SpaceX & Blue Origin VS Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Airbus, MHI,...

[Tywin]

In the past, we had this interesting threads, about the different path of SpaceX vs Lockheed/Boeing, and which be more successful...

For examples:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30693.0

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24097.0

We make a good debate of the future of Aerojet Rocketdyne very interesting too...

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38582.40

And we has a this other thread, about SpaceX vs Blue, very interesting too:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38883.0

But I want open this new thread, for make debate, about the present and the future, of this new competition...

IF, and is a big IF, SpaceX triumph with her BFR, and the combinitation of F9-FH, and Blue with her New Glenn, and in the future with her New Armstrong (wharever this project is...), How will be, the response of the "old space industries" now and in the nexts years, to don't loose this market...

Because we talk, about companies like Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, Airbus, MHI, they make billion of dollars in revenue every years, in her others aerospace and defence division...BUT...

They go te leave two new players take away all her space division? especially this can mean for the future, of her business?

Which can be the response of this big aerospace companies for compete with this new disruptive companies?

[Tulse]

The big aerospace companies will still have both commercial and military "aero", and military "space" (at least in terms of expendable missiles), so I don't know how big a chunk of their business NewSpace will impact (and I presume that varies greatly among the different specific businesses).  Does anyone else have any hard numbers on what percentage of revenue commercial/non-military space is for the incumbent OldSpace companies?

[MikeAtkinson]

Space business is over $300 B worldwide of which only $10 B is launch related. Even if SpaceX and Blue Origin dominate launch revenue, then there is still the vast majority of business for other players.

Aside from launch SpaceX and Blue Origin have indicated that they are going for new markets: tourism, LEO constellations and Mars colonisation, perhaps lunar missions and space industrialisation. These will not only grow the overall space revenues, but also create new niches for existing companies and new entrants.

Economics is not a zero sum game, just because SpaceX and Blue Origin win it doesn't mean that Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Airbus, MHI, etc. loose.

[Tywin]

Aside from launch SpaceX and Blue Origin have indicated that they are going for new markets: tourism, LEO constellations and Mars colonisation, perhaps lunar missions and space industrialisation. These will not only grow the overall space revenues, but also create new niches for existing companies and new entrants.

Yeah, exactly this new market for "tourism, LEO constellations and Mars colonisation, perhaps lunar missions and space industrialisation" could value for billions in the medium future...

Economics is not a zero sum game, just because SpaceX and Blue Origin win it doesn't mean that Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Airbus, MHI, etc. loose.

Boeing and Airbus, for example... at the moment almost control the commercial aeronautics flight in the world...It's no easy entrance to a market dominated by two-three big companies...

I don't think so, they want the all this new market belong to Blue and SpaceX...and this is the question, how they can response?

Off course they have satellite industries, (and maybe other space hardware) but even this is changing very quickly and their aren't the only players in this market...

[freddo411]

Which can be the response of this big aerospace companies for compete with this new disruptive companies?

Here's my guess.   Old Space has considerable business skill dealing with DC.   There are difficult and time consuming battles acquiring and defending the considerable funds available from the Feds.     Most of this is DOD related, but some of it is NASA related (see JWST, SLS, LOPG, etc, etc).     These skills are often anti-correlated to operating a genuine functional business, so they provide a different niche from SpaceX and Blue.

My expectation is that SpaceX and Blue will provide some services to NASA and the DOD, but that old space will out compete them in harvesting most of the slush funds.

[brickmack]

The big aerospace companies will still have both commercial and military "aero", and military "space" (at least in terms of expendable missiles)

IMO the big distinguishing thing will not be commercial vs military or commercial vs government or whatever, but crew/cargo vs traditional satellite vs "big dumb satellites" vs constellations (for purposes of this, I assume big dumb satellites and constellations don't overlap. Constellations of BDS's would just fall under BDS itself). The processing requirements and flightrates and economic cases for each of these are widely separated, so it doesn't make sense to have a single rocket doing everything

*crew/cargo: Practically unlimited demand, provided costs can get low enough. Passengers are "self loading cargo", no new engineering needed per flight

*traditional satellite: Delicate, custom orbit requirements and interfaces, hundreds of millions to billions of dollars, replaceable only on scales of years to decades rather than days to weeks. Total global demand for only a few hundred launches at best.

*"big dumb satellites": Total non-concern for mass, enlarge them by an order of magnitude or more to cut hardware cost as launch cost plummets. Off-the-shelf hardware, large structural margins

*constellations: Could be mass constrained or not depending on economic assumptions, but low cost + zero variation in interfaces/requirements + easily replaceable.

The commercial satellite market will probably move mostly to constellations + BDSs, but scientific and reconnaissance payloads (where the instruments themselves are inherently very very expensive with little chance of serious reductions, and which have little demand for large-scale production, and which usually have specialized orbital requirements) will stick with the traditional model.

Crew/cargo, constellations, and big dumb satellites are all similar in that the key economic parameter is cost per kg. Difference is that crew/cargo and constellations all have relatively tight payload environment requirements still (way easier than traditional payloads though. Mostly just enough to keep the passengers alive), and will not require mission-specific engineering, but big dumb satellites can be launched more like cargo in a freight train. For traditional payloads, cost per launch is the deciding factor (and possibilities for rideshare are limited).

Launch providers like SpaceX and Blue will probably focus on HSF and constellations. BDS launches will be awarded purely to whoever has the cheapest superheavy rocket on the market. ULA/Arianespace/similar can probably maintain close to their current demand if they stick to traditional payload launch.

[TrevorMonty]

Big aerospace companies are quite capable of building RLVs that compete with Blue and SpaceX. They just don't see launch market to justify large development costs. For them its a wait and see game. If the RLVs create a new high demand and stable launch market eg space tourism, then may go after it.

Doesn't matter when they enter market but how price competitive their product is.

[mme]

Big aerospace companies are quite capable of building RLVs that compete with Blue and SpaceX. They just don't see launch market to justify large development costs. For them its a wait and see game. If the RLVs create a new high demand and stable launch market eg space tourism, then may go after it.

Doesn't matter when they enter market but how price competitive their product is.

Agreed, they can compete but I don't think they want to.

I think the launch market is pocket change to the "Old Space" companies as far as income. If SpaceX, Blue, whoever drive down launch prices I think "Old Space" will just shutter the doors on there launch vehicle business until the market is large enough that it's worth developing a competing RLV.

Maybe ULA will develop the fly back engines to stay in the game. But I could just as easily see Boeing and Lockheed deciding the ROI is too small.

[Tywin]

Big aerospace companies are quite capable of building RLVs that compete with Blue and SpaceX. They just don't see launch market to justify large development costs. For them its a wait and see game. If the RLVs create a new high demand and stable launch market eg space tourism, then may go after it.

Doesn't matter when they enter market but how price competitive their product is.

Yeah but every years later, to response in a future will take a double work only for be to par with this two...off course they still have margin of 5-6 years, to see what happens with BFR and NG-NA...

Well at moment we see some kind the response from ULA (Lockheed-Boeing) with her Vulcan, and her intention of be reusability...

Northrop, can make a Omega 2 reusability (methalox) and a evolution the Cygnus manned for compete for the tourism market, etc?

JAXA have interest in participation in the Prometheus-Callisto program of ESA...and their have been development too the RVX program too...that is a collaboration between Japan-Europe in space...that maybe increase in the future...

For example, MHI have a joint-venture with Vestas (Europe) for her company's of wind turbine...

http://www.mhivestasoffshore.com/about-mhi-vestas-offshore/

It's possible in the next years, a collaboration between MHI and Airbus, for create a conjunction company, like ULA, for response to SX and Blue?

https://www.mhi.com/products/space/

https://www.airbus.com/space.html

Maybe ULA will develop the fly back engines to stay in the game. But I could just as easily see Boeing and Lockheed deciding the ROI is too small.

It's small now, but if this all new market are opens in next 10 years, all this market can value a lot more money that we can imagen in the next 50-100 years...I don't believe, that the owners of all this companies would like see her company renunce to the future...

[Eric Hedman]

One response might be to offer Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos a big pile of cash and stock to buy one of their companies.  That has happened many times in the past when a smaller company has a product a bigger company needs in just about every industry.  IBM just bought Redhat for more than $30 billion for the same reason.  That doesn't mean either of these guys would actually accept the offer, but who knows five years down the road.

[mme]

One response might be to offer Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos a big pile of cash and stock to buy one of their companies.  That has happened many times in the past when a smaller company has a product a bigger company needs in just about every industry.  IBM just bought Redhat for more than $30 billion for the same reason.  That doesn't mean either of these guys would actually accept the offer, but who knows five years down the road.

Neither one of them want to give up control. Selling to an existing aerospace company would mean being beholding to their board and shareholders. That is a non-starter.

[spacenut]

I hope that SpaceX can get Superheavy/Starship up and running without going bankrupt.  Tesla is up and running now and is making cars and money, so maybe Musk can sell off some of his ownership and put it in SpaceX. 

Bezos is going through a divorce.  Hopefully this doesn't affect Blue Origin and he can get New Glen operational. 

I hope also that Boeing and Lockheed either see the handwriting on the wall and decide to either give ULA more money to develop a large reusable rocket or the do it on their own. 

When Starship is operational, that changes everything hopefully. 

[RonM]

ULA should try to implement engine recovery on Vulcan as early as possible. Might keep Vulcan competitive with F9/FH and New Glenn. Since the engines are the biggest expense on a booster, that might be good enough to keep them in the game.

[Eric Hedman]

One response might be to offer Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos a big pile of cash and stock to buy one of their companies.  That has happened many times in the past when a smaller company has a product a bigger company needs in just about every industry.  IBM just bought Redhat for more than $30 billion for the same reason.  That doesn't mean either of these guys would actually accept the offer, but who knows five years down the road.

Neither one of them want to give up control. Selling to an existing aerospace company would mean being beholding to their board and shareholders. That is a non-starter.

Situations can change for people over time.  Five years ago selling Redhat to IBM would have been a non-starter.  I'm not saying it's going to happen with SpaceX or Blue Origin, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did eventually.

[niwax]

One response might be to offer Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos a big pile of cash and stock to buy one of their companies.  That has happened many times in the past when a smaller company has a product a bigger company needs in just about every industry.  IBM just bought Redhat for more than $30 billion for the same reason.  That doesn't mean either of these guys would actually accept the offer, but who knows five years down the road.

Neither one of them want to give up control. Selling to an existing aerospace company would mean being beholding to their board and shareholders. That is a non-starter.

Situations can change for people over time.  Five years ago selling Redhat to IBM would have been a non-starter.  I'm not saying it's going to happen with SpaceX or Blue Origin, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did eventually.

I'm not sure who would want to buy them. It's not like a lot of old space companies really want to do space, they just keep doing it because legacy government contracts provide a nice profit for now. ULA has been for sale for ages and no one wants it. Northrop doesn't look like they're developing OmegA out of a passion for rocketry and believe it's a superior design the world is missing right now. They do it because it's basically risk-free since they don't have to use their own money. I can't think of a single old space company that would be willing to invest billions to retain launch capability that doesn't fall under very favorable contracts.

[brickmack]

ULA should try to implement engine recovery on Vulcan as early as possible. Might keep Vulcan competitive with F9/FH and New Glenn. Since the engines are the biggest expense on a booster, that might be good enough to keep them in the game.

Even without engine reuse, Vulcan looks to be pretty competitive with FH for most missions, at least with currently stated prices for both. Slightly cheaper for a very narrow sliver of the market, and only a bit pricier for most of the remainder (with capabilities that can probably make up the difference). Vulcan-SMART should be an easy winner for most contracts against FH. Still not nearly good enough for the scenario this thread presents though (BFR hitting all its cost/performance/schedule claims)

[Eric Hedman]

One response might be to offer Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos a big pile of cash and stock to buy one of their companies.  That has happened many times in the past when a smaller company has a product a bigger company needs in just about every industry.  IBM just bought Redhat for more than $30 billion for the same reason.  That doesn't mean either of these guys would actually accept the offer, but who knows five years down the road.

Neither one of them want to give up control. Selling to an existing aerospace company would mean being beholding to their board and shareholders. That is a non-starter.

Situations can change for people over time.  Five years ago selling Redhat to IBM would have been a non-starter.  I'm not saying it's going to happen with SpaceX or Blue Origin, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did eventually.

I'm not sure who would want to buy them. It's not like a lot of old space companies really want to do space, they just keep doing it because legacy government contracts provide a nice profit for now. ULA has been for sale for ages and no one wants it. Northrop doesn't look like they're developing OmegA out of a passion for rocketry and believe it's a superior design the world is missing right now. They do it because it's basically risk-free since they don't have to use their own money. I can't think of a single old space company that would be willing to invest billions to retain launch capability that doesn't fall under very favorable contracts.

The premise of the thread is if BFR/Starship and New Glenn succeed how will the old space companies respond.  In that case there will be a profitable market for reusable rockets.  If there is a potential for a growing profitable market, why wouldn't they consider ways to move forward at that time?  We're not talking about the current market.

[rockets4life97]

In the U.S., the Dept. of Defense only needs 2 commercial launch providers for assured access to space. If 5 to 10 years from now, SpaceX and Blue Origin are going strong with reusable rockets, I expect the other U.S. providers (ULA, Northrop) will find themselves without a market. Will Lockheed or Boeing decide to build a reusable rocket? Honestly, I don't see what they have to gain and there is lots of risk. I think they stick to their other defense contracts.

Airbus and Arianespace would be my guess for the next reusable launcher. Europe will keep its launch ability and the commercial market has been important funding center. They will be late to the party, but they will eventually get there.

[Lars-J]

Airbus and Arianespace would be my guess for the next reusable launcher. Europe will keep its launch ability and the commercial market has been important funding center. They will be late to the party, but they will eventually get there.

The Chinese will IMO get a reusable (or semi-reusable) launcher before Europe.

[DistantTemple]

Several groups have cracked vertical landing from short hops,with small vehicles. And everyone can copy SX, and the Chinese with perhaps less inhibition, (now they have offered EM residency :-) )