ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle (as announced/built) - General Discussion Thread 3

[xyv]

Huh.  I heard you barely break them in and then toss 'em aside.  "Ashtray's full, bring me a new car..."

[Robert_the_Doll]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1992946704115732756

The newest Vulcan MLP is out for a stroll today

[Robert_the_Doll]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1992948201419379035

Vulcan Launch Platform Roll: Live views from VIF-A to SLC-41 https://youtube.com/live/uHEKN3U3ryo?si=O-sw3iFqLzYA5nHc via @YouTube

[Coastal Ron]

New article:

ULA aimed to launch up to 10 Vulcan rockets this year—it will fly just once - Ars Technica

Relevant quote:

Around this time last year, officials at United Launch Alliance projected 2025 would be their busiest year ever. Tory Bruno, ULA’s chief executive, told reporters the company would launch as many as 20 missions this year, with roughly an even split between the legacy Atlas V launcher and its replacement—the Vulcan rocket.

Now, it’s likely that ULA will close out 2025 with six flights—five with the Atlas V and just one with the Vulcan rocket the company is so eager accelerate into service. Six flights would make 2025 the busiest launch year for ULA since 2022, but it falls well short of the company’s forecast.

ULA used to be a stalwart, the dependable launch provider. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

No doubt there are multiple reasons for their current lack of launch cadence, but regardless, they are not the valuable company they used to be.

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

[jstrotha0975]

They flew too close to the sun.

[DanClemmensen]

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

I do not see how NG 9x4 is relevant. It does not compete against Vulcan. A reliable full cadence NG 7x2 is a bigger threat. A fully-reusable NG 7x2 would be an even bigger threat. The average number of payloads per year that can be carried by NG 9x4 but that are too heavy for NG 7x2 is less than one.

The potential ULA-killer is Starship, assuming it ever meets its goal of full rapid reusability.

[ThatOldJanxSpirit]

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

I do not see how NG 9x4 is relevant. It does not compete against Vulcan. A reliable full cadence NG 7x2 is a bigger threat. A fully-reusable NG 7x2 would be an even bigger threat. The average number of payloads per year that can be carried by NG 9x4 but that are too heavy for NG 7x2 is less than one.

The potential ULA-killer is Starship, assuming it ever meets its goal of full rapid reusability.

We don’t yet know the performance of New Glenn as built. 9x4 may be required to meet the higher energy NSSL Lane 2 orbits.

[Coastal Ron]

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

I do not see how NG 9x4 is relevant. It does not compete against Vulcan.

I was thinking the same thing as what ThatOldJanxSpirit surmised, that New Glenn 9x4 could be needed/useful for some of the specific launch requirements that ULA has focused on providing.

A reliable full cadence NG 7x2 is a bigger threat. A fully-reusable NG 7x2 would be an even bigger threat.

I think that is part of the reason why ULA is not seeing any interested buyers. And while Blue Origin is an option to buy ULA, right now it may make more sense to see whether they would even need to buy ULA to compete for USG payloads that currently rely on ULA.

The potential ULA-killer is Starship, assuming it ever meets its goal of full rapid reusability.

Reusability, in any form, is a ULA killer, since Vulcan is fully expendable, and I personally don't think the reusability scheme ULA has been pushing for Vulcan makes any sense.

As a side note though, Starship has a number of modes that it will operate in, such as LEO only and interplanetary. But delivering satellites to MEO and GEO locations may still require some sort of space-only booster. ULA builds such a booster (i.e. Centaur V), and that could become a side business for them. Or maybe not if SpaceX and Blue Origin decide to build their own. Just thinking out loud...

[DanClemmensen]

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

I do not see how NG 9x4 is relevant. It does not compete against Vulcan. A reliable full cadence NG 7x2 is a bigger threat. A fully-reusable NG 7x2 would be an even bigger threat. The average number of payloads per year that can be carried by NG 9x4 but that are too heavy for NG 7x2 is less than one.

The potential ULA-killer is Starship, assuming it ever meets its goal of full rapid reusability.

We don’t yet know the performance of New Glenn as built. 9x4 may be required to meet the higher energy NSSL Lane 2 orbits.

If 7x2 cannot even support the higher NSSL reference missions, then I don't think NG is much of a threat to Vulcan.

[ThatOldJanxSpirit]

And it has been quite a while since we heard any rumors about anyone interested in buying ULA. Not that we in the public would know for sure, but no leaks in quite a while. And maybe for good reasons, since ULA really doesn't have much of an upside at this point, especially with Blue Origin announcing New Glenn 9x4 - who would want them?

I do not see how NG 9x4 is relevant. It does not compete against Vulcan. A reliable full cadence NG 7x2 is a bigger threat. A fully-reusable NG 7x2 would be an even bigger threat. The average number of payloads per year that can be carried by NG 9x4 but that are too heavy for NG 7x2 is less than one.

The potential ULA-killer is Starship, assuming it ever meets its goal of full rapid reusability.

We don’t yet know the performance of New Glenn as built. 9x4 may be required to meet the higher energy NSSL Lane 2 orbits.

If 7x2 cannot even support the higher NSSL reference missions, then I don't think NG is much of a threat to Vulcan.

7x2 will directly compete with Vulcan for lower energy missions. If Blue manages to outcompete Vulcan on cost and cadence with 7x2, and they should, then Vulcan will have a fight on its hands to secure future LEO constellation launches.

9x4 is more analogous to FH as an enabler to compete for NSSL and other high energy missions.

Having two competitors that can fully match Vulcan capabilities at higher cadence and lower cost is a bit of an issue for ULA. I don’t see SMART as any kind of answer here either for a very simple business reason. Every BE4 ULA can reuse is a BE4 sale lost to Blue. Yet to make engine reuse work ULA is going to need an engine MRO contract with Blue. Personally I wouldn’t be optimistic with a business plan that requires Jeff Bezos to play nice with a direct competitor.

[DanClemmensen]

7x2 will directly compete with Vulcan for lower energy missions. If Blue manages to outcompete Vulcan on cost and cadence with 7x2, and they should, then Vulcan will have a fight on its hands to secure future LEO constellation launches.

9x4 is more analogous to FH as an enabler to compete for NSSL and other high energy missions.

NSSL lane 2 requires the competitor to be able to perform ALL reference missions. ULA used to use Altas+Delta IV heavy. Vulcan was specifically designed to perform ALL reference missions itself, without needing a "heavy". They ended up needing a little tweak on the VC6, but they succeeded.

BO intended to meet ALL NSSL reference missions using NG, with the very strong implication that the very first NG (now called the 7x2) would do this. They should not need 9x4 for NSSL. IMO if they do, then things get awkward. They may need to qualify 9x4 (i.e., two certification flights) before they can compete for ANY lane 2 flights. The extent to which a smaller variant counts as a qualification launch for a larger variant is (apparently) a judgement call based on the actual design. To me, it's reasonable to use a VC2 mission as part of VC6 certification. To me (YMMV) it is unreasonable to use a 7x2 for 9x4 certification.

This strangeness is why SpaceX built the FH. The had no particular desire to actually fly FH mission, but they needed it to meet the NSSL requirements so they could fly all those NSSL F9 missions. FH required separate certification form F9. FH is not optimum. It ended up being the largest available commercial rocket, so it actually got used, but that's a side effect. If Starship did not exist, they could have continued to enhance FH, e.g., with booster cross-feed.

[sstli2]

BO intended to meet ALL NSSL reference missions using NG, with the very strong implication that the very first NG (now called the 7x2) would do this. They should not need 9x4 for NSSL. IMO if they do, then things get awkward.

Isn't NSSL onboarding 7x2 into Phase 2, and the subsequent flight of certification missions, an acknowledgment that they can meet all reference orbits?

For the most onerous part - 6 tons to GEO - I wonder if Blue Ring is part of the scope. I doubt a rocket that won't exist until late 2027 at the earliest (9x4) is part of it.

[DanClemmensen]

BO intended to meet ALL NSSL reference missions using NG, with the very strong implication that the very first NG (now called the 7x2) would do this. They should not need 9x4 for NSSL. IMO if they do, then things get awkward.

Isn't NSSL onboarding 7x2 into Phase 2, and the subsequent flight of certification missions, an acknowledgment that they can meet all reference orbits?

For the most onerous part - 6 tons to GEO - I wonder if Blue Ring is part of the scope. I doubt a rocket that won't exist until late 2027 at the earliest (9x4) is part of it.

It's an acknowledgement that BO asserted that 7x2 would meet all reference orbits. That's the problem: the surprise announcement of 9x4 calls this into question (for me).

We are perilously close to being off-topic, but this entire side quest is about whether or not NG will take NSSL business away from Vulcan.

[sstli2]

BO intended to meet ALL NSSL reference missions using NG, with the very strong implication that the very first NG (now called the 7x2) would do this. They should not need 9x4 for NSSL. IMO if they do, then things get awkward.

Isn't NSSL onboarding 7x2 into Phase 2, and the subsequent flight of certification missions, an acknowledgment that they can meet all reference orbits?

For the most onerous part - 6 tons to GEO - I wonder if Blue Ring is part of the scope. I doubt a rocket that won't exist until late 2027 at the earliest (9x4) is part of it.

It's an acknowledgement that BO asserted that 7x2 would meet all reference orbits. That's the problem: the surprise announcement of 9x4 calls this into question (for me).

We are perilously close to being off-topic, but this entire side quest is about whether or not NG will take NSSL business away from Vulcan.

The NSSL does not take provider claims at face value. There is a submission process, typically backed by data, and the NSSL must deem the submission a "credible plan". This process is the reason New Glenn did not qualify for Phase 2.

In my view, the 9x4 is not primarily a NSSL play. Rather, it's a SLS, Kuiper, and Golden Dome play.

This entire discussion must be tempered by the fact that Phase 3 order years runs pretty much through the end of the decade, and there is a five-year option that runs through 2034. I wouldn't be surprised if ULA lobbies for that option to be exercised.

But in the event it isn't, the question becomes whether Starship would be available for customer launches by then (likely) and whether a tug would exist that could handle high energy (also likely with Helios). 9x4 would also likely be operational by then (my view is late 2027 and 2028 at the worst).

So sure, it will be a problem for ULA, but the problem is still down the road. Regardless, I think it's early to write them off completely. They aren't going to stand still. What does a Vulcan with sub-cooling an an uprated BE-4 look like? Could it do 10 tons direct-to-GEO (a capability NSSL might want)?

[DanClemmensen]

The NSSL does not take provider claims at face value. There is a submission process, typically backed by data, and the NSSL must deem the submission a "credible plan". This process is the reason New Glenn did not qualify for Phase 2.

Did that "credible plan" mention 9x4?

In my view, the 9x4 is not primarily a NSSL play. Rather, it's a SLS, Kuiper, and Golden Dome play.

Will Golden Dome use NSSL for launches?

... the question becomes whether Starship would be available for customer launches by then (likely) and whether a tug would exist that could handle high energy (also likely with Helios).

Starship uses refill, not tugs. by then, refill will be well-proven, assuming Starship works at all.

[sstli2]

Did that "credible plan" mention 9x4?

We don't know, it's privileged. Given the inconsistencies you already alluded to with regard to needing to certify a new block vehicle, I'm inclined to think it's not a requirement. The plan may involve Blue Ring instead. It may involve a GS3. Or it may involve the shorter-term up-rating of BE-4/BE-3U to extract the requisite performance.

Will Golden Dome use NSSL for launches?

Many of the Phase 3 missions are already spoken for. The timing of Golden Dome may be sooner than the later order years of Phase 3 or a hypothetical Phase 4. As a result, this may be a one-off appropriations and bidding process.

Starship uses refill, not tugs. by then, refill will be well-proven, assuming Starship works at all.

While we know the con ops for a lunar or Mars mission, we do not know what SpaceX will propose for GTO and GEO. It remains possible that an architecture involving RPOD and refueling is not optimal for these. Seeing as Artemis is slipping, it is also questionable whether it will be "well-proven" by then, and likewise whether "well-proven" also means efficient/optimal. Personally, I don't think it's the architecture SpaceX would submit to satisfy those orbits.

[catdlr]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1994485057537675686

Tory Bruno
@torybruno
It’s a big VIF (-A) when you can park 2 mobile launch platforms inside and still have room for couple of basketball courts…

[catdlr]

ULA Rocket Factory Tour

Dec 1, 2025
Vulcan's journey to space begins in Decatur, Alabama at ULA’s 2.2M square foot rocket factory. Long before the path to orbit, the missions start on the factory floor.

[sstli2]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1987997672369012836

How many Vulcans do you have in production? I see at least two.

Around 30, starting at the front door (machining skins). This is final assembly near the back door. There’s another line to the left, off camera, and a couple behind the photographer

My 2 cents - Tory is clearly stretching the truth of what it means to have a Vulcan "in production". But still worth noting.

[sstli2]

Speaking of Tory Bruno tweets, here are a couple more that those here may have missed, that I thought were interesting:

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1996273889354375503

Booster recovery is the correct solution for LEO ops optimized architectures that stage in the 60 to 70km regime. Free return component recovery makes more sense for HE orbit rockets that stage closer to 170Km

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1995559772876407150

Yes, Rocketship will be carrying another Vulcan shortly, but we already have several there. Rolling to the pad with the new VLP was successful and ticked off a number of tests, but the VIF and VLP have a bit more to do to become certified. Very close now.