Could Boeing quit the United Launch Alliance in the future?

[edkyle99]

And no, Delta II went to ULA and no longer was Boeing.

It was for awhile.  Boeing/McDonnell Douglas merged August 1, 1997.  United Launch Alliance was formed December 1, 2006. 

 - Ed Kyle

[Vahe231991]

And no, Delta II went to ULA and no longer was Boeing.

It was for awhile.  Boeing/McDonnell Douglas merged August 1, 1997.  United Launch Alliance was formed December 1, 2006. 

 - Ed Kyle

Considering that there has been criticism by some over the Boeing's decision in 1997 to acquire McDonnell Douglas in light of the delays in the Starliner program, it's possible that if the Conestoga program had been continued rather than canceled given that the Conestoga itself was a privately funded SLV, and McDonnell Douglas had sold its space division to Orbital Sciences, then the ULA might not have existed.

[sdsds]

ICPS is not a Delta stage.  It has a different size hydrogen tank than used on Delta IV.

Splitting hairs. ICPS is certainly a Delta-derived stage, right? Did the ICPS flight software require any substantial re-qualification effort?

As for Boeing, do they already have or won't they likely get the contract for the follow-on SLS upper stage? Or could ULA offer a stage based on Vulcan core tooling for that?

[mkent]

What are (if any) areas LM/Boeing aren't allowed to do on their own by the ULA agreement?
Say, if either of them wanted to build a reusable vehicle (like the ones LM showed renders of), would that be allowed?

EELV-class* expendable launch vehicles and services are reserved for ULA.  Neither Boeing nor Lockheed Martin may participate in those markets.

Likewise, small (such as Lockheed Martin's Athena I & Athena II) and super-heavy (such as Boeing's SLS) expendable launch vehicles and services as well as reusable launch vehicles and services are reserved for the parent companies.  ULA may not participate in those markets.

Which is why trying to turn ULA into another SpaceX is a dead letter.  They cannot build payloads or re-usable launch vehicles.  SMART re-use and the ACES upper stage are about as far as they can go, and even that's pushing it (hence the pushback from their board of directors).

So, short answer, is yes, either Lockheed Martin or Boeing could build an RLV if they so chose.  It's ULA who couldn't.

*medium, intermediate, and large-class launch vehicles

[mkent]

In what ways has Boeing lost big financially on the Delta IV?

In then-year dollars (and those dollars are 25 years old at this point), Boeing spent about $1 billion of its own money developing the RS-68 engine; $500 million on the Common Booster Core (CBC), the Decatur factory, the Delta Mariner barge, and integration of the Delta IV vehicle; $250 million on LC-37 at the then CCAFS; and $250 million upgrading SLC-6 at the then VAFB.  It also spent about $500 million on the Delta IV Heavy, but Boeing got reimbursed for that by the Air Force since there was no commercial market for that vehicle.

Considering the time value of money, Boeing has never pulled anywhere near enough money out of ULA to make that up.

People here sometimes seem to forget that Boeing is the largest commercial aerospace company in the world.  If they were making money on launch vehicles, they'd still be doing it.

As for Boeing, do they already have or won't they likely get the contract for the follow-on SLS upper stage?

They already have the contract for the follow-on SLS upper stage.  It's called the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) and will fly beginning with Artemis IV.  They are past CDR and are working on final drawing release this year.

[Jim]

And no, Delta II went to ULA and no longer was Boeing.

It was for awhile.  Boeing/McDonnell Douglas merged August 1, 1997.  United Launch Alliance was formed December 1, 2006. 

 - Ed Kyle

Considering that there has been criticism by some over the Boeing's decision in 1997 to acquire McDonnell Douglas in light of the delays in the Starliner program, it's possible that if the Conestoga program had been continued rather than canceled given that the Conestoga itself was a privately funded SLV, and McDonnell Douglas had sold its space division to Orbital Sciences, then the ULA might not have existed.

No, it is not possible.   There is no reason for McD to sell Delta.

[Jim]

And no, Delta II went to ULA and no longer was Boeing.

It was for awhile.  Boeing/McDonnell Douglas merged August 1, 1997.  United Launch Alliance was formed December 1, 2006. 

 - Ed Kyle

Considering that there has been criticism by some over the Boeing's decision in 1997 to acquire McDonnell Douglas in light of the delays in the Starliner program, it's possible that if the Conestoga program had been continued rather than canceled given that the Conestoga itself was a privately funded SLV, and McDonnell Douglas had sold its space division to Orbital Sciences, then the ULA might not have existed.

No, all  McDonnell Douglas was bought buy Boeing.  OSC did not get any part.

And Conestoga would not have any bearing on this matter

[Vahe231991]

Found this news item of relevance to this topic:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/03/sources-say-prominent-us-rocket-maker-united-launch-alliance-is-up-for-sale/

As I already stressed on this thread when I first created it, the emergence of SpaceX as a major player in the civil and military satellite launch business challenged the ULA's monopoly on launching national security missions and NASA science probes, and I pondered the question of whether the ULA venture could disband given that the Delta II and single-stick Delta IV were retired in the 2010s and two more Delta IV Heavy launches are left, not to mention that the Delta II was designed by McDonnell Douglas and Boeing took over development of the Delta II after acquiring McDD. If the ULA is sold to another company, Boeing and Lockheed Martin would have to sell the legal manufacturing rights for the Vulcan SLV, Centaur stage, and ICPS to whichever company acquires ULA.

[Jim]

If the ULA is sold to another company, Boeing and Lockheed Martin would have to sell the legal manufacturing rights for the Vulcan SLV, Centaur stage, and ICPS to whichever company acquires ULA.

Huh?

The manufacturing rights and IP are what would be sold.   There is nothing else to the company.  There aren't any other assets except for the factory real estate.

I pondered the question of whether the ULA venture could disband

No, it couldn't because there was no Delta or Atlas /or Boeing or MDC divisions within ULA.    It was one company with one set of employees putting out two products.  (There is no difference between single stick Delta IVs and Heavy from manufacturing or operations).   ULA profits were split by Boeing and LM.  That and the management board were the only things that were specifically Boeing and LM.   If ULA were to "disband", it means Atlas and Vulcan are gone.  If ULA were to be sold and Atlas and Vulcan were continued, it is only a name change for the employees, like what happened when ULA was formed.

not to mention that the Delta II was designed by McDonnell Douglas and Boeing took over development of the Delta II after acquiring McDD.

Boeing did not "take over" development of the Delta II after acquiring McD.  After Boeing bought MCD and the only thing that change with Delta is that the MDC Delta employees were now Boeing Delta employees. 

[woods170]

If the ULA is sold to another company, Boeing and Lockheed Martin would have to sell the legal manufacturing rights for the Vulcan SLV, Centaur stage, and ICPS to whichever company acquires ULA.

If Boeing and LockMart have no intention to sell the production rights, then they wouldn't be putting ULA up for sale. And then there is the fact that Boeing and LockMart own only part of the production rights.

For example: LockMart does not exclusively own the manufacturing rights for Atlas V:

https://spacenews.com/air-force-confirms-ula-position-on-atlas-5-production-rights/

...the Defense Department said it did not own the design or production rights for the rocket, nor did it own the intellectual property rights, according to a June 19 statement from Capt. Annmarie Annicelli, an Air Force spokeswoman.

Lockheed Martin and ULA say they own different elements of the Atlas 5 design. According to Annicelli, ULA also owns the Atlas 5 production facility in Decatur, Alabama, and the launch pads and towers at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida and at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

A similar arrangement exists for Delta IV.
Vulcan is an all-ULA development. Same for Centaur V. Both the production rights and IP rest solely with ULA for those.

Whoever buys ULA from Boeing and LockMart gets whatever production rights, still lying with Boeing or LockMart, as an integrate part of the deal. Similar to how Northrop Grumman acquired the production rights for shuttle-derived SRBs when they bought Orbital-ATK.

[Vahe231991]

If the ULA is sold to another company, Boeing and Lockheed Martin would have to sell the legal manufacturing rights for the Vulcan SLV, Centaur stage, and ICPS to whichever company acquires ULA.

If Boeing and LockMart have no intention to sell the production rights, then they wouldn't be putting ULA up for sale. And then there is the fact that Boeing and LockMart own only part of the production rights.

For example: LockMart does not exclusively own the manufacturing rights for Atlas V:

https://spacenews.com/air-force-confirms-ula-position-on-atlas-5-production-rights/

...the Defense Department said it did not own the design or production rights for the rocket, nor did it own the intellectual property rights, according to a June 19 statement from Capt. Annmarie Annicelli, an Air Force spokeswoman.

Lockheed Martin and ULA say they own different elements of the Atlas 5 design. According to Annicelli, ULA also owns the Atlas 5 production facility in Decatur, Alabama, and the launch pads and towers at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida and at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

A similar arrangement exists for Delta IV.
Vulcan is an all-ULA development. Same for Centaur V. Both the production rights and IP rest solely with ULA for those.

Whoever buys ULA from Boeing and LockMart gets whatever production rights, still lying with Boeing or LockMart, as an integrate part of the deal. Similar to how Northrop Grumman acquired the production rights for shuttle-derived SRBs when they bought Orbital-ATK.

Didn't know that Lockheed Martin and ULA own different elements of Atlas V production. Which of the design and production rights for the Delta IV Heavy are owned by ULA, and which ones are owned by Boeing?

[Jim]

Didn't know that Lockheed Martin and ULA own different elements of Atlas V production. Which of the design and production rights for the Delta IV Heavy are owned by ULA, and which ones are owned by Boeing?

ULA has all the production rights for Delta, Atlas and Vulcan and would be sold with ULA.  There is no need to deal with or figure what LM and Boeing have or have not.

[Vahe231991]

Didn't know that Lockheed Martin and ULA own different elements of Atlas V production. Which of the design and production rights for the Delta IV Heavy are owned by ULA, and which ones are owned by Boeing?

ULA has all the production rights for Delta, Atlas and Vulcan and would be sold with ULA.  There is no need to deal with or figure what LM and Boeing have or have not.

Thanks for clarifying. I was asking that question because it's mentioned in post#29 that Lockheed Martin don't own any production rights for the Atlas V, and Boeing stopped owning production rights for the Delta II and Delta IV after the ULA venture was formed in December 2006.