3 ms·
On first glance, it seems strange to award more contracts to the provider using a totally unproven platform. I would have thought they would ramp up contract aw
by bandyaboot 3y ago
On first glance, it seems strange to award more contracts to the provider using a totally unproven platform. I would have thought they would ramp up contract awards more conservatively in that case. I have to wonder whether the decision is in part about weighing unease with a new platform against unease with unpredictable leadership. Maybe that’s not a big factor, I could also see it being more about the lobbying power of established defense contractors.
- jvanderbot 3y agoSeems strange for an individual, or even a corporate acquisition, but not for government. The incentive structure for gov contracts has a lot of extra stuff beyond risk and cost, including spurring a healthy market or proving out new technology. And yes, creating new jobs, sometimes.
- mlindner 3y agoIf that was the case then there would've been a period where SpaceX got more launches. Instead they had to sue to even get a piece of the pie, and ULA has gotten higher percentages of every contract since. It's just regulatory capture and government revolving door.
- jvanderbot 3y agoI said they had extra incentives, not that they were always fair extra incentives.
- inemesitaffia 3y agoSpaceX has never had more NSSL