{trimmed}Just trying to be helpful...
I don't think that it logically follows that SpaceX lack of contracts is due to SpaceX unsuitability. After all, there is a legal action pending right now that makes far different allegations.
"What says any company is doing "best practices"?"I could go on and on about QA, QC, SPC, ERP, MRP, CM, RA, PM... but "results" should be sufficient.Results in terms of cost, quality, and development time. With best practices you optimize for all three.Without best practices you are forced to choose any two at the expense of the third without knowing the outcome before hand. The beauty of science lies not in discovery, but in the prediction of results."Obviously many gov't customers don't (see lack of Spacex gov't contracts)"What Lar and Space Ghost 1962 said.
Quote from: Jim on 06/20/2014 01:46 amWhat says any company is doing "best practices"? Obviously many gov't customers don't (see lack of Spacex gov't contracts)I don't think that it logically follows that SpaceX lack of contracts is due to SpaceX unsuitability. After all, there is a legal action pending right now that makes far different allegations.ULA is flailing. That WashPo interview won't score any points. They need better PR.
What says any company is doing "best practices"? Obviously many gov't customers don't (see lack of Spacex gov't contracts)
Quote from: Sean Lynch on 06/20/2014 06:01 am"What says any company is doing "best practices"?"I could go on and on about QA, QC, SPC, ERP, MRP, CM, RA, PM... but "results" should be sufficient.Results in terms of cost, quality, and development time. With best practices you optimize for all three.Without best practices you are forced to choose any two at the expense of the third without knowing the outcome before hand. The beauty of science lies not in discovery, but in the prediction of results."Obviously many gov't customers don't (see lack of Spacex gov't contracts)"What Lar and Space Ghost 1962 said. You still haven't answered it. What results? See the lack of contracts.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/19/2014 04:20 pmAnother round of tit for tat press conferences recently. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ula-chief-accuses-elon-musks-spacex-of-trying-to-cut-corners/2014/06/18/a7ca0850-f70d-11e3-8aa9-dad2ec039789_story.html?tid=hpModule_a2e19bf4-86a3-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394Hopefully this ends soon. I'm not sure that this "publicity" approach is working for ULA. Read the last three or so paragraphs for an example. - Ed KyleThanks for sharing Ed, interesting read. I hope it ends soon too. It's painful to watch ULA management caught so off balance:Quote from: (from the article) CEO Michael Gass“We also want to make clear that there is a big distinction between a company that has a 100-year combined heritage in successfully delivering satellites into orbit and a company that is not yet even certified to conduct one launch.”"100-year combined history" doesn't convey a "state of the art, forward leaning, best practices" message to taxpayers or shareholders of parent companies. Worse yet, average readers may perceive the "combined history" statement as a blatant distortion.
Another round of tit for tat press conferences recently. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ula-chief-accuses-elon-musks-spacex-of-trying-to-cut-corners/2014/06/18/a7ca0850-f70d-11e3-8aa9-dad2ec039789_story.html?tid=hpModule_a2e19bf4-86a3-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394Hopefully this ends soon. I'm not sure that this "publicity" approach is working for ULA. Read the last three or so paragraphs for an example. - Ed Kyle
“We also want to make clear that there is a big distinction between a company that has a 100-year combined heritage in successfully delivering satellites into orbit and a company that is not yet even certified to conduct one launch.”
Are you talking lack of contracts as a function of USG consumer confidence?NASA is trusting the lives of the ISS crew and 100b station to safe operations of the SpaceX Dragon. I'd hypothesize Dragon deliveries require a measurable degree of mission confidence based upon a risk assessment which would provide some hard numbers.