The reaction from ULA and its parent companies should be to try to develop a new system that would be cost effective in comparison with SpaceX, but I don't think that such a move would be possible in their universe. Dissolution would be preferable to cost reductions.
That article passes over that the USAF got permission to do the block buy of 36 cores from ULA.
Only in your universe and not the reality that exists today.
Quote from: Jim on 12/05/2012 06:46 pmOnly in your universe and not the reality that exists today.The reality today is that what what was a guaranteed source of income for ULA yesterday is now much less certain today. This time around, USAF authorized 36 ULA cores, and 14 non-ULA. Next time it will likely be closer to 14 ULA-only and the rest openly competed.USAF launches are the only thing ULA has going for it right now, and if they loose any more of that market in the future, I doubt the shareholders (Boeing and LM) would be willing to put any more money into the company.
Quote from: simonbp on 12/06/2012 12:32 amQuote from: Jim on 12/05/2012 06:46 pmOnly in your universe and not the reality that exists today.The reality today is that what what was a guaranteed source of income for ULA yesterday is now much less certain today. This time around, USAF authorized 36 ULA cores, and 14 non-ULA. Next time it will likely be closer to 14 ULA-only and the rest openly competed.USAF launches are the only thing ULA has going for it right now, and if they loose any more of that market in the future, I doubt the shareholders (Boeing and LM) would be willing to put any more money into the company.There are NASA missionsThey haven't lost any of the market.They haven't been putting money into the money for many years now.
The service may also buy as many as 36 cores from the Lockheed-Boeing venture over the same period, with an option to purchase the additional 14 from it, if competitors aren’t ready, Kendall wrote.
This is a fairly important development.There is now a proven path for a launch vehicle company to get into the market. The question is whether there will be new players coming on board in the future. I suspect that it would take some sort of innovative approach to create that opening, ie a more reusable system.
See also this article for some of the highlights:http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/gao-releases-report-on-usaf039s-certification-of-new-launch-providers.html
Quote from: yg1968 on 02/08/2013 02:53 pmSee also this article for some of the highlights:http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/gao-releases-report-on-usaf039s-certification-of-new-launch-providers.htmlTypical nonsense from him along with unsubstantiated assertions.
Quote from: Jim on 02/08/2013 03:00 pmQuote from: yg1968 on 02/08/2013 02:53 pmSee also this article for some of the highlights:http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/gao-releases-report-on-usaf039s-certification-of-new-launch-providers.htmlTypical nonsense from him along with unsubstantiated assertions.Not sure where you read that in to it. It all looked pretty good. He made a lot of good points. Can you point out things you had specific issue with or that are wrong?