Is it just me or does it seem like ULA has less money for R&D than SpaceX? Maybe that is because Commercial Crew and Cargo are development oriented. On the other hand, maybe SpaceX is plowing its profit into R&D while ULA's parent companies are taking a good chunk of the profit. Seems to me that somebody at ULA should figure out how to get the money to do ACES and Vulcan development simultaneously.
As for XEUS, there is no urgency on this project. It still needs flight proven ACES and more importantly a market.
Jon do you know if they plan to fly IVF Centuar or wait for ACES.
Well it might interest President Trump if he wants to go back to the Moon but take the private enterprise route. Though SLS & Orion would no doubt pay the cost of this kind of choice.
Quote from: Star One on 12/31/2016 12:16 pmWell it might interest President Trump if he wants to go back to the Moon but take the private enterprise route. Though SLS & Orion would no doubt pay the cost of this kind of choice.To a certain extent it doesn't matter what technology is available for a government return to the Moon, since we proved we could go to the Moon with 60's era technology. It only matters that there is political consensus to fund such an effort, and in order for that to happen there has to be a "national imperative" of some sort - big or small.Which we don't have today, and since any mission to the Moon will require Congressional buy-in, it's unlikely that a Trump interest in the Moon alone will change the current situation.In the meantime though, moving these systems further along will help them become possible solutions for when someone, sometime, wants to go beyond LEO.
The charts from our Cislunar Marketplace workshop are now available! #cislunar1000 ulalaunch http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Commercial_Space/CisLunar_Marketplace_Master_Final.pdf
ULA overview slides from last week's CISLunar1000 workshop:QuoteThe charts from our Cislunar Marketplace workshop are now available! #cislunar1000 ulalaunch http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Commercial_Space/CisLunar_Marketplace_Master_Final.pdfhttps://twitter.com/george_sowers/status/832235512110813184
The CisLunar Marketplace roadmaps we created identified potential business opportunities near term and a 30-year time span
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 02/19/2017 05:42 amULA overview slides from last week's CISLunar1000 workshop:QuoteThe charts from our Cislunar Marketplace workshop are now available! #cislunar1000 ulalaunch http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Commercial_Space/CisLunar_Marketplace_Master_Final.pdfhttps://twitter.com/george_sowers/status/832235512110813184Quite an 'interesting' take on becoming entrepreneurial in the space marketplace.Imagine Silicon Valley holding workshops on, Internet, The Next Thirty Years in 1980, or Telecommunications, The Next Thirty Years in 1990, or AI, The Next Thirty Years... of course, they'd generate Roadmaps and Cross-Correlation Matricies.QuoteThe CisLunar Marketplace roadmaps we created identified potential business opportunities near term and a 30-year time span
What I find surprising about Holguin's presentation is that ACES isn't planned to fly until 2023 and the reusability plans only come in after that. 7 years is a long-time for a NET date. The market and the competition could have changed significantly by then.
Quote from: rockets4life97 on 12/30/2016 04:05 pmWhat I find surprising about Holguin's presentation is that ACES isn't planned to fly until 2023 and the reusability plans only come in after that. 7 years is a long-time for a NET date. The market and the competition could have changed significantly by then.I've never been convinced that ULA is serious about ACES and reuse - because it it always many years in the future, it never seems to get any closer. A certain other company gets a lot of flack for development delays, but this perpetual ACES shift into the future seems to glide under the radar.I want to see ACES. I want to see ULA push forward instead of being caretakers of what they inherited when the company was formed.
ACES is a great idea... ULA should continue moving to build it and see if they come.Not sure SMART reuse can compete.
Quote from: AncientU on 02/21/2017 07:41 amACES is a great idea... ULA should continue moving to build it and see if they come.Not sure SMART reuse can compete.SMART reuse would've been much more compelling had they been able to start developing it 8-9yrs ago when they first started talking about it. As much as I love what ULA is doing with ACES and Vulcan, I still hope we can eventually talk them into powered landing, Xeus-style for Vulcan first stage. It's their call, but I struggle to see how they're going to stay competitive with SpaceX with SMART reuse. It might allow them to better compete with a non-reusable vehicle like Proton or Ariane 6, but seems like an incomplete response to what SpaceX is doing.Admittedly, it would be a lot easier to sell them on full first stage recovery if a) distributed lift was already flying or about to fly, and b) there was at least one small RLV startup delivering low-cost propellant that they could leverage for distributed lift. I say that because most of their payloads are GTO/GEO bound (or modest-sized LEO vehicles), where they should have enough performance with a Vulcan/ACES w/o solids to get the payload to LEO and still have enough prop left on the first stage for at least a barge landing. If they had a cheap way to top the ACES stage back up enough for GTO, they could theoretically then justify a fully-reusable first stage. Though admittedly, until distributed lift refueling maneuvers have been demonstrated successfully many times, some customers may prefer to pay the premium for simpler mission operations.Anyhow, just speaking off the cuff there. But I agree with you that I find ACES far more exciting than SMART.~Jon
Jon,The problem that I see for ULA is by the time that they do smart use in 2023 the majority of the commerical market might be all SpaceX and BO. Remember New Glenn is meant to fly by 2020 and it will have first stage re-use. By 2021, you could have SpaceX and BO doing first stage recovery as the normal part of their business. Smart reuse could end up being the Microsoft phone of 2020 --too little too late. The market has moved on. What is even worse for ULA, if in 2020 SpaceX is launching 20 -30+ times per year, vs a company who is only flying 7- 10 times/years, who will have the lower costs? If I was an investor and looking at 5 year time table - who would you put your money in? ULA is safe only for a few more years. ULA needs to out innovate not just SpaceX but BO.
They are building on a strong foundation and will cede nothing.
Quote from: Kansan52 on 02/21/2017 10:31 pmThey are building on a strong foundation and will cede nothing.They are gambling on the competition failing and the status quo remaining, I wouldn't call that a very strong foundation. Especially with the block buys going away. They might cede things despite not wanting to.