Slashdot Mirror
Taxpayer Subsidies To ULA To End
schwit1 writes Because it has concluded that they make it impossible to have a fair competition for contracts, the Air Force has decided to phase out taxpayer subsidies to the United Launch Alliance (ULA). The specific amounts of these subsidies have been effectively buried by the Air Force in many different contracts, so we the taxpayers really don't know how much the are. Nonetheless, this decision, combined with the military report released yesterday that criticized the Air Force's over-bearing and restrictive certification process with SpaceX indicates that the political pressure is now pushing them hard to open up bidding to multiple companies, which in turn will help lower cost and save the taxpayer money.
political pressure is now pushing them hard to open up bidding to multiple companies, which in turn will help lower cost and save the taxpayer money
That's certainly a possible outcome, and hopefully the one we will see, but I think it's a bit optimistic to say that it will do this. It may do that, but a new contract process may also be a total clusterfuck, depending on how it's structured and overseen. The Air Force might get twice as good things for half the price, or it might get something that doesn't work for half the price, or four things that sort of work for twice the price.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
...but they get our shit to space.
Good! They should be supporting the Human Volunteer Force anyway.
untenable lemon socialism program phased out after results deemed detremental to the goals and objectives of the military industrial complex in such a way as to undermine its ability to create conflict and ensue future profit through neoimperialism and greed. But as for you, joe six pack, feel free to click the recliner back another notch! dont give this so much as a second thought. the contracts are buried so, so far deep, that its confusing just to think about the ramifications of a public private partnership that existed solely for the gratification of a cloistered elite class of pseudocitizenry. Why not pay attention to what REALLY matters! the game! its on! and all your favourite team members will, be playing it! be sure to eat and drink lots of the product, as that makes you a superfan!
Good people go to bed earlier.
The big issue here is not the payments, it is the way of achieving working access to space.
The Air force found a 'stark disconnect' between the Air Force and Space X.
The Air Force wanted X to do things the AF way.
X rightly pushed back.
Somebody stepped back and realized that it might be good that X does some things differently.
Sounds like they both need to think through and make some adjustments on both sides.
Goal 1, don't kill the X way of doing things.
Goal 2, X may learn a few new tricks for.
Goal 3, AF will get more can do.
Both will end up with a better understanding of what really matters.
The tax payer may or may win, considering we will be supporting multiple launch methods.
I always get a little concerned when too many bits of good news come out of a sector of government that has been entrenched in a particular activity (waste, abuse, corruption, etc) for decades and suddenly they decide to "change". I hope it is true and this just a confluence of a realization that they're public servants, more transparency/competition will help not diminish their goals as public servants and a little bit of political pressure. But there is also a nasty tendency in government to notice a shift in opinion and to make it "look" like you're bowing to that opinion while actually doing nothing or in fact using it as a vessel to get your particular activity even further intrenched into government. Cautious optimism isn't unreasonable, but close scrutiny of the "changes" they are suggesting is also prudent.
No wonder ULA's buddies in the Air Force have been trying to sabotage SpaceX.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
ULA adopted the same SAP systems as it's parent company Lockheed used and this led to their financial crisis. ULA being a house of about 4k employees and seeking to further slim down. SpaceX was restricted term onsite and no open source alternatives were considered. As I understand it there are several OSS alternatives for rocketry and listed online at Nasa, etc. which SpaceX leverages. There are two men responsible for convincing ULA to go with a huge SAP system who worked for the primer consulting firm of the merger. 2007/2008 Leo and Rick laughed after completing the sale welcoming their huge comission and promotion that would come as a result of selling the customer something big and expensive that they all knew would eat them alive.
Look at who did the merger for ULA, CSC is renowned for unethical business practices and they have gone through their own financial troubles relying of bought and paid for senators and no bid contracts. No wonder they cannot complete a successful merge that controls costs and allows a company to compete in a free market!
... SpaceX will become very, very expensive when required to comply with govt contracting law ...
Actually ULA will become much more expensive as they will have to include fixed costs (infrastructure, etc) into their launch pricing. Currently they do not. They seem to have a separate contract purely for infrastructure and other related fixed costs, this contract is separate from launch contracts. Short story: ULA launch contracts don't have to include such costs since they are paid for elsewhere, SpaceX launch contracts includes all such costs and they are still far less expensive.
The USAF got caught cheating to hop on the Musk bandwagon, and the consequences will be very, very expensive.
I think recent news stories demonstrated the opposite, the USAF overstepped its bounds and began dictating design changes and corporate reorganizations.