4 ms·

There was a period of roughly a year where SpaceX was the only medium lift rocket in the Western world with available payload capacity. ULA was in between Atlas

There was a period of roughly a year where SpaceX was the only medium lift rocket in the Western world with available payload capacity. ULA was in between Atlas V and Vulcan, ArianeSpace was between Ariane 5 and 6, with both upcoming rockets fully booked for a while. It was to the point that Europe had to book launches with SpaceX, and SpaceX did not take advantage of their monopoly. They aren't just doing the bare minimum to be cheaper and better (as would be the way to go if they were trying to just be better than Boeing). Right now, SpaceX has launched the majority of the global mass to orbit this year and has done most rocket launches this year. SpaceX has flown 83 times, an unprecedented rate of a launch on average every ~3 days, ULA has flown 4 times, SLS (and for that matter Starliner also) will probably not fly again until 2026. It's laughable to suggest that Boeing is even competing, let alone applying price pressure.

rich_sasha 2y ago
I'm not saying it's competing. But if NASA want any semblance of an alternative to SpaceX, they have no alternative. Boeing can be as uncompetitive as they like, there's value in being second best, almost no matter how poor their delivery. In turn, SpaceX can't quite apply monopoly pricing, because there is a hypothetical alternative in Boeing. SpaceX can't hike their prices 10x from current. But if they are the only crewed space transport?
- dotnet00 2y ago
  I mean, SpaceX has already been contracted for the flights for the remaining years that the ISS will be around. They already don't have the ability to raise prices that much. NASA keeps Starliner around because they've already committed to the bit about redundancy when it comes to "new space" style acquisition processes (after all, they're still fully intending on flying astronauts on Orion without flight testing a fully crew capable version, and talking about paying for a backup option to it and SLS is a fast way to get fired or forced to resign).

rich_sasha 2y ago

I'm not saying it's competing. But if NASA want any semblance of an alternative to SpaceX, they have no alternative. Boeing can be as uncompetitive as they like, there's value in being second best, almost no matter how poor their delivery. In turn, SpaceX can't quite apply monopoly pricing, because there is a hypothetical alternative in Boeing. SpaceX can't hike their prices 10x from current. But if they are the only crewed space transport?

dotnet00 2y ago
I mean, SpaceX has already been contracted for the flights for the remaining years that the ISS will be around. They already don't have the ability to raise prices that much. NASA keeps Starliner around because they've already committed to the bit about redundancy when it comes to "new space" style acquisition processes (after all, they're still fully intending on flying astronauts on Orion without flight testing a fully crew capable version, and talking about paying for a backup option to it and SLS is a fast way to get fired or forced to resign).