3 ms·
both test failures seem to have been during the booster rocket phase and they weren't even able to test or collect data on the missile component Lockheed is in
by ren_engineer 4y ago
both test failures seem to have been during the booster rocket phase and they weren't even able to test or collect data on the missile component
Lockheed is in charge of development, just like the SLS program. I'm curious how hard it would be to have SpaceX make an attempt or if they would even be willing. Seems safe to say they know rockets far better than Lockheed
- mannykannot 4y agoThis article describes the first test as ending in a booster failure, but describes the problem here as the failure of the test asset to ignite. I would guess that the test asset is the hypersonic device itself.
- jlmorton 4y ago> Lockheed is in charge of development, just like the SLS program Lockheed tried to buy Aerojet Rocketdyne a couple years ago, the maker of the Shuttle's RS-25 engines, which are being re-used on SLS, but abandoned the acquisition. Boeing is the lead contractor for the launch vehicle.
- thereddaikon 4y agoLockheed is not running the SLS. They have had their share of bad programs you can point to but SLS isn't one of them.
- deelowe 4y ago> Lockheed is in charge of development, just like the SLS program. Several big defense contractors are involved, but Lockheed isn't one of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System
- monocasa 4y agoULA is a Lockheed and Boeing joint venture, and the Orion capsule itself is a straight up Lockheed built ship. Now, the fuckups seem to be mainly on Boeing's side of the fence, but it's incorrect to say that Lockheed isn't involved.