The Pentagon has declared that the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) project has exceeded its original projected per-unit cost by 58.4%, triggering a rigorous review under the Nunn-McCurdy program oversight law.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awx/2012/04/17/awx_04_17_2012_p0-448599.xml&headline=Massive%20EELV%20Cost%20Growth%20Reported%20To%20Congress.QuoteThe Pentagon has declared that the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) project has exceeded its original projected per-unit cost by 58.4%, triggering a rigorous review under the Nunn-McCurdy program oversight law.This is not meant to be a "the house is on fire!" post but rather a place to intelligently discuss the causes, effects, and potential solutions to this cost spike.
Solution - Split ULA up a
It's not if you copy-paste the address into the browser.article
A significant "cause" is that the original EELV plan was for down select to only one launch provider. The Pentagon is living with the cost of its decision to award two "winners". This should be a lesson to those who think there should be two Commercial Crew providers, etc. - Ed Kyle
The government payload problem (disaster? fiasco? etc.) has contributed. The non-downselect and the lowered government launch rate pushed launch prices up, which helped press the EELVs out of the commercial launch business.
Question: Where the EELV's ever really in the commercial launch business? Did they ever stand a chance in the commercial launch business? After all, they basically are DOD rockets.
Quote from: woods170 on 04/20/2012 06:56 amQuestion: Where the EELV's ever really in the commercial launch business? Did they ever stand a chance in the commercial launch business? After all, they basically are DOD rockets.No, they are not DOD rockets.a. Atlas had/has commercial payloadsb. The intermediate versions (any vehicle with a solid) exist because of commercial requirements and not DOD requirements. The DOD only had requirements for the medium and heavy class vehicles. The versions with SRMs came about when comsats started getting heavier. That is why Atlas can only carry 5 and Delta only 4 solids because the vehicle and GSE designs were too far along to properly accommodate them
But the fact that Lockheed was involved in ILS Proton, and Boeing in Sea Launch, even as they were developing EELVs tells me that the companies were never really serious about EELV commercial launch.
Launch rate.
Quote from: Jim on 04/20/2012 01:18 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 04/20/2012 01:12 pm But the fact that Lockheed was involved in ILS Proton, and Boeing in Sea Launch, even as they were developing EELVs tells me that the companies were never really serious about EELV commercial launch.Lockheed's involvement in ILS and Boeing's in Sealaunch predates their mergers with Martin Marietta (Atlas) and McDonnell Douglas (Delta) respectively. And McDonnell Douglas won the EELV competition before Boeing took them over.True, but a lot of years passed between the mergers/EELV awards and the company's dis-connections from their respective international affiliations. In each case, the merging partner promoting non-U.S. commercial satellite launch collaboration seemed to win the internal corporate argument, if there ever was an argument.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 04/20/2012 01:12 pm But the fact that Lockheed was involved in ILS Proton, and Boeing in Sea Launch, even as they were developing EELVs tells me that the companies were never really serious about EELV commercial launch.Lockheed's involvement in ILS and Boeing's in Sealaunch predates their mergers with Martin Marietta (Atlas) and McDonnell Douglas (Delta) respectively. And McDonnell Douglas won the EELV competition before Boeing took them over.