Well, the first correction is that Kodak are still in business and they did develop digital cameras. I have a digital Kodak EasyShare CX4200 camera that I still use. They are also big in digital printing in the commercial area (our local K-Mart uses their big printers to print photos at only 10 cents each!). And by the way, they still make digital cameras!
As to whether Boeing and Lockheed are restricting what ULA can do to protect SLS and other programs, all I see is hearsay. No proof has been provided. We only have George Sowers word that he was ordered to not say "Depot"....
Well, the first correction is that Kodak are still in business and they did develop digital cameras.
As to whether Boeing and Lockheed are restricting what ULA can do to protect SLS and other programs, all I see is hearsay. No proof has been provided.
Using Von Braun's tanking mode, a depot is not needed anyway, so there were ways to get around that restriction.
There may also be an innocent reason why ACES and propellant transfer are currently not being pursued (if that allegation is true). One reason could be is that ULA needs to focus on getting Vulcan done and so anything that could delay that is being put to the side for now.
Searching ULA for depot shows that their previous papers on depots are still there. They have papers from 2018 on using Lunar propellant! Their last paper on ACES is from May 2018, a little over a year ago.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 07/31/2019 09:47 pmhttps://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1156663096192176128QuoteULA getting corralled by both parents. Boeing says don't do in-space refueling or the ACES upper stage. Lockheed says don't do the XEUS lunar lander. Company is thus forced to put all of its eggs into the Vulcan basket. Not good for them, or aerospace in general.I came here to discuss this because it kind of shocked me. The SLS situation is bad enough as it is. But this sheds an entirely darker light (o.O) on the whole situation. In the past, I was kind of indifferent towards Shelby. Yes he wasts a lot of money on SLS but I didnt see that zombie roaming around outside of its cage. Now this shows that Shelby is willing to ax innovation and development in favour of SLS. That is exactly the opposite of what should be happening. Not only wasting time and money but actively suppressing development. I kind of feel sorry for ULA at this point. They are running a race with shackles on their feet. I hope this can change before its too late. And I sincerely hope that other companies dont get entangled in the same net over time.
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1156663096192176128QuoteULA getting corralled by both parents. Boeing says don't do in-space refueling or the ACES upper stage. Lockheed says don't do the XEUS lunar lander. Company is thus forced to put all of its eggs into the Vulcan basket. Not good for them, or aerospace in general.
ULA getting corralled by both parents. Boeing says don't do in-space refueling or the ACES upper stage. Lockheed says don't do the XEUS lunar lander. Company is thus forced to put all of its eggs into the Vulcan basket. Not good for them, or aerospace in general.
Quote from: Semmel on 08/01/2019 06:14 amQuote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 07/31/2019 09:47 pmhttps://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1156663096192176128QuoteULA getting corralled by both parents. Boeing says don't do in-space refueling or the ACES upper stage. Lockheed says don't do the XEUS lunar lander. Company is thus forced to put all of its eggs into the Vulcan basket. Not good for them, or aerospace in general.I came here to discuss this because it kind of shocked me. The SLS situation is bad enough as it is. But this sheds an entirely darker light (o.O) on the whole situation. In the past, I was kind of indifferent towards Shelby. Yes he wasts a lot of money on SLS but I didnt see that zombie roaming around outside of its cage. Now this shows that Shelby is willing to ax innovation and development in favour of SLS. That is exactly the opposite of what should be happening. Not only wasting time and money but actively suppressing development. I kind of feel sorry for ULA at this point. They are running a race with shackles on their feet. I hope this can change before its too late. And I sincerely hope that other companies dont get entangled in the same net over time.The fact that the parents of ULA (Lockheed and Boeing) have been hamstringing ULA innovation has been fairly widely mentioned for some years now. Jon Goff and others have commented on it regularly.George Sowers authoritative responses to long-time space journalist Eric Berger's inquiries and statements simply gives us a more first hand view into this very sad situation where the political incentives of gov space have impeded innovation by a theoretically independent company for over a decade now.
Quote from: Llian Rhydderch on 08/02/2019 12:05 pmThe fact that the parents of ULA (Lockheed and Boeing) have been hamstringing ULA innovation has been fairly widely mentioned for some years now. Jon Goff and others have commented on it regularly.George Sowers authoritative responses to long-time space journalist Eric Berger's inquiries and statements simply gives us a more first hand view into this very sad situation where the political incentives of gov space have impeded innovation by a theoretically independent company for over a decade now. It was obvious, as you say, that Boeing and LM are keeping a lid on ULA for new developments. But so far, I was under the misconception that they dont want ULA to keep profits, thus preventing investment into IVF and ACES for instance. The fact that Shelby is actually pulling the strings in the background on this one is was shocked me. As a government body, the senate should encourage, not discourage, technological development inside the US. Doing this sort of string pulling could (if it was not for SpaceX and Blue Origin) be the cause for the US to loose space technology superiority to China for instance. This action of Shelby is so small minded and damaging to US spaceflight in general, I is simply and plain malicious. I was just not expecting this.
The fact that the parents of ULA (Lockheed and Boeing) have been hamstringing ULA innovation has been fairly widely mentioned for some years now. Jon Goff and others have commented on it regularly.George Sowers authoritative responses to long-time space journalist Eric Berger's inquiries and statements simply gives us a more first hand view into this very sad situation where the political incentives of gov space have impeded innovation by a theoretically independent company for over a decade now.
ULA and its launch industry competitors in pitched fight over regulations..by Sandra Erwin — August 3, 2019https://spacenews.com/ula-and-its-commercial-competitors-in-pitched-fight-over-launch-regulations/
Quote from: Rondaz on 08/04/2019 01:10 amULA and its launch industry competitors in pitched fight over regulations..by Sandra Erwin — August 3, 2019https://spacenews.com/ula-and-its-commercial-competitors-in-pitched-fight-over-launch-regulations/Wow. That is blood boiling to read the ULA comments. Instead of trying to catch up to Blue/SpaceX and innovate; they want to send an army of lawyers to kneecap the competition instead. I used to have a sympathetic view of ULA due to their unique challenges being a joint venture of Boeing/Lockheed. But after this display of blatant anti-competitiveness I am now going to actively root for Blue and SpaceX to bury them in the coming decade.
Wow what a hyperbole filled post which puts a particular spin on what the article says. Guess you forgot people from the industry read the forum, and I doubt they appreciate such keyboard warrior comments. Especially as the whole thing is space policy not for this thread.
.@Nasa says there's still no explanation for April breakup of Centaur upper stage. It's 3rd such breakup in less than a year. @ULA @usairforce.
I don’t follow all the ULA threads, is there already a discussion about Centaur upper stages breaking up?! https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/1158348917026639873Quote.@Nasa says there's still no explanation for April breakup of Centaur upper stage. It's 3rd such breakup in less than a year. @ULA @usairforce.
There is a cargo flight on behalf of ULA from Switzerland to Titusville between Aug. 26 and Sep. 26, I assume that would be payload fairings?
Quote from: Rondaz on 08/04/2019 01:10 amULA and its launch industry competitors in pitched fight over regulations..by Sandra Erwin — August 3, 2019https://spacenews.com/ula-and-its-commercial-competitors-in-pitched-fight-over-launch-regulations/Edited to remove off topic derail that belongs in another thread.
Every time a big event! The loading doors of one of the world's largest transport aircraft opened at the airfield in Emmen, Switzerland, and a #faring for an @ulalaunch rocket was loaded. Everything went well. Have a good trip! #ruagspace
