- \n
- SpaceX Forum Section<\/li>\n
- ULA Forum Section<\/li>\n
- L2 SpaceX Section<\/li>\n
- Click here to Join L2<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
As such it was unsurprising that the leaders of both companies traded blows \u2013 albeit in a civil fashion \u2013 during the hearing.<\/p>\n
Chaired by Sentator Durbin, who provided an interesting, informed and fair set of questions for the witnesses, the Defense Subcommittee\u2019s focus was on the National Security Space Launch Programs.<\/p>\n
Both leaders placed their rockets in opposing corners of the political boxing ring, before facing each other to trade blows over reliability and cost.<\/p>\n
![\"Z4\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/Z41.jpg\")
ULA found a likely ally in Senator Shelby \u2013 representing the State of Alabama, where ULA\u2019s Decatur plant is located. The Senator was the first to be introduced by the chairman, wasting no time in pointing out ULA\u2019s impressive success rate \u2013 classed as 68 consecutive mission successes.<\/p>\n(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});<\/p>\n
\u201cI recognize this achievement, not just as a Senator from Alabama, but as someone who has watched the defense industry for decades and knows a 100 percent success rate is no small feat. We must ensure that record of success is maintained.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Senator was alluding to the big talking point facing the forward path of the EELV program, the upcoming slice of EELV launch contracts, amid a new direction that attempts to allow for competition among those providers that have \u2013 or will soon have \u2013 the required certification.<\/p>\n
Mr. Gass also pointed out his company\u2019s record of reliability, outlining ULA also launch numerous other payloads into orbit, including high profile flagship missions for NASA.<\/p>\n
\u201cFor NASA, we have launched science missions to the Moon, Mercury, Jupiter, and Pluto, and even sent the rovers on their way to Mars. Our customers extend beyond government to the commercial sector with nine commercial missions to date and several more on the manifest.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/10\/B32.jpg\")
\u201cI am pleased to report that ULA and the government team have consistently delivered 100 percent mission success over 68 launches since the inception of the program. We are currently at a tempo of about one launch every month. ULA\u2019s Atlas V and Delta IV rockets are the most powerful and most reliable in the world.<\/p>\n\u201cThey are the only rockets that fully meet the unique and specialized needs of the national security community.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mr. Gass\u2019 opening remarks \u2013 which included a note that ULA are looking towards an Arianespace-style arrangement where they can launch two satellites together on one vehicle \u2013 mainly focused on his companies successes.<\/p>\n
Mr. Musk provided with a similar outline of his company\u2019s goals, also citing reliability and safety \u2013 while adding an extra word, \u201caffordability\u201d \u2013 as SpaceX\u2019s aspirations.<\/p>\n
The SpaceX founder noted his company is the fastest growing launch services company in the world, with 50 contracts worth $5 billion on the order books, with the Falcon 9 rocket launching eight times, including four successful launches for NASA \u2013 with another Dragon set to launch to the ISS this month \u2013 along with three successful launches commercial satellite missions under its belt.<\/p>\n
![\"Z3A1\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Z3A1.jpg\")
He also noted the company is scaling their production operations to produce 40 rocket cores and nearly 400 rocket engines annually later this year and are already the largest rocket engine manufacturer in the world, all while they continue to push the envelope on rocket technology, as they advance toward fully reusable launch vehicles and the development of the Raptor engine (new article coming this week).<\/p>\nIn what would become a major talking point later in the hearing, Mr. Musk also went on the offensive, adding \u201c(SpaceX) launch vehicles (including engines and fairings) and spacecraft are made in America. We do not rely upon Russia for any element of the launch vehicle.\u201d<\/p>\n
Click here for recent SpaceX News Articles: http:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/tag\/spacex\/<\/p>\n
Mr. Musk also wasted no time in pointing out the vast differences in costs between ULA rockets and SpaceX launch vehicles.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo put this into perspective, had SpaceX received the award for the 36 core EELV block buy contract, we would have saved the taxpayer $11.6 billion.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"Z3\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/12\/Z31.jpg\")
Mr. Musk also noted that SpaceX\u2019s EELV certification process included a number of requirements that were never demanded of ULA. However, SpaceX has now achieved three flights of their upgraded Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket \u2013 one of the certification requirements.<\/p>\nSpaceX is also now undergoing a review process, involving 30,000 data items and total access to their rocket systems. Mr. Musk hopes the certification process will be completed this year.<\/p>\n
With EELV competition encouraged by officials, per direction provided a few years ago, Mr. Musk appeared to be discouraged by the potential delay in allowing for upcoming missions to be competed, claiming he\u2019s heard only one mission will be up for grabs this year. A total of 14 upcoming missions are being lined up for competition.<\/p>\n
American Made Rockets:<\/p>\n
Mr. Musk\u2019s main target was the Atlas V, which uses the Russian-built RD-180. SpaceX vehicles are exclusively American.<\/p>\n
\u201cOur Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles are truly American. We design and manufacture our rockets in California and Texas, with key suppliers throughout the country.<\/p>\n
![\"Z6\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/Z6.jpg\")
\u201cThis is in stark contrast to ULA\u2019s most frequently flown vehicle, the Atlas V, which uses a Russian main engine and approximately half the air frame is made overseas.\u201d<\/p>\nWhile the benefit of US tax dollars being spent on US built hardware has been a point often made during economically challenging times, Mr. Musk cited the ongoing tensions between Russia and the West over the Ukrainian crisis as a negative point for one of ULA\u2019s rockets.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn light of Russia\u2019s de-facto annexation of the Ukraine\u2019s Crimea region, the Atlas V cannot be possibly described as providing assured access to space when the supplying of the main engine depends on President Putin\u2019s permission. With this in mind, we need to consider if the uncompeted 36 core EELV contract is in the best interests of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"Z9\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/Z9.jpg\")
Chairman Durbin questioned Mr. Gass with regard to potential sanctions against Russia, with the ULA head noting they have some level of accommodation, per current engine stock and the possibility of manufacturing the RD-180 in the United States.<\/p>\n\u201cWhat we have done to protect against that concern is that we have over two years of safety stock inventory in the US. We also have another product (Delta IV) that is fully compliant and ready to support any of the missions,\u201d noted Mr. Gass.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe could also co-produce that engine (RD-180). We bought all the blueprints and specifications, translated them from Russian to English, brought them into the country and demonstrated we can build that exact engine. \u201c<\/p>\n
Click here for recent ULA News Articles: http:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/tag\/ula\/<\/p>\n
Mr. Gass also claimed the United States has fallen behind in propulsion technology, adding \u201cwhen we went to Russia, there were things they were doing that we found in our text books were impossible.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mission Assurance:<\/p>\n
Later in the hearing, Mr. Musk countered that the two years of stock does not allow for the claim of assured access to space, given the EELV 36 core contract is based over a five year period. However, he would first counter ULA\u2019s success rate.<\/p>\n
![\"Z10\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/Z10.jpg\")
\u201cI should mention that the premise of perfect success is not quiet correct for ULA. They have a very good track record, but the first Delta IV-Heavy failed, and there was a partial failure of an Atlas V that resulted in the satellite having a reduced life. So it\u2019s a good record, but it would be a flawed premise to say it\u2019s perfect.\u201d<\/p>\nMr. Gass later countered back, noting they judge mission success on the customer\u2019s declaration of success.<\/p>\n
Senator Shelby also got involved, pointing out SpaceX placed a secondary payload into the wrong orbit, leading to the loss of the satellite.<\/p>\n
The secondary payload referenced was likely the Orbcomm O2G-1 communications satellite; a prototype for Orbcomm\u2019s second generation constellation slated for launch on upcoming Falcon 9 v1.1 missions.<\/p>\n
![\"Engine](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/02\/Z331.jpg\" "\\"Engine")
While the Falcon 9 launch of the Dragon CRS-1 mission was successful as a whole, the launch suffered an engine problem during first stage flight which played a part in the loss of the Orbcomm satellite.<\/p>\nThe number 1 engine failed approximately 79 seconds after launch; being shut down by the onboard computer after it lost pressure. Debris was seen falling from the rocket, believed to be part of a fairing designed to protect the engines from aerodynamic loads.<\/p>\n
While the failure was within the Falcon 9\u2032s engine-out capability, it resulted in the second stage burning more propellant than had originally been planned in order to reach the planned orbit for Dragon deployment.<\/p>\n
As a result the stage failed a propellant mass check at engine cut-off, and the Orbcomm satellite was dumped into an orbit that was not planned.<\/p>\n
\u201cBy ULA\u2019s definition of success, that mission was perfect,\u201d responded Mr. Musk with a grin on his face, before Mr. Gass quickly countered it would have not been classed as successful at ULA.<\/p>\n
Working Together \u2013 Without Atlas V:<\/p>\n
As a potential route forward, where both ULA and SpaceX conducted EELV class missions, Mr. Musk believes such a scenario would involve the Falcon family and the Delta family.<\/p>\n
He noted that ULA should phase out the Atlas V, a somewhat cheeky comment, based on Atlas V\u2019s other roles outside of the EELV realm, including the planned launch services for two commercial crew competitors that are battling against Mr. Musk\u2019s Dragon spacecraft.<\/p>\n
![\"Z12\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/Z12.jpg\")
\u201cULA has both the Delta and the Atlas, but both are redundant, you don\u2019t need both of those rocket families. For the long term security benefits of the country, it would make more sense to phase out the Atlas V \u2013 which depends on the Russian engine \u2013 and have ULA operate the Delta family, while SpaceX operate the Falcon family, allowing for assured access to space.\u201d<\/p>\nWhile reliability and assured access are key factors, the whole purpose of the Department of Defense\u2019s move towards an element of competition is based on reducing costs, which have been rising at an alarming rate.<\/p>\n
Under the Air Force\u2019s plan to reduce EELV costs, 36 missions have been sole-sourced as block buys to ULA, while SpaceX will compete for 14 flights, which will be competed, with no guarantee SpaceX will be awarded any of those 14 missions.<\/p>\n
![\"Z6\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/12\/Z66.jpg\")
In highlighting the cost difference, Mr. Musk noted that while such launches will cost a lot more than the prices they offer to commercial launch service suitors, it will still be far less expensive than the cost of using the ULA fleet.<\/p>\n\u201cThe US government does not buy launch insurance, so there is a mission assurance overhead applied (to the price). Our launch costs are estimated to be 50 percent higher than commercial flights.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo instead of $60 million for a commercial mission, it\u2019s $90m, but that compares to more like $380 million for ULA.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mr. Gass later claimed Mr. Musk was claiming figures that were \u201ccategorically wrong\u201d, without noting which numbers were in error. However, he did note \u2013 per a chart that was presented at the hearing \u2013 that the portrayed up-curve in costs was reflective of appropriations, not cost or cost performance.<\/p>\n
Importantly, when asked if ULA is ready to go into battle with SpaceX for the remaining EELV contracts, Mr. Gass was buoyant.<\/p>\n
\u201cULA is ready, willing and ready to compete.\u201d<\/p>\n
(Images via Hearing Webcast, ULA, SpaceX and Lockheed Martin).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In what was one of the most fascinating hearings in years, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and United Launch Alliance (ULA) boss Michael Gass faced off against each other over the lucrative Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV)-class contracts. Both gentlemen didn\u2019t pull their punches, with Mr. Gass cited ULA\u2019s superior reliability, while Mr. Musk denounced ULA\u2019s costs, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":30293,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[7758,8296,2705,479,316,363],"class_list":["post-39633","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-atlas-v","tag-delta-iv","tag-eelv","tag-falcon-9","tag-spacex","tag-ula"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39633"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=39633"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39633\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/30293"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39633"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39633"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39633"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}