-
#460 by edkyle99 on 02 Dec, 2006 14:05
-
ULA only holds the government EELV contracts. Boeing and Lockheed Martin will still be able to market their launch vehicles for commercial payloads outside of ULA.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-01-2006/0004483584&EDATE=
- Ed Kyle -
#461 by edkyle99 on 02 Dec, 2006 14:09
-
According to the story at:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/061202/merger.shtml
"The Lockheed Martin operations that are being moved to Decatur employ about 100."
Versus 637 Boeing jobs at Decatur for Delta IV now.
"Michael Gass, formerly of Lockheed and now chief executive officer of ULA, said that number is lower than Delta's because Lockheed outsources many steps in its rocket production that Decatur performs in-house. Gass said ULA would evaluate the outsourcing, but that he did not know whether that evaluation would increase Decatur employment."
Are there really only 100 Lockheed Martin production people working on Atlas today? Who are the primary "outsource" contractors (besides Energomash)?
- Ed Kyle -
#462 by R&R on 02 Dec, 2006 14:33
-
Quote
bombay - 2/12/2006 10:12 PM
QuoteR&R - 1/12/2006 10:37 PM
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/061201/lockheed_boeing_rockets_merger.html?.v=6
Where did you read that? It's not accurate.
They are only ULA's Atlas and Delta now.
ULA must use the parents LM and Boeing to market and sell launches for the first years (I think it was less than five) but after that they are free to do the marketing and sales directly. If they choose to do that LM & Boeing will stop and just sit back to collect their share of profits.
You'll find the quote near the bottom of the article.
Thanks for the link. I see where you were getting your take.
My take is that ULA has exclusivity to the Air Force/DOD/NRO launches and that ULA will not compete with LM/Boeing because Buy 3 basically guarantees a set number of launches to each Family. So basically with regard to the military launches Atlas and Delta rockets will not compete with each other. They will get the number promised by Buy 3 based more on what capacity is needed and schedule not what the cost is.
Since ULA is not allowed to do the commercial marketing Atlas and Delta do compete by way of the individual parent sales divisions. But Delta IV is not marketed commercially now and I can't see how that is likely to change since Boeing has Sea Launch going so well.
I still think that down the line when ULA can do the marketing commercially that LM and Boeing would still stop because it makes no sense to keep those people on the payroll to sell the same thing as ULA. Boeing would still keep people to sell Sea Launch. -
#463 by Jim on 02 Dec, 2006 14:45
-
Quote
edkyle99 - 2/12/2006 9:52 AM
According to the story at:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/061202/merger.shtml
"The Lockheed Martin operations that are being moved to Decatur employ about 100."
Versus 637 Boeing jobs at Decatur for Delta IV now.
"Michael Gass, formerly of Lockheed and now chief executive officer of ULA, said that number is lower than Delta's because Lockheed outsources many steps in its rocket production that Decatur performs in-house. Gass said ULA would evaluate the outsourcing, but that he did not know whether that evaluation would increase Decatur employment."
Are there really only 100 Lockheed Martin production people working on Atlas today? Who are the primary "outsource" contractors (besides Energomash)?
- Ed Kyle
The CBC domes and skin panels are outsourced
Denver only does final assembly which includes major welds.
Harlingen work is 4m fairings and thrust structure. I think this will move too
Edit:
Look at page A-22 and on in the PPG -
#464 by bombay on 02 Dec, 2006 16:04
-
Quote
Jim - 2/12/2006 9:28 AM
Atlas is a two part equation, Atlas booster and Centaur upperstage.Quoteedkyle99 - 2/12/2006 9:52 AM
According to the story at:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/061202/merger.shtml
"The Lockheed Martin operations that are being moved to Decatur employ about 100."
Versus 637 Boeing jobs at Decatur for Delta IV now.
"Michael Gass, formerly of Lockheed and now chief executive officer of ULA, said that number is lower than Delta's because Lockheed outsources many steps in its rocket production that Decatur performs in-house. Gass said ULA would evaluate the outsourcing, but that he did not know whether that evaluation would increase Decatur employment."
Are there really only 100 Lockheed Martin production people working on Atlas today? Who are the primary "outsource" contractors (besides Energomash)?
- Ed Kyle
The CBC domes and skin panels are outsourced
Denver only does final assembly which includes major welds.
Harlingen work is 4m fairings and thrust structure. I think this will move too
Edit:
Look at page A-22 and on in the PPG
The Centaur is built completely in-house. The domes and skins are not outsourced.
San Diego does all detail assembly and final assembly of the primary structure in addition to the propellant ducting. I would suspect there's a couple hundred in San Diego building and supporting Centaur.
If the plan is to move San Diego to Decatur along with Denver, the number of employees in Decatur would have to increase. (That is of course if they get anybody from San Diego to go). -
#465 by edkyle99 on 02 Dec, 2006 19:25
-
Quote
Jim - 2/12/2006 9:28 AM
Quoteedkyle99 - 2/12/2006 9:52 AM
According to the story at:
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/061202/merger.shtml
"The Lockheed Martin operations that are being moved to Decatur employ about 100."
Versus 637 Boeing jobs at Decatur for Delta IV now.
"Michael Gass, formerly of Lockheed and now chief executive officer of ULA, said that number is lower than Delta's because Lockheed outsources many steps in its rocket production that Decatur performs in-house. Gass said ULA would evaluate the outsourcing, but that he did not know whether that evaluation would increase Decatur employment."
Are there really only 100 Lockheed Martin production people working on Atlas today? Who are the primary "outsource" contractors (besides Energomash)?
- Ed Kyle
The CBC domes and skin panels are outsourced
Denver only does final assembly which includes major welds.
Harlingen work is 4m fairings and thrust structure. I think this will move too
Edit:
Look at page A-22 and on in the PPG
Will San Diego Centaur tank work move too? I would be surprised if Denver + Harlingen + San Diego only totaled 100 workers.
- Ed Kyle -
#466 by Dexter on 03 Dec, 2006 06:07
-
637 + 100 is well short of 3,000. I am sure the Governor of Alabama will be disappointed.
http://www.siteselection.com/sshighlites/0498/9804p190.htm
"Boeing: Decatur, Ala., $450 million, 3,000 jobs
Boeing’s $400 million, 3,000-employee, 2-million-sq.-ft. (180,000-sq.-m.) rocket plant is big in ways transcending the obvious. Alabama’s largest project ever, the deal is also big in incentives and very big in risk.
Despite the industry’s rapid growth, new aerospace facility launches remain precarious ventures. Start-up costs are sky-high, with a minuscule customer base and cut-throat competition.
More risk was added with the Decatur plant, which appeared to hinge on Boeing’s landing a coveted $1.6 billion contract for the next-generation U.S. space launch vehicle.
Alabama offered Boeing $80 million in incentives for a project that may create 3,000 more jobs. Alabama development officials drew critical fire a few years earlier for the $253 million Mercedes-Benz incentive package. Neal Wade, Alabama Economic Development Partnership director insisted, "we won’t extend anything we can’t get back if it’s not built."
In April 1998, the Air Force split the $1.6 billion contract between Boeing and Lockheed Martin. But Boeing’s Decatur plant is proceeding due to skyrocketing commercial launch demand, including projects for Motorola, Hughes and Loral, says spokesman Walt Rice. Now, though, the Decatur facility is being built to be flexible enough to grow or contract as decisions are made."
I wonder how the $80 million in incentives gets reduced by falling short of the 3,000 employment mark? -
#467 by Jim on 04 Dec, 2006 01:21
-
No Harlingen move.
Per ULA website:
"ULA is headquartered in Denver, Colo., with most engineering and administrative activities consolidated at existing Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company facilities. Major assembly and integration operations will be located at the former Boeing manufacturing and assembly facility in Decatur, Ala. Atlas V mechanical structures, payload fairing and adapter fabrication and assembly are performed in Harlingen, Tex."
"ULA program management, engineering, test and mission support functions are headquartered in Denver, Colo. Manufacturing, assembly and integration operations are located at Decatur, Ala. and Harlingen, Tex. Launch operations are located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., and at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif." -
#468 by Propforce on 04 Dec, 2006 23:18
-
Partial quote from today's Aerospace DailyQuote
News
ULA begins operations, embarks on consolidation plan
Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
12/04/2006, page 09
Jefferson Morris
United Launch Alliance (ULA) formally opened for business Dec. 1, embarking on a two-year plan to consolidate Atlas and Delta rocket operations primarily in Denver, Colo., and Decatur, Ala.
ULA is a 50-50 joint venture between Atlas builder Lockheed Martin and Delta manufacturer Boeing that will have just under $2 billion in annual sales at startup. The company begins life with 3,800 employees total - 1,500 from the Atlas program and 2,300 from Delta.
Layoffs, attrition and reassignments will reduce that number as the consolidation continues, but company officials are hesitant to peg specific work force targets. The company projects annual savings to the government of $100 million to $150 million from the consolidation.
Roughly 1,000 Atlas employees are currently in Denver, where ULA will be headquartered. There are roughly 800 employees in Huntington Beach, Calif., 600 at Boeing's Delta rocket plant in Decatur, and 800 at Cape Canaveral, Fla. The balance of the work force is at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., San Diego, Calif., and Harlingen, Texas.
ULA will consolidate its technical and program management operations in Denver and its rocket production operations in Decatur. The 800 Boeing Delta personnel in Huntington Beach will be reduced to an estimated 400-700, then moved to Denver. Approximately 1,000 personnel will work at ULA headquarters, with 500 or so at other sites that have yet to open
:
:
:
Their estimate of "400-700" out of 800 Delta engineering will move to Denver is grossly optimistic, IMO.
-
#469 by Gus on 05 Dec, 2006 04:38
-
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
-
#470 by Dexter on 05 Dec, 2006 05:23
-
Quote
Propforce - 4/12/2006 6:01 PM
Partial quote from today's Aerospace DailyQuoteNews
ULA begins operations, embarks on consolidation plan
Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
12/04/2006, page 09
Jefferson Morris
United Launch Alliance (ULA) formally opened for business Dec. 1, embarking on a two-year plan to consolidate Atlas and Delta rocket operations primarily in Denver, Colo., and Decatur, Ala.
ULA is a 50-50 joint venture between Atlas builder Lockheed Martin and Delta manufacturer Boeing that will have just under $2 billion in annual sales at startup. The company begins life with 3,800 employees total - 1,500 from the Atlas program and 2,300 from Delta.
Layoffs, attrition and reassignments will reduce that number as the consolidation continues, but company officials are hesitant to peg specific work force targets. The company projects annual savings to the government of $100 million to $150 million from the consolidation.
Roughly 1,000 Atlas employees are currently in Denver, where ULA will be headquartered. There are roughly 800 employees in Huntington Beach, Calif., 600 at Boeing's Delta rocket plant in Decatur, and 800 at Cape Canaveral, Fla. The balance of the work force is at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., San Diego, Calif., and Harlingen, Texas.
ULA will consolidate its technical and program management operations in Denver and its rocket production operations in Decatur. The 800 Boeing Delta personnel in Huntington Beach will be reduced to an estimated 400-700, then moved to Denver. Approximately 1,000 personnel will work at ULA headquarters, with 500 or so at other sites that have yet to open
:
:
:
Their estimate of "400-700" out of 800 Delta engineering will move to Denver is grossly optimistic, IMO.Sites that have yet to open implies something new.
Perhaps the building in Huntsville being built by Lockheed has something to do with this that was mentioned in the Bud Cramer thread.
-
#471 by Dexter on 05 Dec, 2006 05:28
-
Quote
Gus - 4/12/2006 11:21 PM
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
One-third of engineers?
Sounds like a risk of loosing critical skills just like what happened with the Titan IV failures in the late 90s.
-
#472 by Jim on 05 Dec, 2006 11:19
-
Quote
Dexter - 5/12/2006 1:11 AM
QuoteGus - 4/12/2006 11:21 PM
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
One-third of engineers?
Sounds like a risk of loosing critical skills just like what happened with the Titan IV failures in the late 90s.
Those were production skills. One was software entry error and the other bad wiring. The third was not LM hardware. EELV is an ongoing program, T-IV was phasing out -
#473 by Propforce on 05 Dec, 2006 20:48
-
Quote
Gus - 4/12/2006 9:21 PM
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
The keyword is "... very pleased..." if 1/3 of HB engineers will accept relocation.
I just checked the cost-of-living calculator between Littleton, CO and HB, CA. Littleton (Lockheed's campus) is about 64% of HB, CA. The GOOD NEWS is that, if you've already owe a house in CA you can probably get one bigger or fully paid-for. The BAD NEWS is that you'll probably NOT going to get a decent salary raise for a long time, when you compare a CA salary to a CO salary.
-
#474 by bombay on 06 Dec, 2006 00:12
-
Quote
Jim - 5/12/2006 6:02 AM
You're competely missing the point!QuoteDexter - 5/12/2006 1:11 AM
QuoteGus - 4/12/2006 11:21 PM
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
One-third of engineers?
Sounds like a risk of loosing critical skills just like what happened with the Titan IV failures in the late 90s.
Those were production skills. One was software entry error and the other bad wiring. The third was not LM hardware. EELV is an ongoing program, T-IV was phasing out
In addition to the 3 Titan launch failures in the same 98-99 time frame, there were two Delta III failures and an Athena II failure.
The gov't & commercial internal reviews noted the following consistent shortfalls:
1) emphasis on cost cutting
2) loss of experienced personnel
3) inadequate manufacturing process controls
4) insufficient oversight on quality assurance
I would say that the cost cutting rhetoric that we've all been fed and losing 2/3 (at a minimum) of experieneced Delta engineers along with a yet to be determined loss of experienced Atlas manufacturing personnel clearly represents the high interest concerns addressed in 98-99 relative to the string of launch failures.
-
#475 by Jim on 06 Dec, 2006 00:25
-
Delta III had nothing to do with it and it was a totally commercial endevour. Not related to Gov't issues. Boeing tried to do something on the cheap.
The IUS failure was not a Titan failure. It was a Boeing IUS ( seattle based)
1. Yes, it is cost reduction measure but not across the board, only labor. The previous cost cutting measures included reduced testing and analysis.
2. a given. But Atlas survived the move to Denver and shuttle survived the move to houston (STS-107 was not due to the move)
3. Where is this? This not applicable to ULA
4. Where is this? This not applicable to ULA
Anyways, a loss of a vehicle in the next few years is not going to prove anything. Statistically, we due for one. -
#476 by quark on 06 Dec, 2006 00:53
-
Atlas survived the move to Denver. And both engineering and production were moved. Delta is moving only engineering to Denver. Production is staying put in Decatur.
Delta II survived production move to Decatur.
That is not to minimize the task, just to say it's been done successfully in the past by the same people.
Wasn't there a ULA kick off meeting in Huntington Beach today? What was the mood? And violent demonstrations or effigy burning? -
#477 by Dexter on 06 Dec, 2006 05:14
-
Quote
Jim - 5/12/2006 6:02 AM
QuoteDexter - 5/12/2006 1:11 AM
QuoteGus - 4/12/2006 11:21 PM
In today's "Welcome to ULA" All Hands meeting here in Denver, Dan Collins stated that he would be very pleased if one-third of the Huntington Beach engineers accepted relocation.
One-third of engineers?
Sounds like a risk of loosing critical skills just like what happened with the Titan IV failures in the late 90s.
Those were production skills. One was software entry error and the other bad wiring. The third was not LM hardware. EELV is an ongoing program, T-IV was phasing out
Here we go again.
https://research.maxwell.af.mil/papers/ay2000/acsc/00-047.pdf
"Loss of experienced personel" (page 12 of the pdf file) as quoted from AWS&T
Footnote 7 William B. Scott, "Panel Links Launch Failure to Systemic Ills", AWST, September 13, 1999, 41.
When a new ULA executive says the optimistic forecast is a 2/3 reduction in the established engineering talent on Delta, that seems like a significant loss of experienced personel.
-
#478 by Dexter on 06 Dec, 2006 05:22
-
Quote
Jim - 5/12/2006 7:08 PM
Delta III had nothing to do with it and it was a totally commercial endevour. Not related to Gov't issues. Boeing tried to do something on the cheap.
The IUS failure was not a Titan failure. It was a Boeing IUS ( seattle based)
1. Yes, it is cost reduction measure but not across the board, only labor. The previous cost cutting measures included reduced testing and analysis.
2. a given. But Atlas survived the move to Denver and shuttle survived the move to houston (STS-107 was not due to the move)
3. Where is this? This not applicable to ULA
4. Where is this? This not applicable to ULA
Anyways, a loss of a vehicle in the next few years is not going to prove anything. Statistically, we due for one.I am sure when the failure investigation team meets, they will consider the streak of success, see that we were statistically due, and not delve into the matter any further because it would not prove anything further. (Sarcasm Off)
This will be kind of like Russian Roulette with payloads. You best hope and pray it is not one of your NASA missions that finds the loaded chamber.
-
#479 by Dexter on 06 Dec, 2006 05:25
-
Quote
quark - 5/12/2006 7:36 PM
Atlas survived the move to Denver. And both engineering and production were moved. Delta is moving only engineering to Denver. Production is staying put in Decatur.
Delta II survived production move to Decatur.
That is not to minimize the task, just to say it's been done successfully in the past by the same people.
Wasn't there a ULA kick off meeting in Huntington Beach today? What was the mood? And violent demonstrations or effigy burning?[/QUOTE]I am sure there will be demonstrations in Denver when they announce the ULA engineering is moving to the new building in Huntsville to more closely support Decatur.
