Reliability and cost make up 2 criteria for DOD contacts but there are others. Launching on time is also very important and so far Spacex has had a poor record in this regards. Having a dedicated launch pad for DOD missions will help address this.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2014 07:19 pmReliability and cost make up 2 criteria for DOD contacts but there are others. Launching on time is also very important and so far Spacex has had a poor record in this regards. Having a dedicated launch pad for DOD missions will help address this.The problem from my perspective is not that SpaceX ignores schedule, it's that DOD ignores cost. The current DOD budget isn't sustainable, and DOD has funded some studies that start with that very premise.
Quote from: vulture4 on 03/17/2014 06:08 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2014 07:19 pmReliability and cost make up 2 criteria for DOD contacts but there are others. Launching on time is also very important and so far Spacex has had a poor record in this regards. Having a dedicated launch pad for DOD missions will help address this.The problem from my perspective is not that SpaceX ignores schedule, it's that DOD ignores cost. The current DOD budget isn't sustainable, and DOD has funded some studies that start with that very premise.The problem from my perspective is making "political theatre" out of a commercial contract
Quote from: Prober on 03/17/2014 06:34 pmQuote from: vulture4 on 03/17/2014 06:08 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 03/13/2014 07:19 pmReliability and cost make up 2 criteria for DOD contacts but there are others. Launching on time is also very important and so far Spacex has had a poor record in this regards. Having a dedicated launch pad for DOD missions will help address this.The problem from my perspective is not that SpaceX ignores schedule, it's that DOD ignores cost. The current DOD budget isn't sustainable, and DOD has funded some studies that start with that very premise.The problem from my perspective is making "political theatre" out of a commercial contract Theater, yes, but getting everything out in the open is the only way I know to (possibly) get a decision made that has some rationale, rather than just the usual process of whoever can pay the largest bribe (sorry, legal campaign contribution), or offer the cushiest job to the government decisionmakers when they retire, getting their way.
whoever can pay the largest bribe (sorry, legal campaign contribution), or offer the cushiest job to the government decisionmakers when they retire, getting their way.
ULA is ready and able to compete with SpaceX - Gass.
If ULA wants they could super mass produce the RD-180 and have a Falcon Heavy killer!"The RD-180 engine has been test-certified not only for the current Atlas V launch vehicle, but also for the tri-booster Atlas V heavy launch vehicle (HLV)"
Quote from: Prober on 03/19/2014 01:43 amIf ULA wants they could super mass produce the RD-180 and have a Falcon Heavy killer!"The RD-180 engine has been test-certified not only for the current Atlas V launch vehicle, but also for the tri-booster Atlas V heavy launch vehicle (HLV)"No, ULA is going to build the Atlas V HLV since it has the Delta IV heavy. And also, it would still have less performance than the Falcon Heavy.And ULA does not produce the RD-180, Aerojet would
Yeah, I'd like to see how much in campaign contributions the Chairman from Ill. received from aerospace if at all
Quote from: Prober on 03/19/2014 01:14 amYeah, I'd like to see how much in campaign contributions the Chairman from Ill. received from aerospace if at all The relevant page on opensecrets.org lists Lockheed Martin and Boeing as his two largest donors in 2009-14. He received quite a bit more moola from law firms as a whole than he did from aerospace firms, however.
Quote from: Proponent on 03/19/2014 08:34 amQuote from: Prober on 03/19/2014 01:14 amYeah, I'd like to see how much in campaign contributions the Chairman from Ill. received from aerospace if at all The relevant page on opensecrets.org lists Lockheed Martin and Boeing as his two largest donors in 2009-14. He received quite a bit more moola from law firms as a whole than he did from aerospace firms, however.To be fair to both parties, did he receive any donations from Solar City, Tesla Motors, SpaceX etc?
My thinking was more toward the idea that it might be better to keep the RD-180 production under a new company with Some AeroJet ownership. That might help with any "possible" conflicts with the AJ26 engine program.
Quote from: Prober on 03/19/2014 11:58 amMy thinking was more toward the idea that it might be better to keep the RD-180 production under a new company with Some AeroJet ownership. That might help with any "possible" conflicts with the AJ26 engine program.why? And there are no other equivalent companies to handle it. And RD-180 is just as much Aerojet's as is AJ-26.
Why? thinking ahead now.....the Orbital lawsuit regarding the RD-180 The Russian issue of manufacture RD-180 & AJ-26I could go on...but you get the idea
Just thought I'd toss this in per Chris's article on the European Solar Orbiter mission on Atlas V 411 in 2017:"Tuesday’s announcement of a contract award for a launch three years away at least shows NASA LSP confidence in Atlas V’s medium term future."
Quote from: PahTo on 03/19/2014 06:36 pmJust thought I'd toss this in per Chris's article on the European Solar Orbiter mission on Atlas V 411 in 2017:"Tuesday’s announcement of a contract award for a launch three years away at least shows NASA LSP confidence in Atlas V’s medium term future."Yep, well done Just goes to show NASA wants more than "cheap"
