4 ms·
SpaceX IS the newcomer and underdog, but one that's advancing very quickly. The big monopolist in this case is ULA, the "United Launch Alliance", which was crea
by andreasley 10y ago
SpaceX IS the newcomer and underdog, but one that's advancing very quickly. The big monopolist in this case is ULA, the "United Launch Alliance", which was created in 2006 as a joint venture of Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Boeing Defense, Space & Security.
For years, ULA was only option for US government launch contracts. They had more than 100 launches – all of them successful except one single minor anomaly [1].
SpaceX tried and succeeded [2] to get into the lucrative government contract business, arguing that their launches are five times cheaper (90M vs 460M USD).
Before that, an interesting meeting of the U.S. Committee on Armed Services took place [3], discussing ULA's dependency on russian-made RD-180 rocket engines for their Atlas V launch system.
[1] http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/ula-traces-atlas-v-anomaly-to-malfunctioning-valve http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/ula-traces-atlas-v-ano...
[2] https://spaceflightnow.com/2015/05/27/spacex-cleared-to-launch-u-s-national-security-satellites/ https://spaceflightnow.com/2015/05/27/spacex-cleared-to-laun...
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ff_5jF_3QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ff_5jF_3QU
- lucb1e 10y ago> SpaceX IS the newcomer and underdog Woah, sorry. I never said they weren't. > which was created in 2006 That sounds rather new to me, considering that space tech has been around since what, the 60s? If someone told me SpaceX was originally started in 2006 I'd be only slightly surprised, but I'd figure it just took years to attract expertise and set the whole thing up before we start hearing about it. All I'm asking is for the other side of the story. ULA is being painted as evil here and no matter how true every word from SpaceX's side is, I would always like to read ULA's comments on the matter.