5 ms·

So really this is a more of necessity not to encourage competition. They need a replacement for the Russian rocket engines and SpaceX is the only good alternat

by Fuxy 11y ago

So really this is a more of necessity not to encourage competition. They need a replacement for the Russian rocket engines and SpaceX is the only good alternative.

dimitar 11y ago
Competition is about alternatives - the Air Force could have just trusted the Lockheed-Boeing venture to do it. F-35 comes to mind and not in a good way.
- engi_nerd 11y ago
  I'm not seeing the connection to the F-35. I guess you know there was a competition for the right to build the JSF. Both aircraft met all the requirements for the competition. So can you please clarify?
  - pyre 11y ago
    The F-35 continuously overruns budgets and gets more and more money poured into it. I think this is the what is being referred to.
    - engi_nerd 11y ago
      It has a history of overrunning budgets, yes, but the per-aircraft cost is declining and should continue to decline. I thought parent might have been referring to budget issues but I'm not really grasping how that's relevant.
      - ceejayoz 11y ago
        The per-aircraft cost is still 3x or more that of the F/A-18, and the costs of operating it are also dramatically higher. http://breakingdefense.com/2014/09/gao-draft-slams-f-35-on-unaffordable-costs-8-8b-over-legacy-fighters/ http://breakingdefense.com/2014/09/gao-draft-slams-f-35-on-u...
        engi_nerd 11y ago
        http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/F-18-Super-Hornet.html http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/F-18-Super-Hornet.html F-18E/F: $65.3 million (flyaway cost) or $80.7 million incl. support costs. You'll see a number of places quoting slightly different per unit costs for an F-18E/F, but they cluster around that figure. The cost of an F-35 in the latest LRIP lot (8) was as follows: http://www.janes.com/article/46129/pentagon-finalises-f-35-lrip-8-contract http://www.janes.com/article/46129/pentagon-finalises-f-35-l... "The US buy is for 19 F-35A conventional take-off and landing aircraft at USD94.8 million apiece; 6 F-35B short take-off and landing aircraft for USD102 million each." That does not include an F-135 engine for each jet, which is anywhere from $10 to $15 million depending on the variant. So while the F-35 is more expensive than the F-18, I do not believe the figures bear your "3x or more" assertion. Also it's difficult to compare the operating costs of a fully mature aircraft like the F-18 with the F-35, which is still being tested and developed. I don't think that is an apples/apples comparison. Disclaimer: all opinions my own, not those of my employer, etc.
        ceejayoz 11y ago
        Sorry, I was going off F/A-18D unit costs from Wikipedia rather than the Super Hornet. Still, ~2x the unit cost plus a 79% increase in support costs is nothing to sneeze at.
        engi_nerd 11y ago
        Well keep in mind that we are still in a low production rate situation. Production will ramp up greatly in the next few years, driving costs down further.
        seanflyon 11y ago
        I'm pretty sure those costs are estimates based on a high production rate.
        engi_nerd 11y ago
gexla 11y ago
I believe at first, SpaceX was squeezed out. SpaceX sued the government as choosing a monopoly. The government then went back on that to allow SpaceX to play. There has been a lot of commentary in the news as to why SpaceX may not have been chosen. They don't have the track record that the current "monopoly" has. Even though SpaceX can deliver cheaper, these loads aren't nearly as price sensitive as commercial loads. SpaceX hasn't yet shown they can deal with increased load of launches.

by Fuxy 11y ago

So really this is a more of necessity not to encourage competition. They need a replacement for the Russian rocket engines and SpaceX is the only good alternative.

dimitar 11y ago

Competition is about alternatives - the Air Force could have just trusted the Lockheed-Boeing venture to do it. F-35 comes to mind and not in a good way.

engi_nerd 11y ago
I'm not seeing the connection to the F-35. I guess you know there was a competition for the right to build the JSF. Both aircraft met all the requirements for the competition. So can you please clarify?
- pyre 11y ago
  The F-35 continuously overruns budgets and gets more and more money poured into it. I think this is the what is being referred to.
  - engi_nerd 11y ago
    It has a history of overrunning budgets, yes, but the per-aircraft cost is declining and should continue to decline. I thought parent might have been referring to budget issues but I'm not really grasping how that's relevant.
    - ceejayoz 11y ago
      The per-aircraft cost is still 3x or more that of the F/A-18, and the costs of operating it are also dramatically higher. http://breakingdefense.com/2014/09/gao-draft-slams-f-35-on-unaffordable-costs-8-8b-over-legacy-fighters/ http://breakingdefense.com/2014/09/gao-draft-slams-f-35-on-u...
      - engi_nerd 11y ago
        http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/F-18-Super-Hornet.html http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/F-18-Super-Hornet.html F-18E/F: $65.3 million (flyaway cost) or $80.7 million incl. support costs. You'll see a number of places quoting slightly different per unit costs for an F-18E/F, but they cluster around that figure. The cost of an F-35 in the latest LRIP lot (8) was as follows: http://www.janes.com/article/46129/pentagon-finalises-f-35-lrip-8-contract http://www.janes.com/article/46129/pentagon-finalises-f-35-l... "The US buy is for 19 F-35A conventional take-off and landing aircraft at USD94.8 million apiece; 6 F-35B short take-off and landing aircraft for USD102 million each." That does not include an F-135 engine for each jet, which is anywhere from $10 to $15 million depending on the variant. So while the F-35 is more expensive than the F-18, I do not believe the figures bear your "3x or more" assertion. Also it's difficult to compare the operating costs of a fully mature aircraft like the F-18 with the F-35, which is still being tested and developed. I don't think that is an apples/apples comparison. Disclaimer: all opinions my own, not those of my employer, etc.
        ceejayoz 11y ago
        Sorry, I was going off F/A-18D unit costs from Wikipedia rather than the Super Hornet. Still, ~2x the unit cost plus a 79% increase in support costs is nothing to sneeze at.
        engi_nerd 11y ago
        Well keep in mind that we are still in a low production rate situation. Production will ramp up greatly in the next few years, driving costs down further.
        seanflyon 11y ago
        I'm pretty sure those costs are estimates based on a high production rate.
        engi_nerd 11y ago

gexla 11y ago

I believe at first, SpaceX was squeezed out. SpaceX sued the government as choosing a monopoly. The government then went back on that to allow SpaceX to play. There has been a lot of commentary in the news as to why SpaceX may not have been chosen. They don't have the track record that the current "monopoly" has. Even though SpaceX can deliver cheaper, these loads aren't nearly as price sensitive as commercial loads. SpaceX hasn't yet shown they can deal with increased load of launches.