Quote from: gospacex on 07/04/2017 06:56 pmQuote from: Mike Jones on 07/04/2017 06:03 pmCould you please provide a short summary of Roscosmos' views ?They plan to compete with SpaceX using new rocket, Soyuz-5. First flight is expected in 2022. And where will SpaceX be in five years?
Quote from: Mike Jones on 07/04/2017 06:03 pmCould you please provide a short summary of Roscosmos' views ?They plan to compete with SpaceX using new rocket, Soyuz-5. First flight is expected in 2022.
Could you please provide a short summary of Roscosmos' views ?
Quote from: Jim on 02/27/2016 10:57 pmQuote from: AncientU on 02/27/2016 08:59 pmOverall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years. ULA hasn't lost any to Spacex yet.I'm not sure how you can defend that statement.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the GPS satellites, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the X-37 missions, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.And the Air Force in on record wanting competition, meaning ULA will continue to lose market share to SpaceX vs when they were a monopoly. The evidence is clear.
Quote from: AncientU on 02/27/2016 08:59 pmOverall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years. ULA hasn't lost any to Spacex yet.
Overall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years.
Soyuz 5 being a 100% Made in Russia Zenit launcher, I just don't see how this plan could work
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 07/04/2017 07:20 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/27/2016 10:57 pmQuote from: AncientU on 02/27/2016 08:59 pmOverall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years. ULA hasn't lost any to Spacex yet.I'm not sure how you can defend that statement.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the GPS satellites, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the X-37 missions, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.And the Air Force in on record wanting competition, meaning ULA will continue to lose market share to SpaceX vs when they were a monopoly. The evidence is clear.wrong, ULA can't lose what they can't compete for
Komarov said the volume and value of SpaceX’s launch contracts present “a serious challenge, not only for us, but for all traditional producers of rocket and space technology…. I think in the future this technology will be used. The only question is when. There are serious doubts that we can do it with the present level of materials and rocket engines.”
Komarov listed the tradeoffs involved in rocket reuse, including the need to carry substantial extra fuel, reducing payload-carrying capability, to power the stage back to Earth. The stresses on materials during atmospheric reentry will mean high maintenance and repair costs, he suggested.Komarov said he assumes that SpaceX and others planning to reuse their rocket stages will be able to cut their prices by 15-20% and that the reductions will not go much beyond this in the next five years.
Quote from: Jim on 07/04/2017 07:35 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 07/04/2017 07:20 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/27/2016 10:57 pmQuote from: AncientU on 02/27/2016 08:59 pmOverall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years. ULA hasn't lost any to Spacex yet.I'm not sure how you can defend that statement.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the GPS satellites, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the X-37 missions, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.And the Air Force in on record wanting competition, meaning ULA will continue to lose market share to SpaceX vs when they were a monopoly. The evidence is clear.wrong, ULA can't lose what they can't compete forIf you are talking about OTV-5 (because there was no reason ULA couln't compete for the GPS launch), then the only reason ULA didn't lose it would be if the USAF wouldn't have needed it if SpaceX didn't exist. That is, it's merely make-work or a demo mission for SpaceX.If the USAF has a real mission need for OTV-5, it would have gone to ULA by default.
Quote from: envy887 on 07/04/2017 10:38 pmQuote from: Jim on 07/04/2017 07:35 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 07/04/2017 07:20 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/27/2016 10:57 pmQuote from: AncientU on 02/27/2016 08:59 pmOverall, SpaceX has taken market share away from nearly everyone in the business over the last two years. ULA hasn't lost any to Spacex yet.I'm not sure how you can defend that statement.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the GPS satellites, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.Prior to SpaceX ULA was launching all of the X-37 missions, and now SpaceX has won at least one launch.And the Air Force in on record wanting competition, meaning ULA will continue to lose market share to SpaceX vs when they were a monopoly. The evidence is clear.wrong, ULA can't lose what they can't compete forIf you are talking about OTV-5 (because there was no reason ULA couln't compete for the GPS launch), then the only reason ULA didn't lose it would be if the USAF wouldn't have needed it if SpaceX didn't exist. That is, it's merely make-work or a demo mission for SpaceX.If the USAF has a real mission need for OTV-5, it would have gone to ULA by default.This necro quote isn't fair.BUT... I seem to recall ULA not bidding on this GPS launch because this was the one they "couldn't validate the necessary accounting processes" or some such. Either way, I do agree in principle, ULA, whether couldn't, can't, won't or didn't, undoubtedly has to count this as lost business due to SpaceX being in business.
ULA can expect at best 50% of the NSS plus NASA launch contracts to be awarded/flown over the next five years (excluding block buy, which was not competed).A reasonable person would say that they have lost 50% of their monopoly market share.
Quote from: AncientU on 07/04/2017 11:08 pmULA can expect at best 50% of the NSS plus NASA launch contracts to be awarded/flown over the next five years (excluding block buy, which was not competed).A reasonable person would say that they have lost 50% of their monopoly market share.Are you counting NASA crew and cargo deliveries over the next 5 years, or just NASA spacecraft? ULA never had a monopoly on the former, though they did on the latter at one point.
...What do the next two years look to reveal -- more of the same or end of the SpaceX market share growth?
Quote from: envy887 on 07/04/2017 11:13 pmQuote from: AncientU on 07/04/2017 11:08 pmULA can expect at best 50% of the NSS plus NASA launch contracts to be awarded/flown over the next five years (excluding block buy, which was not competed).A reasonable person would say that they have lost 50% of their monopoly market share.Are you counting NASA crew and cargo deliveries over the next 5 years, or just NASA spacecraft? ULA never had a monopoly on the former, though they did on the latter at one point.Yes, I am including them; cargo and crew launches were/are competed NASA launches. ULA and its parent companies essentially had a monopoly on all USG launches when SpaceX entered the market. They still have a significant share... though dropping toward 50%.SpaceX manifest plus potential wins:9 more CRS-16 CRS-2 (initial award -- subsequent awards likely)3 crew demos (including in flight abort)6 crew transports4 USAF (including STP-2, 2 GPS-III, OTV-5)1 NASA (TESS, probably a couple others will be added)a share (maybe >50%) of the 12 or so remaining Phase 1A NSS launchesa share (50% plus/minus) of the Phase 2 NSS launches (initially 20 launches)Total (about) 40-50 USG-paid launches out to 2024. ULA will be pressed to win/launch more than that number even including the remaining block buy launches. Even if they do manage to break 50%, it is disingenuous to say ULA/Boeing/LM haven't lost a huge chunk of market share to SpaceX. And this doesn't include the fate of SLS/Orion...
Quote from: AncientU on 07/05/2017 12:39 amQuote from: envy887 on 07/04/2017 11:13 pmQuote from: AncientU on 07/04/2017 11:08 pmULA can expect at best 50% of the NSS plus NASA launch contracts to be awarded/flown over the next five years (excluding block buy, which was not competed).A reasonable person would say that they have lost 50% of their monopoly market share.Are you counting NASA crew and cargo deliveries over the next 5 years, or just NASA spacecraft? ULA never had a monopoly on the former, though they did on the latter at one point.Yes, I am including them; cargo and crew launches were/are competed NASA launches. ULA and its parent companies essentially had a monopoly on all USG launches when SpaceX entered the market. They still have a significant share... though dropping toward 50%.SpaceX manifest plus potential wins:9 more CRS-16 CRS-2 (initial award -- subsequent awards likely)3 crew demos (including in flight abort)6 crew transports4 USAF (including STP-2, 2 GPS-III, OTV-5)1 NASA (TESS, probably a couple others will be added)a share (maybe >50%) of the 12 or so remaining Phase 1A NSS launchesa share (50% plus/minus) of the Phase 2 NSS launches (initially 20 launches)Total (about) 40-50 USG-paid launches out to 2024. ULA will be pressed to win/launch more than that number even including the remaining block buy launches. Even if they do manage to break 50%, it is disingenuous to say ULA/Boeing/LM haven't lost a huge chunk of market share to SpaceX. And this doesn't include the fate of SLS/Orion...CRS-1 missions don't count. ULA was frozen out of them.