ULA's backup plan might be to buy several New Glenn first stages and fly their ACES stage on top.
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.
They are building on a strong foundation and will cede nothing.
Quote from: Lars-J on 02/21/2017 11:17 pmQuote 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.Why do you think they are gambling on the competition failing?
Quote from: Lars-J on 02/21/2017 11:17 pmThey 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.Why do you think they are gambling on the competition failing?
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.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 08:17 pmWhy do you think they are gambling on the competition failing? Why? Because they are not investing in any kind of reuse. (powerpoints don't count) ACES is also years away. Now they are streamlining and slimming down - true - but without significant investment in new technology, they are betting that what they have is sufficient. That doesn't mean they are doomed to fail. Their gamble may actually pay off. But it is still a gamble.
Why do you think they are gambling on the competition failing?
Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 02/22/2017 06:17 amULA's backup plan might be to buy several New Glenn first stages and fly their ACES stage on top.Blue and ULA are already partnering on BE4 why not for distributed launch. Use New Glenn for fuel tanker with Vulcan carrying payload. Allows launches to be days apart.
Bruno is making as many changes as he can considering his funding is controlled by two public companies (Boeing and LM).
Let's also be fair, ULA's main competitor is controlled by someone; who moves goal posts so rapidly that even his own employees have a hard time keeping up, constantly puts out goal deadlines that can only be called impossible and are frequently missed, and wasn't founded to maximize profit.
So any company compared to ULA's main competitor is going to be considered conservative.
ULA's is moving forward prudently and deliberately.
So if this is the criteria you use for "ULA gambling on their competition failing" then yes ULA is gambling on their competition failing. However let's be fair, it is a long shot that their competitor will have a full re-usable SHLV flying before 2025.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmBruno is making as many changes as he can considering his funding is controlled by two public companies (Boeing and LM).Boeing and Lockheed Martin own ULA, and they are running the way they want, not the way Bruno wants. Let's not forget that. And they can change that anytime they want, but so far they haven't wanted to. ULA is not a victim here.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmLet's also be fair, ULA's main competitor is controlled by someone; who moves goal posts so rapidly that even his own employees have a hard time keeping up, constantly puts out goal deadlines that can only be called impossible and are frequently missed, and wasn't founded to maximize profit.I'm assuming you mean SpaceX and Elon Musk. It would be wrong to think that Musk is moving goal posts without his employees knowing anything about what he's saying, since while it's true that they miss schedule dates, they have met the capabilities that Musk advertises. And you can't do that without validating what you're promising BEFORE you promise it.
As to profits, SpaceX has been profitable (for the most part) for years, and Musk has not been supporting SpaceX with funding the way Bezos has. SpaceX is in the business of making a profit, as that is the only way they can afford to pursue their Mars goals.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmSo any company compared to ULA's main competitor is going to be considered conservative.I don't want to start a debate about "NewSpace" vs "OldSpace", but my definition of "NewSpace" has been that they are willing to risk their own money to create new products and services, while "OldSpace" is not.As to ULA, I'm not sure we're seeing a willingness by ULA's parents to truly pursue technologies and business models that will compete with SpaceX and other significant competitors so that they can be in the top rung of competitors when Vulcan becomes operational.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmULA's is moving forward prudently and deliberately.To me that sounds like you're trying to justify why they don't seem to be responding to the competitive threat reusability means to them, since it's not just SpaceX but Blue Origin also that are committed to reusability.
Quote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmSo if this is the criteria you use for "ULA gambling on their competition failing" then yes ULA is gambling on their competition failing. However let's be fair, it is a long shot that their competitor will have a full re-usable SHLV flying before 2025. There is no business case for SHLV's at this point, so I would not blame ULA for not pursuing that market. But then again both Musk and Bezos are positioning themselves for the markets that come AFTER where we are today. And maybe those markets won't appear, but if they do then ULA won't be positioned to take advantage of them. Food for thought.But ULA is working on some good technologies, like ACES and IVF, that could be very useful for expanding humanity out into space. However I'm not sure if they are positioned to survive that long as a launch provider and still have the money to pursue that next market using ACES and IVF. And that would not be good, because I want them to continue to be a competitor - competition is good, because it keeps everyone on their toes.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 02/23/2017 02:14 amQuote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmULA's is moving forward prudently and deliberately.To me that sounds like you're trying to justify why they don't seem to be responding to the competitive threat reusability means to them, since it's not just SpaceX but Blue Origin also that are committed to reusability.ULA is responding the competitive threat that reusability means to them. They are responding with smart engine re-use.
Except they aren't. "Smart engine re-use" does not appear to be part of the initial Vulcan design. (Unless I am mistaken)
ULA must have an idea how SMART is going to work.
A write-up of the workshop by Paul D. Spudis:http://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/cislunar-space-next-30-years-180962249/
Quote from: Brovane on 02/23/2017 04:03 amQuote from: Coastal Ron on 02/23/2017 02:14 amQuote from: Brovane on 02/22/2017 09:28 pmULA's is moving forward prudently and deliberately.To me that sounds like you're trying to justify why they don't seem to be responding to the competitive threat reusability means to them, since it's not just SpaceX but Blue Origin also that are committed to reusability.ULA is responding the competitive threat that reusability means to them. They are responding with smart engine re-use.Except they aren't. "Smart engine re-use" does not appear to be part of the initial Vulcan design. (Unless I am mistaken)
Tory Bruno @torybruno 18m18 minutes agoSome cool concept art from one of our #CisLunar1000 Marketplace partners
Robert Bigelow @RobertTBigelow 13m13 minutes agoWhat if the B330 was launched to LEO, then redeployed by two @ulalaunch ACES busses to a low lunar orbit to serve as a lunar depot?
What if the @SpaceX V2 and/or the @LockheedMartin Orion were engaged as the transportation vehicles to and from the lunar depot?
If initiated soon, a lunar depot could be in operation by the end of 2020.