http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/events/webcasts/discussion-with-tony-bruno-president-and-ceo-of-united-launch-allianceCouple of interesting snippets in there. Promised to introduce a new more accessible business model and changing the way they interface with commercial customers, but later dodged a question whether they intend to sell directly to commercial customers.
Couple of interesting points on engine development that may be related:
1) Not so keen on gov't funded engine development calling it "one size fits no-one"
2) Studying options to replace RL-10 in the future.
I would guess they are looking for a non Aerojet solution. Seems to me that Aerojet has seriously dropped the ball over the years. They got into a monopoly position as ULA engine provider (even RD-180 through RD Amross), thought they were irreplaceable and what's worse, proceeded to abuse and exploit that situation to maximum extent. It appears they are one of the big reasons why ULAs much touted cost halving looks a lot like cost doubling to everyone else. Now that competition has come along ULA has finally had enough. Even if these studies to replace RL-10 are only half serious it is a strong message to Aerojet-Rocketdyne to get their act together.
A funny bit as well. A few minutes after talking about 89 missions with perfect track record: "We don't talk about 89 consecutive successes".
Couple of interesting snippets in there. Promised to introduce a new more accessible business model and changing the way they interface with commercial customers, but later dodged a question whether they intend to sell directly to commercial customers.
Dodging the question is wholly understandable. ULA can only sell directly to USG currently. So Tony was a smart guy by not overturning the apple cart.
Anyone know if a transcript has been posted?
The comment about studying RL10 replacement suggests they may still be proceeding with XCOR engine. There is also option of BE3.
The future for Aerojet doesn't look good, being stuck with a pile of NK33s which are probably destined for the scrap merchants will not help share prices.
Thanks Saliva_Sweet for the link.
Finally watched the video, Tory would make one great diplomatic ambassador. He doesn't put a foot wrong and as all great ambassadors doesn't quite answer the question. Lots of good questions followed by lots of ambiguous answers.
They are designing both stages of new LV, so choice of upper stage engine is being made now. Even if new upper stage flys a few years after 1st stage.
IMHO. The delaying introduction of 2nd stage is probably cost and resource based decision but also gives them more time to develop a new engine.
Anyone know if a transcript has been posted?
the video
The video is in the first post, I was looking for a written transcript. Finally blocked out an hour to watch it.
Interesting comment, he mentioned he is friends with Dave Thompson and that he has talked to him since he failure. I wonder if it went beyond condolences for the Antares failure.
As a side note the russian reporter asked why ULA was upping 2015 RD-180 deliveries from 5 to 8. I liked his answer on that, for an increased flight rate. He said very little about the RS-68, only the RS-180.
Anyone know if a transcript has been posted?
the video
As a side note the russian reporter asked why ULA was upping 2015 RD-180 deliveries from 5 to 8. I liked his answer on that, for an increased flight rate. He said very little about the RS-68, only the RS-180.
I wonder if the Russian reporter will be in trouble or not
A very nasty story about the RD-180 is running on Reuters. This interview confirms part of the story about Congress. Do also believe that monies from each engine is going into someone's pocket. Come next year the Sen. John McCain will try and cut off the RD-180. The Senator still would need to have others to sign on, yet he does become a very powerful Senator next year.
the russian reporter asked why ULA was upping 2015 RD-180 deliveries from 5 to 8. I liked his answer on that, for an increased flight rate.
I think that's a very good answer from Bruno, but I think it is phrased that way to obscure some important aspects of the situation. In particular, it allays concerns that might arise if ULA were perceived to be "stockpiling" RD-180 engines. They would stockpile if they were uncertain about the future continuity of supply, and they don't want to signal that. On the other hand, ULA wants to have engines for a certain number of years' worth of missions on hand in the United States. So when the Atlas flight rate goes up, they not only need to increase the delivery rate to compensate for that directly, they need to also increase the delivery rate to increase the number of engines in their stockpile so it continues to be enough for that certain number of years' worth of missions.
<begin conjecture>
I speculate ULA are working right now to bring online additional RD-180 storage capacity. Indeed I speculate they have deferred delivery (by some number of weeks) of the remaining engines expected this year, and that's because their current storage facility is chock-full.
<end conjecture>
the russian reporter asked why ULA was upping 2015 RD-180 deliveries from 5 to 8. I liked his answer on that, for an increased flight rate.
I think that's a very good answer from Bruno, but I think it is phrased that way to obscure some important aspects of the situation. In particular, it allays concerns that might arise if ULA were perceived to be "stockpiling" RD-180 engines. They would stockpile if they were uncertain about the future continuity of supply, and they don't want to signal that. On the other hand, ULA wants to have engines for a certain number of years' worth of missions on hand in the United States. So when the Atlas flight rate goes up, they not only need to increase the delivery rate to compensate for that directly, they need to also increase the delivery rate to increase the number of engines in their stockpile so it continues to be enough for that certain number of years' worth of missions.
<begin conjecture>
I speculate ULA are working right now to bring online additional RD-180 storage capacity. Indeed I speculate they have deferred delivery (by some number of weeks) of the remaining engines expected this year, and that's because their current storage facility is chock-full.
<end conjecture>
Everyone
stockpiles; SpaceX builds extra cores, AR built extra inventory, Russia builds and stores launchers and engines,etc.
So why the extra focus on ULA and the RD-180? That's the question that is in need of an answer.
From what I remember, ULA had actually been expending more LV than the engines they had been procuring. In effect, their stockpile had been shrinking. They had a 17 stockpile, with 4 engines/yr while launching about 8 AV/yr. Had they not ordered an increase in deliveries, they would be risking having no stockpile in as little as four years.
