Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpaceX, US Air Force Settle Spy Sat Dispute

Posted by timothy on from the show-elon-what-you're-wearing dept.

hypnosec writes The US Air Force and private space flight company SpaceX have settled their dispute involving the military's expendable rocket program, thereby paving the way for SpaceX to join the spy satellite launch program known as Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). The settlement opens doors for SpaceX to compete with United Launch Alliance (ULA) for launch of spy satellites. ULA is a joint Boeing-Lockheed venture – the only private player to have received clearance for launching black ops satellites.

6 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Is someone looking for a job? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe someone high up in the USAF food chain is retireing soon and looking for a job... Boeing obviously didn't pay them off enough to keep exclusivity on their overpriced program.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Is someone looking for a job? by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

      A lot of satellites launched by the USAF aren't that large to begin with and were launched on Delta II rockets until quite recently. One example is the GPS constellation satellites. As for the payload capacity problem you talk about once Falcon 9 Heavy is available, possibly this year, SpaceX will be able to launch bigger and heavier payloads than the largest EELV namely Delta IV Heavy.

      As for having a proven track record most of the claims spouted by ULA apologists are plain bullshit. The Delta family had a spotty track record regarding new rocket development. The Delta III program was a disaster and the initial Delta IV Heavy launch didn't go along that well either. Atlas V has a solid launch record and it is cheaper than the Delta IV but it uses Russian engines.

      Despite the first Delta IV Heavy launch failure the DoD still chanced it and used it to launch a really expensive earth reconnaissance satellite right on the next flight. But because SpaceX isn't Lockheed Martin or Boeing they can't get the same privilege.

  2. Re:Elon Musk gotta be very careful here ! by Inzkeeper · · Score: 5, Funny

    That sure is a nice looking stage one rocket booster you have there.
    It'd be a shame it something were to happen to it...

  3. Re:Elon Musk gotta be very careful here ! by demachina · · Score: 4, Informative

    Like send the Colorado congressional delegation to attack SpaceX for no particularly good reason. ULA has a large operation in Denver and they pay Colorado Republicans handsomely.

    --
    @de_machina
  4. asking questions of each is good, intentions aside by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Colorado representatives favor ULA, of course. So they asked for information about the full costs to have SpaceX do it, mentioned that SpaceX has a higher rate of cancelled launches, etc. Just as SpaceX and their representatives point out the downsides of the ULA contract. I think that's a good thing, that the House and the American people hear both perspectives, then make decisions.

          Certainly you wouldn't want the administration to make these choices behind closed doors, with no public information about why they chose one vendor over another and what the options were, would you?

  5. Umm... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe I just don't understand the bold postmodern reality where you can change things just by changing what you call them; but isn't a 'united alliance' between the two effective players in a market what we used to call a 'cartel'?

    Is there some sort of argument in favor of it that gets trotted out with a straight face when someone asks if there was just too much 'ruinous competition' between Boeing and Lockheed, and some 'price stability' was badly needed, or is this purely a because we can sort of operation?