Effect of reusable rockets on solid rocket/ICBM manufacturing?

[Pipcard]

As we all know, solids are a dead end for economical reusability (as recovering the Shuttle SRBs turned out). Assuming that reusable rockets will be cheaper and replace expendable launch systems, what will happen to manufacturers of solid rocket stages which apparently need to keep a manufacturing base for ICBMs?

[edkyle99]

As we all know, solids are a dead end for economical reusability (as recovering the Shuttle SRBs turned out). Assuming that reusable rockets will be cheaper and replace expendable launch systems, what will happen to manufacturers of solid rocket stages which apparently need to keep a manufacturing base for ICBMs?

I question your assumptions.

Solid motors are being developed for Ariane 6, for Vega-C, for Vulcan, for Omega, for H-3, and for Space Launch System.  In addition, they are currently used by Antares, Atlas 5, Delta 4, Ariane 5, Vega, PSLV, GSLV, GSLV Mk 3, H-2A, and H-2B, and I may have missed a few rockets in these lists.

So, not a dead end, clearly.

 - Ed Kyle

 

[Kabloona]

As we all know, solids are a dead end for economical reusability (as recovering the Shuttle SRBs turned out). Assuming that reusable rockets will be cheaper and replace expendable launch systems, what will happen to manufacturers of solid rocket stages which apparently need to keep a manufacturing base for ICBMs?

The short answer is that they'll be busy for the next decade or so producing new ICBM's for the Pentagon's GBSD program. But there's already a whole thread devoted to discussing the solid propellant industrial base:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43194.0

[envy887]

As we all know, solids are a dead end for economical reusability (as recovering the Shuttle SRBs turned out). Assuming that reusable rockets will be cheaper and replace expendable launch systems, what will happen to manufacturers of solid rocket stages which apparently need to keep a manufacturing base for ICBMs?

I question your assumptions.

Solid motors are being developed for Ariane 6, for Vega-C, for Vulcan, for Omega, for H-3, and for Space Launch System.  In addition, they are currently used by Antares, Atlas 5, Delta 4, Ariane 5, Vega, PSLV, GSLV, GSLV Mk 3, H-2A, and H-2B, and I may have missed a few rockets in these lists.

So, not a dead end, clearly.

 - Ed Kyle

They commercial viability of all those is questionable at best over the next 10 years or so.

But the answer to the original question is simple: solids production, like orbital launch, will be propped up for national security reasons, no matter how commercial viable, or not viable, it is for orbital launches.

[Coastal Ron]

I question your assumptions.

Solid motors are being developed for Ariane 6, for Vega-C, for Vulcan, for Omega, for H-3, and for Space Launch System.  In addition, they are currently used by Antares, Atlas 5, Delta 4, Ariane 5, Vega, PSLV, GSLV, GSLV Mk 3, H-2A, and H-2B, and I may have missed a few rockets in these lists.

So, not a dead end, clearly.

They commercial viability of all those is questionable at best over the next 10 years or so.

But the answer to the original question is simple: solids production, like orbital launch, will be propped up for national security reasons, no matter how commercial viable, or not viable, it is for orbital launches.

Exactly. Supply and demand forces will ensure that the U.S. Government gets what it needs for national defense. Which means, with lower demand prices per unit could go up - which is how capitalism works, and we are a nation that embraces capitalism.

[vaporcobra]

They'll continue to be heavily or entirely subsidized by governments, as they have been for most of the last two decades.

[Patchouli]

As we all know, solids are a dead end for economical reusability (as recovering the Shuttle SRBs turned out). Assuming that reusable rockets will be cheaper and replace expendable launch systems, what will happen to manufacturers of solid rocket stages which apparently need to keep a manufacturing base for ICBMs?

The short answer is that they'll be busy for the next decade or so producing new ICBM's for the Pentagon's GBSD program. But there's already a whole thread devoted to discussing the solid propellant industrial base:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43194.0

There still would be a need for solid fuel on smaller missiles as well.
Though RLVs can make use of a solid PAM as a quick and dirty way to increase payloads in certain high energy orbits.

[gongora]

As has been already mentioned, there is an existing thread for discussion of solid rocket manufacturing:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43194.0