Author Topic: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad  (Read 42875 times)

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« on: 12/20/2011 08:42 PM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html
« Last Edit: 12/20/2011 09:11 PM by Antares »
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #1 on: 12/20/2011 08:47 PM »
Ha! Excellent concept and composition, I like it.

Offline MP99

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #2 on: 12/20/2011 08:58 PM »
Brilliant!

Cheers, Martin

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #3 on: 12/20/2011 09:06 PM »
PWR boosts of 14 launches in 12 months using its engines.

Five were primarily boosted by Russian RD-180s, but used PWR RL-10s for the upper stage.  I'll generously give PWR credit for half of the liquid propulsion, or 2.5 launches.

Six used SSMEs or RS-27A engines - engines being phased out on rockets being phased out.  The total for this category will be ZERO in 2012.  (Is this a boost of corporate prowess, or a celebration of the company winding down its operations?  Wasn't PWR thinking of selling off its liquid rocket business a few months back?)

The remaining three launches were performed by Delta IV rockets using  RS-68 and RL-10 engines. 

Projecting into 2012, then, I predict 5.5 launches using PWR engines. 

I wonder how "the other guys" will do by comparison?

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/20/2011 09:15 PM by edkyle99 »

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6190
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 2294
  • Likes Given: 775
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #4 on: 12/20/2011 09:12 PM »
PWR boosts of 14 launches in 12 months using its engines.

Five were primarily boosted by Russian RD-180s, but used PWR RL-10s for the upper stage.  I'll generously give PWR credit for half of the liquid propulsion, or 2.5 launches.

Six used SSMEs or RS-27A engines - engines being phased out on rockets being phased out.  The total for this category will be ZERO in 2012.

The remaining three launches were performed by Delta IV rockets using  RS-68 and RL-10 engines. 

Projecting into 2012, then, I predict 5.5 launches using PWR engines. 

I wonder how "the other guys" will do by comparison?

 - Ed Kyle

You take potshots while you can... :-)

~Jon

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2795
  • Likes Given: 7330
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #5 on: 12/20/2011 09:14 PM »
The question is… Why do they feel they need to run an ad ?
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #6 on: 12/20/2011 09:16 PM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

It works for presidential politics. ::)

I don't see "the other guys" launching misleading patriotic websites with buried references to their company. This smells like ATK's "Safe Simple Soon." The video is great though.
« Last Edit: 12/20/2011 09:17 PM by Jason1701 »

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #7 on: 12/20/2011 09:20 PM »
The question is… Why do they feel they need to run an ad ?

Isn't that what competition and commercial products are supposed to be about?  I think people have an unhealthy fixation with trying to divide between supposedly "new" and "old" space. 

Why don't people ask why SpaceX places ads/videos/etc (or releases an Estes rocket)?
« Last Edit: 12/20/2011 09:21 PM by OV-106 »
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2795
  • Likes Given: 7330
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #8 on: 12/20/2011 09:27 PM »
The question is… Why do they feel they need to run an ad ?

Isn't that what competition and commercial products are supposed to be about?  I think people have an unhealthy fixation with trying to divide between supposedly "new" and "old" space. 

Why don't people ask why SpaceX places ads/videos/etc (or releases an Estes rocket)?
To me it’s all good, like I’ve said before “we are all on this grand adventure together”. That being said, I guess I’ll have to run out and get one.  ;D
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #9 on: 12/20/2011 11:34 PM »
Ha! Excellent concept and composition, I like it.
I thought it was clever. :)

Still, Ed has a good point.

This ad shows that they're starting to feel pressure (or think they soon will) from the New Space folk (particularly SpaceX with the Falcon series and the latest Stratolaunch announcement about using SpaceX engines). As Ed points out, they're going to be much less prominent in the next 12 months.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #10 on: 12/20/2011 11:52 PM »
They advertise on the wrong sites, so they can go shove it ;D

(I still love SSMEs ;)).

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17804
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 4278
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #11 on: 12/21/2011 12:08 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


Very clever.
Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4302
  • Liked: 1555
  • Likes Given: 1281
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #12 on: 12/21/2011 12:33 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

It works for presidential politics. ::)

I don't see "the other guys" launching misleading patriotic websites with buried references to their company. This smells like ATK's "Safe Simple Soon." The video is great though.

It doesn't work for presidential election politics. (as you probably meant)  All we get is more posturing and ridicule.

You don't see it elsewhere?

And Loren Thompson?  Puleeze!

But the idea of letting the hardware talk is one that can't be denied.  Just wish it would happen more often.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4398
  • Liked: 181
  • Likes Given: 350
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #13 on: 12/21/2011 12:56 AM »
It's clever but incorrect.
Not all new space companies are all talk.

I don't think one can seriously knock Spacex anymore as they flew a capsule and recovered it.

Many other are making progress too such as the secretive Blue Origin,SNC,and Armadillo etc.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 01:04 AM by Patchouli »

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #14 on: 12/21/2011 12:58 AM »
"I appreciate a good ad smackdown."

Great comment, Antares.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #15 on: 12/21/2011 01:01 AM »
They still have Rl-10
possible SSME expendable for SLS
possible CECE derived engines
possible engines for ACES

Their ad says they are trying to lower cost. Interesting!
This ad helps support the other company, that is that they could most likely be a major competitor.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4398
  • Liked: 181
  • Likes Given: 350
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #16 on: 12/21/2011 01:09 AM »
They still have Rl-10
possible SSME expendable for SLS
possible CECE derived engines
possible engines for ACES

Their ad says they are trying to lower cost. Interesting!
This ad helps support the other company, that is that they could most likely be a major competitor.

Also the J-2X for the SLS EDS and the RS-88 LAS/OME engine on the CST-100.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 01:10 AM by Patchouli »

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #17 on: 12/21/2011 04:14 AM »
P.S. the Youtube associated with it is even better.

If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline Tcommon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #18 on: 12/21/2011 04:32 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


Bring it on, people. 

You don't see this kind of competition in spaceflight anywhere else in the world - I think that is something to be proud of.

« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 07:46 AM by Tcommon »

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #19 on: 12/21/2011 05:21 AM »
American companies need to come together and compete against foreign companies to keep up and build the domestic economy.

In the 1980's and early 1990's domestic car companies would compete against each other and not agianst the foreign competition. Less American auto makers with less American owned manufacturing with less American workers, bad economy.

Same things happens with the space launch industry. Some of the space companies are out sourcing to foreign countries with American tax payer dollars.
 
There is no reason to out source American dollars when we can do it our selves and save our economy.

So for the PWR ad they should show why American rocket engines and hardware are worth going with over a forgein launch.

Offline OpsAnalyst

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Mary Lynne Dittmar
  • Washington, DC
    • MaryLynneDittmar.com
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 120
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #20 on: 12/21/2011 07:19 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


Bring it on, men. 


And women. ;)  Just sayin'

Offline Tcommon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #21 on: 12/21/2011 07:47 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.
http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html
Bring it on, men. 
And women. ;)  Just sayin'
touché, fixed in original post

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #22 on: 12/21/2011 08:39 AM »
Who paid for all those PWR engines?
It's all in the data.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7140
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 662
  • Likes Given: 771
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #23 on: 12/21/2011 10:41 AM »
Who paid for all those PWR engines?

Hmm... Good question.  Unless I'm wrong, all those launches were USG funded, so the money came from Joe Taxpayer.  That said, the USG is putting a lot of money into commercial, so a portion of the money for those Merlins come from the same source.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #24 on: 12/21/2011 11:03 AM »
Perhaps I, or we, are misconstruing the intent of the advertisement, however I don’t think so.

I wonder how many well paid PWR upper management have put their hands in their pockets and self-funded new projects or programs?

This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar. Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.
It's all in the data.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11159
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #25 on: 12/21/2011 11:08 AM »

1.  This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar.

2.  Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.


1.  Same with Spacex ads.

2.  Rules on what do with profits?  Are we socialists?

PWR is a public company, they can do what they want with their
money.  Their contracts are with ULA for Atlas or Delta are commercial not with the gov't .   PWR and Boeing funded most of the RS-68 development themselves. PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III.  RL-10B was developed for Boeing.

This line of thought is absurd.  A unabashed nuspace slant.   

It is a great advertisement.   
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 11:18 AM by Jim »

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #26 on: 12/21/2011 12:05 PM »

1.  This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar.

2.  Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.


1.  Same with Spacex ads.

2.  Rules on what do with profits?  Are we socialists?

PWR is a public company, they can do what they want with their
money.  Their contracts are with ULA for Atlas or Delta are commercial not with the gov't .   PWR and Boeing funded most of the RS-68 development themselves. PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III.  RL-10B was developed for Boeing.

This line of thought is absurd.  A unabashed nuspace slant.   

It is a great advertisement.   


Actually Jim, no.

I’m one of the biggest shuttle huggers out there, and thought that the SSME was an incredible piece of work.

Ad’s like this just disappoint me. Personally I see no point to it except to 'bleat'.

Can you please enlighten me as to its purpose and why is it such a “great advertisement”. I’m genuinely interested to know.
It's all in the data.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11159
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #27 on: 12/21/2011 12:28 PM »
Once in awhile, the people behind the curtain need to get their time in the spotlight.

or, the other side of the story needs to be told.

or, the loud mouth  needs to be put in his place once in awhile.

pick one

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #28 on: 12/21/2011 12:33 PM »
Interesting take!
It's all in the data.

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8491
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4974
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #29 on: 12/21/2011 12:39 PM »
or, the loud mouth  needs to be put in his place once in awhile.

pick one
Oh, Jim really let himself go here. That's whats bothering him. He sees some nuspace characters as loud mouths. What a suprise... ;)

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #30 on: 12/21/2011 01:45 PM »
Perhaps I, or we, are misconstruing the intent of the advertisement, however I don’t think so.

I wonder how many well paid PWR upper management have put their hands in their pockets and self-funded new projects or programs?

This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar. Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.


As long as my local electric and natural gas companies can run ads telling me how great they are doing, I have no problem with PWR running an ad.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #31 on: 12/21/2011 01:55 PM »
PWR boosts of 14 launches in 12 months using its engines.

Five were primarily boosted by Russian RD-180s, but used PWR RL-10s for the upper stage.  I'll generously give PWR credit for half of the liquid propulsion, or 2.5 launches.

Six used SSMEs or RS-27A engines - engines being phased out on rockets being phased out.  The total for this category will be ZERO in 2012.  (Is this a boost of corporate prowess, or a celebration of the company winding down its operations?  Wasn't PWR thinking of selling off its liquid rocket business a few months back?)

The remaining three launches were performed by Delta IV rockets using  RS-68 and RL-10 engines. 

Projecting into 2012, then, I predict 5.5 launches using PWR engines. 

I wonder how "the other guys" will do by comparison?

 - Ed Kyle

Looking at the launch manifest for 2012 on SFN, I see 3 Delta 4 launches, and 1 D4 Heavy. That's 4 launches for a start.

There are 6 Atlas launches listed for 2012. It uses the RD-180, which may be built by the Russians, but does ULA obtain them directly or did PWR purchase these engines and place them in their warehouse ? A marketing wizard could make the point that these are PWR engines, with outsourced manufacturing. PWR has the option to manufacture them, but chose the lower cost option instead.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #32 on: 12/21/2011 02:36 PM »
Looking at the launch manifest for 2012 on SFN, I see 3 Delta 4 launches, and 1 D4 Heavy. That's 4 launches for a start.

There are 6 Atlas launches listed for 2012.
Final results almost always fall short of start of year predictions. 
Quote

It uses the RD-180, which may be built by the Russians, but does ULA obtain them directly or did PWR purchase these engines and place them in their warehouse ?

RD-180 is manufactured and tested by Energomash in Russia, then shipped to ULA under the RD AMROSS import banner.  http://rdamross.com/about_us 
RD-180 is a Russian engine, bolted to a U.S. rocket, plain and simple. 

For years, PWR, via. its involvement in RD AMROSS, has held rights to build RD-180 in the U.S.  Those rights have been used as a tool to placate the Pentagon to win U.S. defense work, but no RD-180 has ever, or will ever, be manufactured in the U.S..

As for this Ad, it seems likely to me to to be part of a campaign to compete for the SLS advanced booster contract, and to press for RS-25 funding (since J-2X will soon be mothballed).  The "other guys" in this context are likely Aerojet and SpaceX.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #33 on: 12/21/2011 02:42 PM »

1.  This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar.

2.  Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.


1.  Same with Spacex ads.

2.  Rules on what do with profits?  Are we socialists?

PWR is a public company, they can do what they want with their
money.  Their contracts are with ULA for Atlas or Delta are commercial not with the gov't .   PWR and Boeing funded most of the RS-68 development themselves. PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III.  RL-10B was developed for Boeing.

This line of thought is absurd.  A unabashed nuspace slant.   

It is a great advertisement.   


Actually Jim, no.

I’m one of the biggest shuttle huggers out there, and thought that the SSME was an incredible piece of work.

Ad’s like this just disappoint me. Personally I see no point to it except to 'bleat'.

Can you please enlighten me as to its purpose and why is it such a “great advertisement”. I’m genuinely interested to know.

I'm a big "commercial" supporter, and I liked the ad. :)

I do wish "commercial" folk would just get on with launching stuff. Press conferences are nice, but without the REAL smoke and fire, it's not worth anything. PWR should probably also figure out how to keep their engines inexpensive and high performing. All I've been hearing is how theirs keep getting more expensive, so I do think PWR has an image problem there.

All in all, competition is good. It's great that the so-called "old-space" folks are getting in on the game. The real playing field is hardware and operations, not ads and PR (which is the point of this ad).

I should point out that while PWR has a long history in rockets, SpaceX has been kicking their butts on raw production numbers for turbopump rocket engines (Falcon 9 needs lots of 'em), which has cost, efficiency, and even quality control consequences which favor SpaceX.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Tcommon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #34 on: 12/21/2011 04:40 PM »
I'm a big "commercial" supporter, and I liked the ad. :)

I do wish "commercial" folk would just get on with launching stuff. Press conferences are nice, but without the REAL smoke and fire, it's not worth anything. PWR should probably also figure out how to keep their engines inexpensive and high performing. All I've been hearing is how theirs keep getting more expensive, so I do think PWR has an image problem there.

All in all, competition is good. It's great that the so-called "old-space" folks are getting in on the game. The real playing field is hardware and operations, not ads and PR (which is the point of this ad).

I should point out that while PWR has a long history in rockets, SpaceX has been kicking their butts on raw production numbers for turbopump rocket engines (Falcon 9 needs lots of 'em), which has cost, efficiency, and even quality control consequences which favor SpaceX.

The ad is entertaining, but it's negative. Reminds me of a political campaign where one of the candidates gets scared and turns to a negative campaign out of fear. Sure "The other guys" have been loud, but theirs has been a mostly positive campaign.

PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. PWR has had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared. The thing is, "the other guys" are no where near threatening them, yet. All it would take is one failure to really mess them up, and failures happen a lot with new systems and companies.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 04:46 PM by Tcommon »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #35 on: 12/21/2011 04:49 PM »
...
PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. They've had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared.
Agreed. (though I'm not sure I'd call it disingenuous, though maybe a little as you say... as all ads kind of are)

PWR needs to be more agile. In a monopoly (or near-monoploy) with a pretty small market with inelastic demand, you maximize profit by increasing your prices without doing much else. If a new player comes in and they can offer the services at a lot lower price than the formerly-monopolistic-company, the new company will either eat their lunch or force the formerly-monopolistic-company to provide either better services, lower prices, or both. This is called competition. A lot of these new players want to decrease prices to the point that the market demand becomes elastic. This is actually good for the formerly-monopolistic-company as well (as long as they don't ONLY make rocket engines but also do other space-related services), but it's not a local optimum (it requires big investments to get the cost down that low), thus risk-averse formerly-monopolistic-companies aren't likely to go for it by themselves.

If you get the price of launch down into the elastic-demand region with several companies competing, the local optimum for profit becomes better service and lower price. At least we hope.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 04:50 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11159
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #36 on: 12/21/2011 04:54 PM »
PWR has had monopolies

No, they have not.  There was Rocketdyne and Aerojet

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #37 on: 12/21/2011 04:56 PM »
Those who underestimate PWR are just wrong.    Many designs for new engines have been tested and put on the shelf over the years.    Some of the projects Boeing paid the check for.

Side point:  Note all the companies listed on the bottom of the ad.   Something is being told there.
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #38 on: 12/21/2011 04:58 PM »
Those who underestimate PWR are just wrong.
...
I hope you don't get the impression that I underestimate them. :)

If any PWR folk are here, you guys do great work.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Tcommon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #39 on: 12/21/2011 05:50 PM »
PWR has had monopolies
No, they have not.  There was Rocketdyne and Aerojet
Wrong.

They've had monopolies and guaranteed business on various launchers for decades.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 05:52 PM by Tcommon »

Offline MP99

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #40 on: 12/21/2011 06:19 PM »
The ad is entertaining, but it's negative. Reminds me of a political campaign where one of the candidates gets scared and turns to a negative campaign out of fear. Sure "The other guys" have been loud, but theirs has been a mostly positive campaign.

PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. PWR has had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared. The thing is, "the other guys" are no where near threatening them, yet. All it would take is one failure to really mess them up, and failures happen a lot with new systems and companies.

It will be interesting to come back to this thread the first time all of "the other guys" combined manage to power "14 launches in 12 months with 100% success".

So, when will that be?

cheers, Martin

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #41 on: 12/21/2011 06:22 PM »
The ad is entertaining, but it's negative. Reminds me of a political campaign where one of the candidates gets scared and turns to a negative campaign out of fear. Sure "The other guys" have been loud, but theirs has been a mostly positive campaign.

PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. PWR has had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared. The thing is, "the other guys" are no where near threatening them, yet. All it would take is one failure to really mess them up, and failures happen a lot with new systems and companies.

It will be interesting to come back to this thread the first time all of "the other guys" combined manage to power "14 launches in 12 months with 100% success".

So, when will that be?

cheers, Martin
Russia: "Done!" ;) (I know, I know...)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline MP99

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #42 on: 12/21/2011 06:41 PM »
The ad is entertaining, but it's negative. Reminds me of a political campaign where one of the candidates gets scared and turns to a negative campaign out of fear. Sure "The other guys" have been loud, but theirs has been a mostly positive campaign.

PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. PWR has had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared. The thing is, "the other guys" are no where near threatening them, yet. All it would take is one failure to really mess them up, and failures happen a lot with new systems and companies.

It will be interesting to come back to this thread the first time all of "the other guys" combined manage to power "14 launches in 12 months with 100% success".

So, when will that be?

cheers, Martin

Russia: "Done!" ;) (I know, I know...)

Yes, but also Soyuz failed in 2011?

cheers, Martin

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #43 on: 12/21/2011 07:46 PM »
Looking at the launch manifest for 2012 on SFN, I see 3 Delta 4 launches, and 1 D4 Heavy. That's 4 launches for a start.

There are 6 Atlas launches listed for 2012.
Final results almost always fall short of start of year predictions. 
Quote

It uses the RD-180, which may be built by the Russians, but does ULA obtain them directly or did PWR purchase these engines and place them in their warehouse ?

 
RD-180 is a Russian engine, bolted to a U.S. rocket, plain and simple. 

 - Ed Kyle

Ed you know the history better than that.

Jim said it well:  PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III

It might even be said that with Lockheed’s help, a little “American” is in some of the engines now produced in Russia.


« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 07:51 PM by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #44 on: 12/21/2011 07:50 PM »
PWR has had monopolies
No, they have not.  There was Rocketdyne and Aerojet
Wrong.

They've had monopolies and guaranteed business on various launchers for decades.

You're watering down the process.  They bid for contracts and Won.

2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #45 on: 12/21/2011 07:51 PM »
Jim said it well:  PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III

Just because you keep saying doesn't make it true. Unless you deliberately use the term "develop" is a veeery loose fashion.

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #46 on: 12/21/2011 07:52 PM »
PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III

How is that?

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #47 on: 12/21/2011 08:03 PM »
PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III

How is that?

http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd180.htm

PWR Reworked the RD-170 4 chambers into a 2 chamber Rd-180
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #48 on: 12/21/2011 08:09 PM »
PWR developed the RD-180 commercially for Atlas III

How is that?

http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd180.htm

PWR Reworked the RD-170 4 chambers into a 2 chamber Rd-180

Where does it say in there that PWR reworked the RD-170 (or *developed* RD-180 as you originally claimed)?

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Liked: 464
  • Likes Given: 815
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #49 on: 12/21/2011 08:11 PM »
Yes, but also Soyuz failed in 2011?
Worth remembering that Soyuz has (more than once) had runs of successful flights that exceed the entire combined flight history of Atlas V and Delta IV.
How is that?
PWR Reworked the RD-170 4 chambers into a 2 chamber Rd-180
No, NPO Energomash did that, the major input from PWR was $.  It's rather silly to say PWR "developed" it when they didn't get the technical documentation translated until years after the rocket flew.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 08:11 PM by hop »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #50 on: 12/21/2011 08:41 PM »

RD-180 is a Russian engine, bolted to a U.S. rocket, plain and simple. 

 - Ed Kyle

Ed you know the history better than that.

Here's a reference.  RD-180 history is right there in black and white.
http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/publications/RD180EstablishedRecord201108_0201.pdf

"The RD-180 designed and built by NPO EM was
specifically tailored for the Atlas launch vehicle."

"Although ULA is the end user of the engine, as a U.S.
company, it is not authorized to suggest technical
improvements to the Russian company that builds the
engine. The RD-180 program must adhere to international
traffic in arms regulations or ITAR. ITAR restrictions on
the RD-180 program limit the constant operational
improvement that naturally occurs on other domestic
programs. In order to do business with a foreign company,
United Launch Alliance and its counterparts at Pratt &
Whitney Rocketdyne must operate under a license
agreement with NPO Energomash approved by the United
States Government. The purpose of this agreement is to
protect sensitive technology that is available in the United
States but not available in Russia. NPO EM has a similar
agreement with the Russian Government that only allows
them to provide information and data specific to the RD-
180 engine. The U.S. license must be agreed upon by NPO
EM the U.S. government and ULA. Likewise, the PWR
license must be agreed upon by NPO EM and the U.S.
government. This document is what defines the scope of
technical assistance and discussions that may be provided
by ULA and PWR to NPO EM in order to deal with issues
associated with integration and launch of the engines.
Often times the license and ITAR regulations limit the type
of discussions and data transfers that take place between
NPO Energomash, United Launch Alliance, and Pratt &
Whitney Rocketdyne."

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 09:30 PM by edkyle99 »

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #51 on: 12/21/2011 11:32 PM »

RD-180 is a Russian engine, bolted to a U.S. rocket, plain and simple. 

 - Ed Kyle

Ed you know the history better than that.

Here's a reference.  RD-180 history is right there in black and white.
http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/publications/RD180EstablishedRecord201108_0201.pdf

"The RD-180 designed and built by NPO EM was
specifically tailored for the Atlas launch vehicle."

 - Ed Kyle

Yes and just one of my sources has a decent article on "Tech Transfer"

If you have hard copies of Aviation WeekST Nov.22, 1999 you will find some decent material.   I happen to have this on my desk atm because was doing cleaning and found it of interest.....any how

It states that Pratt had redesigned the turbomachinery (logical as that is their special business) yet kept the same basic Russian engine design.

Was thinking of scanning and put on L2 however could be some copyright issues.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 11:45 PM by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #52 on: 12/21/2011 11:42 PM »
Yes, but also Soyuz failed in 2011?
Worth remembering that Soyuz has (more than once) had runs of successful flights that exceed the entire combined flight history of Atlas V and Delta IV.
How is that?
PWR Reworked the RD-170 4 chambers into a 2 chamber Rd-180
No, NPO Energomash did that, the major input from PWR was $.  It's rather silly to say PWR "developed" it when they didn't get the technical documentation translated until years after the rocket flew.

No, the money came from LM.   PWR was scheduled to go into CoProduction and had performed the welding & brazing tests, enough to go into production.  As of Nov. 1999

« Last Edit: 12/21/2011 11:44 PM by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #53 on: 12/22/2011 12:29 AM »
Speaking of New-Space, has SpaceX actually flown a Merlin engine built internally, or are have they all been the Barber-Nichols design ? The Merlin probably doesn't even exist without NASA's work on the Fastrac engine, correct ?


Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #54 on: 12/22/2011 12:33 AM »
Speaking of New-Space, has SpaceX actually flown a Merlin engine built internally, or are have they all been the Barber-Nichols design ? The Merlin probably doesn't even exist without NASA's work on the Fastrac engine, correct ?
None of the engines are Barber-Nichols design. Just the turbopump part is Barber-Nichols. The engine itself is in-house SpaceX. The Fastrac engine wasn't a direct ancestor, either, though Barber-Nichols no doubt learned stuff from Fastrac that helped them make the cheap Merlin turbopump.

Merlin 1D is the first with a SpaceX-produced turbopump. It will fly on the 7th Falcon 9 flight. They've already test-fired it.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17804
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 4278
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #55 on: 12/22/2011 12:52 AM »
P.S. the Youtube associated with it is even better.



Thanks, I needed my launch 'fix'  :)

No matter what angle people take on this video, in the land of advertising, the one with the awesome videos always seems to garner the best attention (and the win).
Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2795
  • Likes Given: 7330
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #56 on: 12/22/2011 01:04 AM »
An old pilot saying, but I think it applies here as well:

“Trust in God and Pratt & Whitney”  :)
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #57 on: 12/22/2011 01:33 AM »

If you have hard copies of Aviation WeekST Nov.22, 1999 you will find some decent material.   I happen to have this on my desk atm because was doing cleaning and found it of interest.....any how

It states that Pratt had redesigned the turbomachinery (logical as that is their special business) yet kept the same basic Russian engine design.

AvWeek also said that Aurora and Blackstar existed, etc.  I once sat in a luncheon at Cape Canaveral where an AvWeek editor talked about how bad the Russian engines were.  He was wrong about that too. 

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11378
  • Liked: 2892
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #58 on: 12/22/2011 02:25 AM »
1-The ad is entertaining, but it's negative. Reminds me of a political campaign where one of the candidates gets scared and turns to a negative campaign out of fear. Sure "The other guys" have been loud, but theirs has been a mostly positive campaign.

2-PWR has had a downturn but not because of "the other guys", not yet anyway. So the add is a little disingenuous. PWR has had monopolies and guaranteed business for so long they've forgotten how to compete. No wonder they are scared. The thing is, "the other guys" are no where near threatening them, yet. All it would take is one failure to really mess them up, and failures happen a lot with new systems and companies.

1-Negative advertising works in politics. Numerous political scientists (look up the work of the late Bill Riker) have demonstrated that.

2-You have to look at the USAF decision on a block buy for EELV. SpaceX lobbied HEAVILY to have it overturned. Don't think that competition for government contracts merely involves building a better or cheaper product. SpaceX lobbied in the court of public opinion and scored some victories. PWR is doing the same.

Offline simonbp

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #59 on: 12/22/2011 02:50 AM »
SpaceX lobbied in the court of public opinion and scored some victories. PWR is attempting doing the same.

Fixed that for you. It's going to mighty hard (and expensive) for PWR to get to SpaceX levels of lobbying, especially considering they are going to have to fight for the attentions of the same California congressmen...

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11378
  • Liked: 2892
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #60 on: 12/22/2011 04:01 AM »
SpaceX lobbied in the court of public opinion and scored some victories. PWR is doing the same.

Fixed that for you. It's going to mighty hard (and expensive) for PWR to get to SpaceX levels of lobbying, especially considering they are going to have to fight for the attentions of the same California congressmen...

Changed it back. Don't try to edit me, it's presumptuous.

PWR has more money than SpaceX. So does ULA. More lobbyists too.

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Online Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22478
  • Liked: 796
  • Likes Given: 295
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #62 on: 12/22/2011 04:17 AM »
Is it possible that the PWR ad is more aimed at Aerojet in reference to the noise it has been making about the AJ-26 derivatives for the SLS booster (and possible use for future DoD booster) ect.  Seems to me Aerojet is more of a threat than SpaceX.
And this is a good reminder that just because one of your fellow space enthusiasts occasionally voices doubts about the SpaceX schedule announcements or is cautious about believing SpaceX has licked a problem before actually seeing proof that's true, it doesn't mean they hate SpaceX.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #63 on: 12/22/2011 04:36 AM »
Is it possible that the PWR ad is more aimed at Aerojet in reference to the noise it has been making about the AJ-26 derivatives for the SLS booster (and possible use for future DoD booster) ect.  Seems to me Aerojet is more of a threat than SpaceX.
Don't forget XCor, who is going after the RL-10 (which is on both EELVs) partnered with ULA.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #64 on: 12/22/2011 08:06 AM »
Is it possible that the PWR ad is more aimed at Aerojet in reference to the noise it has been making about the AJ-26 derivatives for the SLS booster (and possible use for future DoD booster) ect.  Seems to me Aerojet is more of a threat than SpaceX.

A couple of the Atlases in that youtube video show a liftoff with solids (and a Russian-made engine at that), wouldn't it be kind of ironic that they're using Aerojet's "smoke and fire" against Aerojet?

I think it's clearly aimed at SpaceX. I can remember a time when ads and PR like this from SpaceX were frowned upon in this forum as it's "not how aerospace works" in the U.S. If I didn't have better things to waste my time on, I'd go hunting for those comments.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11378
  • Liked: 2892
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #65 on: 12/22/2011 01:29 PM »
I think it's clearly aimed at SpaceX. I can remember a time when ads and PR like this from SpaceX were frowned upon in this forum as it's "not how aerospace works" in the U.S. If I didn't have better things to waste my time on, I'd go hunting for those comments.

Which raises the question "so what?" Aerospace companies advertise their brands ALL THE TIME. I work in Washington. I ride the subway. The subway frequently includes ads for the F-35 or the V-22 or some missile defense system. Boeing and Lockheed Martin frequently take out full-page ads in the Washington Post touting their products. The Pentagon Metro station is filled with them. This is nothing new at all. Heck, a couple of years ago you should have seen how much Boeing advertised their Air Force tanker. That ultimately worked for them, because they got the Airbus contract win overturned (well, I tend to believe that it had more to do with the USAF being very sloppy in its selection than it had to do with Boeing lobbying, but I'm naive). Companies often run these ads when there are contract decisions coming up. But sometimes they run them simply to keep their name out there, to brag about their work.

And anybody who snorts that this indicates that PWR is now scared of SpaceX is probably reading too much into this. PWR is looking at the EELV contract, which should make them a nice fat bit of bank, and seeing that it is now in jeopardy because of SpaceX lobbying, and their executives are also probably a little annoyed that SpaceX keeps holding press conferences (on Mars landers, the Falcon 9 Heavy, reusable rockets) in a year in which they didn't launch a single rocket. I bet this ad originated when some vice president at PWR was watching the latest SpaceX press conference and said "We've launched lots and they've launched nothing and yet they get into Aviation Week all the time and that makes me mad! Do something about it, Smithers!"

That's the way this stuff works.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #66 on: 12/22/2011 04:35 PM »
I'm a big "commercial" supporter, and I liked the ad.

I do wish "commercial" folk would just get on with launching stuff. ...

Me too, and me too.  SpaceX's delays are, by my take, so that they can ensure success.  In the long run, it will be their success which counts for the most.  In the meantime, those of us on the sidelines must wait. 

As to Aerojet being one of the "other guys" in the ad, I think that observation is spot on too.  I keep thinking that ads like that are a waste of company money, but I imagine that there are people in PWR and Congress and in the industry in general, who feel that such advertising has an ROI.

You have to look at the USAF decision on a block buy for EELV. SpaceX lobbied HEAVILY to have it overturned. Don't think that competition for government contracts merely involves building a better or cheaper product. SpaceX lobbied in the court of public opinion and scored some victories. PWR is doing the same.

Another reason why I have no problem with the ad.  Competition is, or should be everywhere, including the ad space.  And, like you say:

Quote
I bet this ad originated when some vice president at PWR was watching the latest SpaceX press conference and said "We've launched lots and they've launched nothing and yet they get into Aviation Week all the time and that makes me mad! Do something about it, Smithers!"
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #67 on: 12/22/2011 04:40 PM »
P.S. the Youtube associated with it is even better.

If for no other reason than containing images of an AJ-10 relative. ;)
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9679
  • Liked: 1399
  • Likes Given: 877
« Last Edit: 12/23/2011 01:40 PM by yg1968 »

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16626
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 5428
  • Likes Given: 678
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #69 on: 12/23/2011 04:41 AM »
That reminds me of this photo of President Kennedy with Werner von Braun talking under a Saturn I. Now there's smoke and fire for you!

http://www.dailyjfk.com/november-16-1963/
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #70 on: 12/23/2011 05:12 AM »
That reminds me of this photo of President Kennedy with Werner von Braun talking under a Saturn I. Now there's smoke and fire for you!

http://www.dailyjfk.com/november-16-1963/

The difference between the two images being, of course, the leadership to provide overwhelming funding.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #71 on: 12/23/2011 02:34 PM »
That reminds me of this photo of President Kennedy with Werner von Braun talking under a Saturn I. Now there's smoke and fire for you!

http://www.dailyjfk.com/november-16-1963/

The difference between the two images being, of course, the leadership to provide overwhelming funding.

Ouch time.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8333
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #72 on: 12/23/2011 03:40 PM »
That reminds me of this photo of President Kennedy with Werner von Braun talking under a Saturn I. Now there's smoke and fire for you!

http://www.dailyjfk.com/november-16-1963/

The difference between the two images being, of course, the leadership to provide overwhelming funding.

 - Ed Kyle
Another difference is that JFK was later assassinated and thus became deified.

And there was a Cold War.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • V
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #73 on: 12/25/2011 06:15 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


I think they're taking a shot at COTS, not clear that it's explicitly at NewSpace (though it may be if you consider COTS = NewSpace). Heck, I don't like companies who are "just talk" either. We have plenty of those.


Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • V
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #74 on: 12/25/2011 06:25 AM »
Side point:  Note all the companies listed on the bottom of the ad.   Something is being told there.


That the ad is from UTC??

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #75 on: 12/25/2011 10:09 AM »
I think they're taking a shot at COTS, not clear that it's explicitly at NewSpace (though it may be if you consider COTS = NewSpace). H

It's pretty clear and explicit IMO, "powerful press conferences" screams one name and one name only. A name that holds the distinction of not having done one single launch in more than 12 months, but instead 2 or 3 "major" announcements.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #76 on: 12/25/2011 10:22 AM »
A name that holds the distinction of not having done one single launch in more than 12 months, but instead 2 or 3 "major" announcements.

Then again, how much of PWR's income comes from SLS-related activity vs EELV-related activity?
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11378
  • Liked: 2892
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #77 on: 12/25/2011 06:01 PM »
A name that holds the distinction of not having done one single launch in more than 12 months, but instead 2 or 3 "major" announcements.

Then again, how much of PWR's income comes from SLS-related activity vs EELV-related activity?

Who cares? Aerospace companies advertise ALL THE TIME. There is nothing terribly unique about this at all.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #78 on: 12/25/2011 06:05 PM »
Who cares? Aerospace companies advertise ALL THE TIME. There is nothing terribly unique about this at all.

PWR's income from SLS is hardly more real than what SpaceX is doing. So if most of PWR's income is SLS-related, then they aren't all that different from SpaceX in that regard after all. And that difference is what ugordan seemed to be getting at.
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • V
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #79 on: 12/26/2011 12:30 AM »
Who cares? Aerospace companies advertise ALL THE TIME. There is nothing terribly unique about this at all.

PWR's income from SLS is hardly more real than what SpaceX is doing. So if most of PWR's income is SLS-related, then they aren't all that different from SpaceX in that regard after all. And that difference is what ugordan seemed to be getting at.

Buh wha? There's a lof of stretching going into this statement.

Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • V
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #80 on: 12/26/2011 12:30 AM »
I think they're taking a shot at COTS, not clear that it's explicitly at NewSpace (though it may be if you consider COTS = NewSpace). H

It's pretty clear and explicit IMO, "powerful press conferences" screams one name and one name only. A name that holds the distinction of not having done one single launch in more than 12 months, but instead 2 or 3 "major" announcements.

I didn't think of that. So maybe it is spacex after all...

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #81 on: 12/27/2011 09:17 AM »
Buh wha? There's a lof of stretching going into this statement.

How so?
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline grr

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Highlands Ranch, Colorado
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #82 on: 12/31/2011 07:19 PM »
The problem is, that it really is not effective.
Look, this is supposed to be a marketing push to back old space. Fine.
However, all they do is speak on it.
Who are they targeting? Nobody in particular.
It is geared, at best, to space fanatics who have already made up their minds.
I know that I have been writing my congressman (not that it does any good; between a large chinese importer and L-mart, coffman is bought and paid for) and senators.

Do they show WHERE they are going? Nope.
Do they show anything new? Nope.
Do they have a new group of ppl to target? Nope.
Do they show that they are doing anything above and beyond normal? Nope.

OTH, SpaceX did live launches on-line. It was encouraged to watch these.
My kids watch these. Numerous geeks around the world and in America watched them.
In addition, my kids were enamored with SpaceX's movies of launches. 
I know that a number of SpaceX's stuff made it to schools.

Likewise, when I bought my son a Sat V model, you can push a button and get a count down. He took that to school and I know that it actually got several parents intrigued enough to ask about space.
So, I turned them on to SpaceX since they had the most going out there.
And that is in spite of the fact that I have ULA and L-Mart in my back yard.

I also know that one parent has since written to our congressman (again a waste of time)/senators about private launch.

If these companies REALLY want to make a difference, they would take to the public.  PWR could also work with American firms and push that angle. But they will not.

Again, they are not effective. Which really is too bad.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11159
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #83 on: 12/31/2011 09:24 PM »
Huh?

ULA streams all their launches online.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #84 on: 12/31/2011 10:00 PM »
The problem is....

In my opinion the problem is your post.  Again, another excellent example of an unhealthy pre-occupation with trying to divide something between "old" space and "new" space and twisting it all in the process to strangely complain about one company while boasting about another, yet that company launched absolutely nothing this past calendar year plus. 

PWR makes engines, you would think they would focus on that in *their* advertisement, as they did.  Every single one of those launches were streamed online, some on NASA channel and some on "mainstream" news outlets. 

So focus on SpaceX if you will, that's certainly your right, but please don't come on here and preach blind-faith, and that we should all follow the "righteous path" when there is zero to extremely small history to stand on while calling those who are launching into space "not effective". 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline OpsAnalyst

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Mary Lynne Dittmar
  • Washington, DC
    • MaryLynneDittmar.com
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 120
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #85 on: 01/01/2012 12:42 AM »
The problem is, that it really is not effective.
Look, this is supposed to be a marketing push to back old space. Fine.
However, all they do is speak on it.
Who are they targeting? Nobody in particular.
It is geared, at best, to space fanatics who have already made up their minds.
I know that I have been writing my congressman (not that it does any good; between a large chinese importer and L-mart, coffman is bought and paid for) and senators.

Do they show WHERE they are going? Nope.
Do they show anything new? Nope.
Do they have a new group of ppl to target? Nope.
Do they show that they are doing anything above and beyond normal? Nope.

OTH, SpaceX did live launches on-line. It was encouraged to watch these.
My kids watch these. Numerous geeks around the world and in America watched them.
In addition, my kids were enamored with SpaceX's movies of launches. 
I know that a number of SpaceX's stuff made it to schools.

Likewise, when I bought my son a Sat V model, you can push a button and get a count down. He took that to school and I know that it actually got several parents intrigued enough to ask about space.
So, I turned them on to SpaceX since they had the most going out there.
And that is in spite of the fact that I have ULA and L-Mart in my back yard.

I also know that one parent has since written to our congressman (again a waste of time)/senators about private launch.

If these companies REALLY want to make a difference, they would take to the public.  PWR could also work with American firms and push that angle. But they will not.

Again, they are not effective. Which really is too bad.

Oh, gosh, you guys are fun.

First thing - you can look up their systems on their website:
http://www.pw.utc.com/products/pwr/propulsion_solutions.asp

Second thing, you have no clue if they're effective.

Consider for a moment - when companies develop advertisement, they don't do it because a bunch of rocketboys or rocketexecs sit around and decide they want an ad that says such and so.

They hire communications, advertising, and marketing firms.

Who in turn, work with the companies to determine a communications strategy, which in turn is driven by the corporate strategy and flowed down via a business strategy - which is mapped to a business plan, which then flows to a communications strat plan.

As a part of that, the professionals involved help the corporation understand and make decisions about what they want to achieve with their communications and marketing.

Which in turn, leads to decisions about what "demographics" to target.

Often, but not always, those demographics are about decision makers and/or people who can influence the business environment.

They are not - repeat, NOT - about folks hanging out on NSF forums (no offense, Chris.)

So.  You didn't like the ad - that's cool.  Comments about whether or not the ad is appropriate, or effective, or "cool" - well, OK, maybe cool - but the rest - you have no basis.

(Methinks I'm a bit ornery tonight.  Hmmm...)
<end of line>

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #86 on: 01/01/2012 01:48 AM »
With all due respect Mary, I doubt very much that the add is going to influence or spread the word in this case. It is the wrong industry for that, too small and focused.

The people who make the decisions already know who all the players are, and if they don't,  PWR have much bigger problems, which this add is not going to correct!

Nice little earner for the PR company, poor ROI for the company I would say.
It's all in the data.

Offline grr

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Highlands Ranch, Colorado
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #87 on: 01/01/2012 12:31 PM »
The problem is....

In my opinion the problem is your post.  Again, another excellent example of an unhealthy pre-occupation with trying to divide something between "old" space and "new" space and twisting it all in the process to strangely complain about one company while boasting about another, yet that company launched absolutely nothing this past calendar year plus. 

PWR makes engines, you would think they would focus on that in *their* advertisement, as they did.  Every single one of those launches were streamed online, some on NASA channel and some on "mainstream" news outlets. 

So focus on SpaceX if you will, that's certainly your right, but please don't come on here and preach blind-faith, and that we should all follow the "righteous path" when there is zero to extremely small history to stand on while calling those who are launching into space "not effective". 

You miss the point.
I am not separating 'old space' vs. 'new space'.
PWR did.
Their ad was an attempt to slap 'new space'.
The new space that is about to launch in another month. The new space that has loads of press.


PWR makes SOME engines. They buy others from Russia.
SpaceX makes their engines. ALL OF THEM.
SpaceX says these are American made (which they hammer about constantly) as well as cheap.


PWR needs to work with ULA and their other partners to get out the message.
They also need more. The web site will do nothing to hook new ppl that can make a difference to their future.  As it is, nearly everybody on this site already has an opinion and provide their set of inputs (via their manager, or by writing their congress/parlament). Targeting space techs get them no where. They need outside of that arena. 

Even on their site, they simply push congressmen that are well known for pushing the SLS/constellation and nearly all hating new space. IOW, writing them will do nothing and pushing their words will do even less for them.


Finally, you do realize that 'new space' is NOT effective on the web either. SpaceX IS, but that is just one company(musk gets the web but that is due to paypay paypal). Orbital is worthless on the web(sorry Antares) even though they are in the same situation as SpaceX (actually better since they have an established sat.  and rocket assembly business).
 
SNC Dream Chaser and Boeing's CST-100 are probably known only because of SpaceX's fame combined with COTS, but they have little to nothing on the web.

And then you have Bigelow. They have the BIGGEST EASIEST opportunity to make it huge on the web (they are unique except for IDC Dover), but miss all of them.  Simply provided a virtual world for designing stations in space, on the moon, and on mars. Fairly trivial to do and relatively cheap.  And if they were real smart, they would provide more compare/contrast to ISS with that. Perhaps provide the ability to attach one to a virtual ISS.  Heck, take it further and allow the other space companies to attach their system to it.

Yet, little to nothing from these groups. Oddly, they see competition amongst themselves, when in fact, they should all be working together to revitalize America's fascination and investment with Space.
« Last Edit: 01/01/2012 01:22 PM by grr »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11159
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #88 on: 01/01/2012 12:43 PM »
The problem is....

In my opinion the problem is your post.  Again, another excellent example of an unhealthy pre-occupation with trying to divide something between "old" space and "new" space and twisting it all in the process to strangely complain about one company while boasting about another, yet that company launched absolutely nothing this past calendar year plus. 

PWR makes engines, you would think they would focus on that in *their* advertisement, as they did.  Every single one of those launches were streamed online, some on NASA channel and some on "mainstream" news outlets. 

So focus on SpaceX if you will, that's certainly your right, but please don't come on here and preach blind-faith, and that we should all follow the "righteous path" when there is zero to extremely small history to stand on while calling those who are launching into space "not effective". 

You miss the point.
I am not separating 'old space' vs. 'new space'.
PWR did.
Their ad was an attempt to slap 'new space'.
The new space that is about to launch in another month. The new space that has loads of press.


PWR makes SOME engines. They buy others from Russia.
SpaceX makes their engines. ALL OF THEM.
SpaceX says these are American made (which they hammer about constantly) as well as cheap.


PWR needs to work with ULA and their other partners to get out the message.
They also need more. The web site will do nothing to hook new ppl that can make a difference to their future.  As it is, nearly everybody on this site already has an opinion and provide their set of inputs (via their manager, or by writing their congress/parlament). Targeting space techs get them no where. They need outside of that arena. 

Even on their site, they simply push congressmen that are well known for pushing the SLS/constellation and nearly all hating new space. IOW, writing them will do nothing and pushing their words will do even less for them.


Finally, you do realize that 'new space' is NOT effective on the web either. SpaceX IS, but that is just one company(musk gets the web but that is due to paypay). Orbital is worthless on the web(sorry antaries) even though they are in the same situation as SpaceX (actually better since they have an established sat.  and rocket assembly business).
 
SNC and CST-100 are probably known only because of SpaceX's fame, but they have little to nothing on the web.

And then you have Bigelow. They have the BIGGEST EASIEST opportunity to make it huge on the web (they are unique except for IDC Dover), but miss all of them.  Simply provided a virtual world for designing stations in space, on the moon, and on mars. Fairly trivial to do and relatively cheap.  And if they were real smart, they would provide more compare/contrast to ISS with that. Perhaps provide the ability to attach one to a virtual ISS.

Yet, little to nothing from these groups. Oddly, they see competition amongst themselves, when in fact, they should all be working together to revitalize America's fascination with Space.

PWR makes most of the US's engines
Delta IV first stage
Delta II first stage
Delta IIV second stage
Atlas second stage
SSME

Offline grr

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Highlands Ranch, Colorado
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #89 on: 01/01/2012 01:00 PM »
....
Oh, gosh, you guys are fun.

First thing - you can look up their systems on their website:
http://www.pw.utc.com/products/pwr/propulsion_solutions.asp

Second thing, you have no clue if they're effective.

Consider for a moment - when companies develop advertisement, they don't do it because a bunch of rocketboys or rocketexecs sit around and decide they want an ad that says such and so.

They hire communications, advertising, and marketing firms.

Who in turn, work with the companies to determine a communications strategy, which in turn is driven by the corporate strategy and flowed down via a business strategy - which is mapped to a business plan, which then flows to a communications strat plan.

As a part of that, the professionals involved help the corporation understand and make decisions about what they want to achieve with their communications and marketing.

Which in turn, leads to decisions about what "demographics" to target.

Often, but not always, those demographics are about decision makers and/or people who can influence the business environment.

They are not - repeat, NOT - about folks hanging out on NSF forums (no offense, Chris.)

So.  You didn't like the ad - that's cool.  Comments about whether or not the ad is appropriate, or effective, or "cool" - well, OK, maybe cool - but the rest - you have no basis.

(Methinks I'm a bit ornery tonight.  Hmmm...)
<end of line>

Ornery, yes.
Correct. No.

Quote
Often, but not always, those demographics are about decision makers and/or people who can influence the business environment.

Who are the decision makers that they are targeting with that site?
Congress. They want those that see their site to write Congress.
They have provide a link for it.

So, who will do it? Just those that have been writing all along.  Think about it. Have you written or spoken to Congress members (actually, IIRC, you have said that you have talked to congress members)? How many others here have  done one or the other? They need nobody from here, but from outside of the space arena writing their congressmen.

But that site is not going to do it.
It is not just plain and boring, but it does not even register in google (which is 2/3 of all searches) unless you type in the site name.  In part, that is because of their code is so-so. If they clean it up, both Google and Bing will move them up in the rankings (fastest way to kill the search engines is to use one of the windows based web site code generators).

They picked up their domain in apr 2011, so they have worked on this for over 8 months.

Go look at their connections to facebook, twitter, youtube.
facebook? No comments. Just posts followed by likes.
Twitter? 300 followers.
You tube? the largest was less than 3000 views and it was designed to knock 'new space' (smoke and fire; not smoke and mirrors).

Look at campaigns around the nation. When you have a candidate turn negative about the other guy, esp. one that is making progress, what do you think of the negative guy?

This site was meant to inspire ppl to write congress. It will,but I think that it will have the OPPOSITE effect of what PWR wanted.

Finally,
Most ' communications, advertising, and marketing firms.'
are pretty incorrect about the web and how to be effective on it.  And at this moment, it appears that is 100% of this campaign.
« Last Edit: 01/01/2012 01:03 PM by grr »

Offline grr

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Highlands Ranch, Colorado
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #90 on: 01/01/2012 01:08 PM »
....
PWR makes most of the US's engines
Delta IV first stage
Delta II first stage
Delta IIV second stage
Atlas second stage
SSME


Yeah, I knew all that.
In fact, I thought that they did Delta II second stage and just found out that they do not (aj's).

However, the main lifter  for ULA is now Atlas (4-5/year vs 2-3 deltas/year).
That would be PWR reselling russian engines (or do they actually manufacture those here?).

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #91 on: 01/01/2012 03:13 PM »
That would be PWR reselling russian engines (or do they actually manufacture those here?).

They have a license to manufacture RD-180 in the US, but that has not happened and probably never will.

Offline Tcommon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #92 on: 01/01/2012 05:03 PM »
... As it is, nearly everybody on this site already has an opinion and provide their set of inputs ...

It's hard to have an opinion when the facts aren't in. SpaceX hasn't launched reliably and frequently, at low cost, and supported themselves with that income.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16626
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 5428
  • Likes Given: 678
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #93 on: 01/02/2012 04:46 AM »
PWR makes most of the US's engines
Delta IV first stage
Delta II first stage
Delta IV second stage
Atlas second stage
SSME

For the RS-27A (Delta II first stage) and RS-25D (SSME), PWR no longer makes those engines.
« Last Edit: 01/02/2012 04:55 AM by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #94 on: 01/03/2012 06:45 PM »

This add will obviously have been paid for from profits – which came from your tax dollar. Perhaps there should be some rules about what such profits can be spent on. I see no point to this advertisement.

So what? If they want to build a giant obscene statue in the middle of nowhere, with flaming letters inscribed into its base: "This was paid for with profits from your tax dollars". then they can go for it as far as I'm concerned. It's a complete non sequitur to me to attach moral obligation to someone's actions because they were paid with public funds.

Any attempt to enforce some sort of moral code (beyond the usual anti-corruption stuff like bans on bribery) on the part of the private world that accepts will just result in some sort of money laundering (I guess you could call it "moral laundering") where a shell company takes the public funds and the private businesses downstream spend the profits.
Karl Hallowell

Offline Warren Platts

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #95 on: 01/04/2012 05:36 AM »
I don't think the ad cost very much: futurespaceUSA.com is a website owned, operated, and edited by Pratt & Whitney. :D
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8491
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4974
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #96 on: 01/04/2012 05:52 AM »
I don't think the ad cost very much: futurespaceUSA.com is a website owned, operated, and edited by Pratt & Whitney. :D

Right, that makes this add a 'cheap shot' in more than one way.  ;)

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #97 on: 01/04/2012 11:09 PM »
...It's a complete non sequitur to me to attach moral obligation to someone's actions because they were paid with public funds.

Any attempt to enforce some sort of moral code (beyond the usual anti-corruption stuff like bans on bribery) on the part of the private world that accepts will just result in some sort of money laundering (I guess you could call it "moral laundering") where a shell company takes the public funds and the private businesses downstream spend the profits.

I would rather you reword that.  Because what we are suffering from is largly the result of unbridled, unrestrained, corporate immorality.  It is flat out worship at the altar of Mammon.  That is, profit.  Mitt Romney is completely and totally wrong, to the point of immorality himself, to insist that corporations are people.  If that is the basis of the Mormon religion, I can see why people have a problem with his religion.  But I digress.

Neither is it the case that the only other behavior alternative for our corporations is to adopt some Mother Theresa goody two shoes altruistic social giveaway.

It always bothers me to see the defense companies with their full page, full color WaPo ads touting their abilities, especially for redundant systems; or systems that are under huge cost increases; or systems which the brass and Congress want to cut.  It is a waste of taxpayer dollars, but they do it to convince the shallow taxpayer, which is the majority, that their actions are actually worth the money.

In any case, I agree with the OP on the PWR ad itself.  They have actually flown a lotta things with their hot air.  Let 'em brag.

Whatevs.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1117
  • Liked: 82
  • Likes Given: 658
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #98 on: 01/05/2012 02:41 AM »
I've heard elsewhere that investor cash might be loosened a little for LEO/BLEO market possibilities, except that legal responsibility and indemnity is in murky water, and there is little to no legal protection for the proceeds from their development costs in making use of baryonic matter located in GSO in the form of sats. Is it sensible that this legal constraint is the largest barrier to growing an embryonic market in LEO, BLEO, EML1, lunar surface? Whoever makes the first stab at a new, never-before-broached market, I think it's going to be no further than GSO. There's enough pain, misfortune, learning curve, aluminum artificial reefs, stuck fairings, premature re-entries, collisions, snafus, foobars, British to Metric conversions, power loss, propellant leaks, stuck gears, frozen components, micrometeorite damage, bad code, reboots, lost telemetry, and other joys among men of goodwill, just between LEO and GSO.

Now if the low-cost new space delivery can deliver, that would be a great start. There could be incremental tweaks that can be done to existing hardware, such as sticky boom and hypergolic prop refueling, by the next Paul Allen. This would mean no need to wait on Nasa, its defense contractors, and the costing structure for the employment of (the actual) engineers, infinite safety verification, and safety paperwork, whatever goes into 'assured launch'. But just comparing ULA's pricing structure to Space X, it's obvious that ULA won't budge very low, and Space X won't stay as low as it claims after enough Time and Murphy.

The potential, I think, or at least I've heard, is that legal protection (indemnity) of the private endeavor, and legal ownership of the products, would unlock at least a trickle of investor cash going into nascent BLEO market. I haven't heard any ideas of how to turn the underpants of LEO/GSO dead sats (baryonic) into a profit, but I wouldn't put it past some 24 yo entrepreneurial engineer wiseacre. So, I think resolving the battle of old space defending its monopoly against a lion whelp by fixes of fiat won't help as much as legally protecting the risk and return of pragmatic innovators operating in very small increments. Legislative / legal protection over risk and return would be tantamount or analogous to some form of radiation protection, and it can be worked on now, and on earth.

I could restate that as "Protect by law, and you'll get not a smackdown, not a lot of smoke with no fire, but a very small, slow trickle of stable growth."
And further, "Get legal protection, get volume, get reduced launch cost."

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #99 on: 01/05/2012 04:56 AM »
Err, not sure what this thread is about now, but I won't allow another to lose its specific topic and end up as a mud bath for everyone to have a two cents-a-thon, so specific from now on (including the temptation to quote) please. It's bad enough this thread is free advertising for their effort, when they are having to buy space on sites that have probably never covered any of their engines in depth.

#StillGrumbling ;)

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #100 on: 01/22/2012 12:59 AM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


O.K.  Let's keep count.  With the launch of Delta 358 on January 20, the score for 2012 is:

PWR:   1          "The Other Guys":  0

 - Ed Kyle

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #101 on: 02/25/2012 03:01 PM »
I appreciate a good ad smackdown.  It usually causes both sides to excel more.

http://www.futurespaceusa.com/smoke_fire.html


O.K.  Let's keep count.  With the launch of Delta 358 on January 20, the score for 2012 is:

PWR:   1          "The Other Guys":  0

 - Ed Kyle

Seven weeks into 2012, Atlas V AV-030 makes it

PWR:  2          "The Other Guys":  0

at least the way PWR counts launches. 

I see this differently, as follows, since Atlas first stages are Energomash-powered.

PWR:  1.5       "The Other Guys":  0

Another way would be to simply count engines

PWR:  3          "The Other Guys":  0

but PWR might cry fowl when each Falcon 9 adds 10 engines to the count.
;)  .  Maybe total impulse is the proper comparison?

Still a shutout!

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 02/25/2012 03:08 PM by edkyle99 »

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #102 on: 05/26/2012 08:22 PM »
Does anybody have a take on this advertisement, now that SpaceX successfully launched Dragon?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1749
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #103 on: 05/26/2012 08:30 PM »
I was going to wait for a successful splashdown (knock on wood) before mentioning anything, but now that you brought it up, I haven't seen either of the two "microphone" ads ever since Dragon launched. They seem to be replaced by a new one showing a rocket smoke trail in the distance. Kind of ironic, given how PWR specializes in liquid engines. Then again, they did use Atlas *liftoffs* in their promo video...

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12876
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3932
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #104 on: 05/26/2012 09:21 PM »
Does anybody have a take on this advertisement, now that SpaceX successfully launched Dragon?

PWR still leads for the year, but its shutout days are over.  :)

 - Ed Kyle

Offline simonbp

Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #105 on: 05/27/2012 04:21 AM »
Especially as, IIRC, the _only_ planned new vehicle that would use PWR engines is SLS, which won't fly much (if at all). That may be why UTC is looking to drop PWR ASAP...

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9168
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 620
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: PWR takes a shot at NewSpace in new ad
« Reply #106 on: 05/27/2012 01:32 PM »
PWR still leads for the year...

Except for that there number of engine metric, right? :)
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Tags: