3 ms·
(note: this post is not directed to you, I'm sure none of this is news to you. rather it's for the benefit of the audience) ULA is safe for a while due to the
by syncsynchalt 10y ago
(note: this post is not directed to you, I'm sure none of this is news to you. rather it's for the benefit of the audience)
ULA is safe for a while due to the DoD's requirement that they keep two domestic methods for space access alive.
Previously this was met with the combination of ULA's Atlas V and Delta IV. Now it'll be the F9 and Atlas V, with the expensive Delta IV being phased out (it's still occasionally needed as it's the largest booster still in operation worldwide).
However ULA's in trouble if another SpaceX shows up. I assume that's why they're working so closely with Blue Origin, better to capture that player now and get a cheap engine provider out of it.
Another input: cost isn't everything; the Atlas V has never lost a payload, while the F9 has. An extra $40m doesn't look like much if your payload is a half billion dollars, for example.
- greglindahl 10y agoULA will probably end up encouraging Bezos to build a complete rocket. There are some other players talking about using the BE3 (the tourist rocket engine) as an upper-stage engine, and ULA is likely to use the BE4. At that point, Bezos can market the complete rocket as "You already depend on our engines, why not try our complete rocket?" You can't really "capture" a billionaire's business.