|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
EELV: Competition? No thanks
Looks like the Air Force has decided that it doesn't believe in
competition after all (I'm assuming that the Air Force was consulted as is planning to say yes, although I assume that their approval is still needed): United Launch Alliance will be structured as a 50-50 joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin -- combining services currently provided separately by Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' Expendable Launch Systems division and by Lockheed Martin's Space Systems Company -- for launches of each company's respective rockets. http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0505/01eelv/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Kingdon" wrote in message
news Looks like the Air Force has decided that it doesn't believe in competition after all (I'm assuming that the Air Force was consulted as is planning to say yes, although I assume that their approval is still needed): United Launch Alliance will be structured as a 50-50 joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin -- combining services currently provided separately by Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' Expendable Launch Systems division and by Lockheed Martin's Space Systems Company -- for launches of each company's respective rockets. http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0505/01eelv/ Interesting. "Work the companies are performing independently in support of NASA-sponsored Space Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicle concepts for future space exploration initiatives will be excluded from this joint venture." It is economics catching up with the current situation (slower commercial satellite market); Boeing's current executive suite problems; Lockheed attention on absorbing its recent acquisition of the old Rocketdyne operations from Boeing (now the liquid rocket maker for US) and global competition in marketplace (sounds like a plug for Thomas Friedman's new book - The World is Flat! ). gb |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
It is economics catching up with the current situation (slower commercial
satellite market) If so, it isn't clear that this announcement will solve the problem. They are still planning on keeping both Atlas and Delta flying (so that they don't have a lengthy standdown in case of problems with one, at least I think that is what "assured access to space" is mainly about). So the question is whether unifying the management/admin/payload side will really save the $100 million that they think it will. I suppose my opinion is that they will save something but there also may be costs, as competition is no longer able to provide another lever on costs. global competition in marketplace (sounds like a plug for Thomas Friedman's new book - The World is Flat! ). There is no global competition for US government contracts, which is what this is about. If I'm reading the following correctly, commercial Atlas and Delta flights aren't going to be done through United Launch Alliance: Lockheed Martin's International Launch Services (including Proton) and Boeing Launch Services (including Sea Launch) are not included in the joint venture. These entities will continue to sell launch services to non-U.S. government customers. http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0505/01eelv/ Incidentally, I did find an article which clarifies that this deal does indeed have the (apparent) blessing of the Air Force: The U.S. Air Force had encouraged the companies last year to team up on launches. . . . Air Force spokeswoman Maj. Karen Finn said the military service -- which oversees launching national security satellites -- looked forward to the outcome of the regulatory reviews. http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050502/arms_...eing.html?.v=3 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Kingdon" wrote in message
news Looks like the Air Force has decided that it doesn't believe in competition after all (I'm assuming that the Air Force was consulted as is planning to say yes, although I assume that their approval is still needed): United Launch Alliance will be structured as a 50-50 joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin -- combining services currently provided separately by Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' Expendable Launch Systems division and by Lockheed Martin's Space Systems Company -- for launches of each company's respective rockets. http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0505/01eelv/ So much for the theory that competition will bring the US government lower EELV prices. Jeff -- Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address. .. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Kingdon wrote:
Incidentally, I did find an article which clarifies that this deal does indeed have the (apparent) blessing of the Air Force: The U.S. Air Force had encouraged the companies last year to team up on launches. Teaming up is the 'new, new thing' here in the 21st century. It's usual justification is 'maintaining competition and industrial capabilities'. Witness the Virgina class SSN. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
and DDX and CVNX and JSF and....you get the idear
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Boeing-Lockheed EELV Joint Venture | Ed Kyle | Policy | 26 | May 10th 05 04:41 PM |
Amateur Telescope Making Competition | Dawn Baird-Chleborad | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | February 26th 05 10:15 PM |
Return to moon: EELV or HLV? Let the market decide (or at least the buyers). | Alex Terrell | Policy | 39 | March 22nd 04 08:16 PM |
BBC Sky at Night - Mars picture competition | Stephen Tonkin | UK Astronomy | 1 | September 11th 03 01:30 PM |
Aurora Student Design Competition Finalists | Ron Baalke | Misc | 0 | August 12th 03 04:37 PM |