[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
You'd probably ask me for proof If I told you that hitting youself on the head with a hammer
... I also don't think he's ever met any executive at ULA or PWR, so the inaccuracies of cynical stereotypes are stated once again...
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.
The government doesn't require head-to-head competition of product that can easily replace each other in a plug-n-play fashion.
In order for competition to work, there needs to be enough business to support multiple competitors.
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.That was already covered earlier in this thread. They are not charging whatever they think they can get away with, they are charging the amount needed to keep their business running. We've gone from over 60 engines per year to under a dozen in only a few years, with the promise of new engine contracts now under threat.
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.That was already covered earlier in this thread. They are not charging whatever they think they can get away with, they are charging the amount needed to keep their business running. We've gone from over 60 engines per year to under a dozen in only a few years, with the promise of new engine contracts now under threat.
What if you had a competitor who could replace your engines with minimal effort and time, and if you didn't lower your prices you'd cease to exist as a company? Do you think your executives might make some different choices?
I don't say this to be cruel, but it's a reality that most businesses have to face daily.
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.That was already covered earlier in this thread. They are not charging whatever they think they can get away with, they are charging the amount needed to keep their business running. We've gone from over 60 engines per year to under a dozen in only a few years, with the promise of new engine contracts now under threat.
What if you had a competitor who could replace your engines with minimal effort and time, and if you didn't lower your prices you'd cease to exist as a company? Do you think your executives might make some different choices?
I don't say this to be cruel, but it's a reality that most businesses have to face daily.It depends, could the company continue to be viable if you fought the competing company in this manner? I know of more than one fresh faced company which tried to undercut the established business, and went out of business three years later because they found out *why* the established business operated how it did. If a new company showed up, with an ideal RL-10 engine, at 1/3rd the cost, does not mean they will take away the business. Shoot, they may still take away the business, and go under anyways because they were too agressive in pricing, undercutting themselves to the point that they went out of business.
---snip---
What if you had a competitor who could replace your engines with minimal effort and time, and if you didn't lower your prices you'd cease to exist as a company? Do you think your executives might make some different choices?
I don't say this to be cruel, but it's a reality that most businesses have to face daily.
[Coming from a man who just asked "whats wrong with monopolies".
And the fact you keep posting this shows that you don't know what you talking about. There are monopolies everywhere, electrical power, water, air traffic control, etc
With those 'Natural Monopolies" traditionally comes regulatory oversight. You electric company does not get to charge you whatever they think they can get away with, like PWR appears to be doing now with the RL10.That was already covered earlier in this thread. They are not charging whatever they think they can get away with, they are charging the amount needed to keep their business running. We've gone from over 60 engines per year to under a dozen in only a few years, with the promise of new engine contracts now under threat.
What if you had a competitor who could replace your engines with minimal effort and time, and if you didn't lower your prices you'd cease to exist as a company? Do you think your executives might make some different choices?
I don't say this to be cruel, but it's a reality that most businesses have to face daily.It depends, could the company continue to be viable if you fought the competing company in this manner? I know of more than one fresh faced company which tried to undercut the established business, and went out of business three years later because they found out *why* the established business operated how it did. If a new company showed up, with an ideal RL-10 engine, at 1/3rd the cost, does not mean they will take away the business. Shoot, they may still take away the business, and go under anyways because they were too agressive in pricing, undercutting themselves to the point that they went out of business.
Not sure what your point is ... yes, a new company with low prices might go under, and it might disrupt the market before doing so. That's what competition is. If you are good at what you do and can compete, you'll usually survive. If not, you go under. PWR shouldn't be sheltered from these market forces. It just hurts everyone in the long run; the tax payers, the employees at PWR who could do much more with their expertise in a different environment, prospective competitors who find roadblocks in the form of uncompetitive companies being propped up by the government, purchasers of launch vehicles.
Also, I think the government has helped create an anti-competitive atmosphere, or at lease failed to encourage a migration from 'natural monopoly' to free market. The science of rocket engine design and manufacture has matured and become well enough understood that new start-up companies are succeeding - and not just a single company, several. That tells me it's time encourage competition, not block it by propping up companies who are unable to evolve.
You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody.
You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody.
ULA would indeed lose their US.
But I thought spacex and orbital do not rely on PWR for their US-engines. (although i am not sure about the ORION-50)
---snip---
You've made a lot of presumptions, that without PWR the market would be better. I look at the market and see that right now, PWR is the gold standard of the market. Loose them, investment will vanish immediately, all US launch capacity would be gone overnight. You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody.
PWR is not being sheltered, if it were her prices would be a lot higher. They are being realistic with the demand of the market. There's a reduced demand, their prices go up. 60 engines per year to 12, that is the normal cause of any price rising. Add to that the cost of commodities needed to produce has gone through the roof in the past 24 months, I can easily see a tripling of prices.
---snip---
PWR does not make just engines, don't forget. They make solar panels, power generators, RTG, and Molten Salt Reactor technology. They make components which are used by all US and several international firms.
You've made a lot of presumptions, that without PWR the market would be better.
I look at the market and see that right now, PWR is the gold standard of the market.
Loose them, investment will vanish immediately, all US launch capacity would be gone overnight. You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody.
PWR is not being sheltered, if it were her prices would be a lot higher. They are being realistic with the demand of the market. There's a reduced demand, their prices go up. 60 engines per year to 12, that is the normal cause of any price rising. Add to that the cost of commodities needed to produce has gone through the roof in the past 24 months, I can easily see a tripling of prices.
---snip---
You've made a lot of presumptions, that without PWR the market would be better. I look at the market and see that right now, PWR is the gold standard of the market. Loose them, investment will vanish immediately, all US launch capacity would be gone overnight. You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody.
PWR is not being sheltered, if it were her prices would be a lot higher. They are being realistic with the demand of the market. There's a reduced demand, their prices go up. 60 engines per year to 12, that is the normal cause of any price rising. Add to that the cost of commodities needed to produce has gone through the roof in the past 24 months, I can easily see a tripling of prices.
I don't understand the assertion "Loose them, investment will vanish immediately, all US launch capacity would be gone overnight. You'd have no SpaceX, no Orbital, no ULA, nobody."
Granted, US EELV's today depend on PWR RL-10 and losing them would be a major hurt--assuming NSS would let that happen, which IMHO will not happen until there are alternatives. (ULA was a shotgun marriage, and IIRC NSS subsidizes ULA facilities to the tune of ~$1B/yr? If PWR RL-10 is critical path, I'd expect they'll pony up the $ to keep production going.)
However, neither SpaceX or OSC's LV's depend on PWR RL-10. Why would PWR's RL-10 production collapse cause investment in them to disappear? If anything, I'd think it would be the opposite?
---snip---
PWR does not make just engines, don't forget. They make solar panels, power generators, RTG, and Molten Salt Reactor technology. They make components which are used by all US and several international firms.
Assuming those other LOB's are viable, no reason they could not or would not be spun out or sold off. IMHO Whether those other LOB's are viable as an independent entity or single-source critical path for US/NSS efforts (unlike the RL-10) is a very different (OT?) discussion.
edit: Clarify "PWR" vs. "PWR RL-10" vs. "PWR other".
See above. You loose the RL-10, the support costs then get applied elsewhere.
We need to better utilize our existing assets. Our under utilization of PWR and Aerojet have driven our costs up. This is a simple reflection of that. You don't like that, then work with me to get the production volume up to bring the prices in-line.