Author Topic: Will be Orbital Sciences corp. the part of United LAunc Alliance  (Read 4592 times)

Offline vasin-456

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Hello!

I have one question?

Could the Orbital Sciences be the United Launch Alliance partner. Due to the Delta-2 closure and development and good perspectives of Antares-2 (former Taurus-2)?

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7860
  • Likes Given: 5232
What? "the" partner?
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 vasin-456

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
yes, the partner...

the delta-2 mission is going to the end. And there is no substitution for it in the ULA. Is there a chance that Orbital will be invited into the Alliance as the full partner. I think it will help ULA to Plug the gap due to the delta-2 retirement and maintain its position in the market of launch services.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7860
  • Likes Given: 5232
No, ULA has the Atlas V in single-stick (no booster) which is getting the old Delta II payloads like GPS birds (which are heavier now anyway). ULA is made just of the launch vehicles of its two parent companies, Lockheed Martin and Boeing.
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: 32196
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10843
  • Likes Given: 321
yes, the partner...

the delta-2 mission is going to the end. And there is no substitution for it in the ULA. Is there a chance that Orbital will be invited into the Alliance as the full partner. I think it will help ULA to Plug the gap due to the delta-2 retirement and maintain its position in the market of launch services.


No.
A.  OSC is a competitor.  It provides them no advantage to join ULA.
B.  ULA is not an alliance, it is a joint venture company.
C.  It provides no advantage to Boeing and LM for OSC to join

Offline vasin-456

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
 Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3888
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 302
  • Likes Given: 140
Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

They will be flying CST-100 from Boeing and DC from Blue origin as well as OFT1 for the Orion program so yes.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7860
  • Likes Given: 5232
Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

They will be flying CST-100 from Boeing and DC from Blue origin as well as OFT1 for the Orion program so yes.
Dreamchaser is Sierra Nevada (they bought Spacedev). Blue Origin has their own spacecraft. Both Dreamchaser and Blue Origin's vehicle are slated for Atlas V launch, though. Technically, that is crew delivery and not cargo, though crew launches will inevitably carry some cargo (especially if you have empty seats)... ...and I expect the crew carriers to bid on the next round of CRS when it comes.
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: 32196
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10843
  • Likes Given: 321
Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

Only if they team with a spacecraft supplier and they win a contract when the cargo service is re-competed.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 700
  • Likes Given: 728
Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

Only if they team with a spacecraft supplier and they win a contract when the cargo service is re-competed.

ULA could do this via buying into Orbital via the Stock market, however why would they?
 
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 Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32196
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10843
  • Likes Given: 321
Thank you, but in this case, does the ULA have a chance to take part in the program of delivery cargo to the ISS?

Only if they team with a spacecraft supplier and they win a contract when the cargo service is re-competed.

ULA could do this via buying into Orbital via the Stock market, however why would they?
 

No, the couldn't
A.  LM and Boeing don't allow ULA to produce spacecraft
B.  LM and Boeing haven't given ULA the ability to buy other companies.

 ULA does not take a lead in this contract.
What I meant by "team" is the spacecraft supplier is who tries to get the contract and they would use ULA as the launch service provider.

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
ULA, with its extended record of reliability, would never slum to that of Orbital.  The comparative advantages of each company are not complementary.
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 Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
ULA, with its extended record of reliability, would never slum to that of Orbital.  The comparative advantages of each company are not complementary.

Orbital had some issues with the Taurus XL, but they have certainly been sucessful with the recycled ICBM-based launchers, right ? Launchers like the Pegasus serve a portion of the market where ULA doesn't really have a product.

Of course, Orbital probably makes the majority of their revenue building spacecraft, not launchers. Their satelitte business competes directly against ULA's parents Boeing and Lockheed. I doubt the government would look at a takeover / merger of Orbital into a Boeing / LM joint venture favorably.

Tags: