the value-added coming in under a single building's roof (80% is an old number. Don't know the current figure).

However....those ULA numbers are far more powerful than what they appear to be at face value. Inasmuch as almost all funding for ULA's activities comes, ultimately, from Congress, the venture has welded a nearly-unshakeable grip on its future security. There is absolutely nothing that a Congressman - Democrat, Republican or OldFrothingslosh - loves more than to be able to demonstrate securing employment for his state. And any organization that can claim 1,600 suppliers across 46 states is a wonderful job security program.....for 535 jobs*.

HOW can SpaceX compete with that?

*Okay. 535 minus the number of Senators & Representatives from the FOUR non-participating states. Picky, picky.

 

[Bgarret]

How can SpaceX solve THIS problem?
Thought I'd be nice and present this in query an on-going thread -

I was thinking about ULA and some of its strengths and weaknesses, and a datum that is from either news reports or possible Vance's biography of Musk came to mind, as follows. I followed that thought and came across this, from ULA's website:

ULA is proud to provide approximately 3,400 high-skilled jobs for Americans. In addition, we support a robust network of more than 1,600 suppliers, including 650 small businesses, across 46 states and 50,000 direct supplier and support jobs.


Now, SpaceX and any number of contributors here have seized upon this "1,600 suppliers" figure as something to be derided - and rightfully so. SpaceX has demonstrably shown how much more economical it is to build rockets with 80% of the value-added coming in under a single building's roof (80% is an old number. Don't know the current figure).

However....those ULA numbers are far more powerful than what they appear to be at face value. Inasmuch as almost all funding for ULA's activities comes, ultimately, from Congress, the venture has welded a nearly-unshakeable grip on its future security. There is absolutely nothing that a Congressman - Democrat, Republican or OldFrothingslosh - loves more than to be able to demonstrate securing employment for his state. And any organization that can claim 1,600 suppliers across 46 states is a wonderful job security program.....for 535 jobs*.

HOW can SpaceX compete with that?

*Okay. 535 minus the number of Senators & Representatives from the FOUR non-participating states. Picky, picky.

It's a great point. I remember when the B1 bomber boasted of parts made in all 50 states, becomes much easier to argue without logic when you can say, "I know our product costs four times as much as theirs, but Senator Inhofe, John Williams from Oklahoma City is counting on you to 'do the right thing'."

 

[mdevp]

Has anyone noted these 2 articles?
Commercial crew spaceships face likely delays | Spaceflight Now
and this article
Senate: Because Commercial Crew Could Slip, Were Slashing the Budget Request at Parabolic Arc
It seems Congress will cause a 300m shortfall for Spacex's and ULA's contracts, and this will delay SpaceXs/ULA plans for that 6billion-plus contract, and have to pay for Russian passenger seats again. And that Alabama senator wants to slash 27% of total funding. Seems to me the Senator from Alabama wants NASA to choose between ULA and SpaceX? I just skimmed through the 2 articles so I could be wrong. What do you guys think?

 

[dsm363]

These programs are all jobs programs to some extent and no senator or representative will vote jobs out of their district.

 

[Grendal]

I doubt that a money issue would slow SpaceX down. They would just plow ahead with their plans since they are not really having any money issues that we are aware of. I'm sure if congress plays too many games then Elon can have one of his press conferences where he points out the truth of the matter and the public and the press does the rest. Shelling out $75 million a seat to the Russians on the taxpayers dime does not make the government look good.

 

[mdevp]

It just bothers me how the Alabama Senator seems to have a plan in place to force NASA to pick one company, ULA, in contracts via NASA budget cuts.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Yes, yes, Elon versus the Alabama senator! That's a press conference I would love to see!

 

[Grendal]

It just bothers me how the Alabama Senator seems to have a plan in place to force NASA to pick one company, ULA, in contracts via NASA budget cuts.

The Senator is in for a world of hurt if it becomes public that he doesn't mind the government spending billions extra for his buddies in ULA. Think about the animosity Solyndra generated. He might just get ULA cut inadvertently. Very unlikely however.

 

[mdevp]

Yes, yes, Elon versus the Alabama senator! That's a press conference I would love to see!

Elon was with the CEO of ULA for a congressional hearing. Elon answered quite a few questions from the Ala. Senator. The senator was definitely biased against SpaceX.

 

[Bgarret]

Elon was with the CEO of ULA for a congressional hearing. Elon answered quite a few questions from the Ala. Senator. The senator was definitely biased against SpaceX.

The Senator in question is the (dis) Honorable Senator Shelby, who comes off as a caricature of a smarmy, dilapidated Southern relic. He is one of the reasons why I want SpaceX to stick the landing repeatedly and get the pricepoint for launches down to $15-20 million. You would think $400 million to $100 million would be agregious enough, but I would like to see a difference that is truly obscene.

 

[ggies07]

Elon was with the CEO of ULA for a congressional hearing. Elon answered quite a few questions from the Ala. Senator. The senator was definitely biased against SpaceX.

Just read in the Elon Musk book by Ashlee Vance that

a few months after the hearing, ULA replaced Gass as CEO and signed a deal with Blue Origin to develop American-made rockets.

I don't keep up with ULA news, so this was a shock to me. Looks like ULA was embarrassed by that hearing and wanted to have American-made products as well.