Connect with us

News

SpaceX nears big US govt. missions as ULA handwaves about risks of competition

Falcon 9 B1045 rolls out to Pad 40 ahead of its first launch in April 2018. (NASA/SpaceX)

Published

on

Speaking at the 2018 Von Braun Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama, ULA COO John Elbon expressed worries that the US National Security Space (NSS) apparatus could be put at significant risk if it comes to rely too heavily on the commercial launch industry to assure access to space.

Given that the US military’s launch capabilities rest solely on SpaceX and ULA and will remain that way for at least three more years, Elbon’s comment was effectively an odd barb tossed in the direction of SpaceX and – to a lesser extent – Blue Origin, two disruptive and commercially-oriented launch providers.

Reading between the lines

For the most part, Elbon’s brief presentation centered around a reasonable discussion of ULA’s track record and future vehicle development, emphasizing the respectable reliability of its current Atlas V and Delta IV rockets and the ‘heritage’ they share with ULA’s next-generation Vulcan vehicle. However, the COO twice brought up an intriguing concern that the US military launch apparatus could suffer if it ends up relying too heavily on ‘commercially-sustained’ launch vehicles like Falcon 9/Heavy or New Glenn.

To provide historical context and evidence favorable to his position, Elbon brought up a now-obscure event in the history of the launch industry, where – 20 years ago – companies Lockheed Martin and Boeing reportedly “set out to develop … Atlas V and Delta IV” primarily to support the launch of several large satellite constellations. The reality and causes of the US launch industry’s instability in the late ’90s and early ’00s is almost indistinguishable from this narrative, however.

Despite the many veils of aerospace and military secrecy surrounding the events that occurred afterward, the facts show that – in 1999 – Boeing (per acquisition of McDonnell Douglas) and Lockheed Martin (LM) both received awards of $500M to develop the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets, and the military further committed to buying a full 28 launches for $2B between 2002 and 2006. Combined, the US military effectively placed $3B ($4.5B in 2018 dollars) on the table for its Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program with the goal of ensuring uninterrupted access to space for national security purposes.

Advertisement

Rocketing into corporate espionage

“The robust commercial market forecast led the Air Force to reconsider its acquisition strategy.  The EELV acquisition strategy changed from a planned down-select to a single contractor and a standard Air Force development program [where the USAF funds vehicle development in its entirety] to a dual commercialized approach that leveraged commercial market share and contractor investment.” – USAF EELV Fact Sheet, March 2017

The above quote demonstrates that there is at least an inkling of truth in Elbon’s spin. However, perhaps the single biggest reason that the EELV program and its two awardees stumbled was gross, inexcusable conduct on the part of Boeing. In essence, the company’s space executives conspired to use corporate espionage to gain an upper-hand over Lockheed Martin, knowledge which ultimately allowed Boeing to severely low-ball the prices of its Delta IV rocket, securing 19 of 28 available USAF launch contracts.

Ultimately, Lockheed Martin caught wind of Boeing’s suspect behavior and filed a lawsuit that began several years of USAF investigations and highly unpleasant revelations, while Boeing also had at least 10 future launch contracts withdrawn to the tune of ~$1B (1999). USAF investigations discovered that Boeing had lied extensively to the Air Force for more than four years – the actual volume of information stolen would balloon wildly from Boeing’s initial reports of “seven pages of harmless data” to 10+ boxes containing more than 42,000 pages of extremely detailed technical and proprietary information about Lockheed Martin’s Atlas V rocket proposal.

“If you rewind the clock 20 years, there were folks on a panel like this having dialogue about commercial launch, and there were envisioned several constellations that were going to require significant commercial launch. Lockheed Martin and Boeing set out to develop launch vehicles that were focused on that very robust commercial market – in the case of McDonald Douglas at the time, which later became Boeing, the factory in Decatur was…sized to crank out 40 [rocket boosters] a year, a couple of ships were bought to transport those…significant infrastructure put in place to address that envisioned launch market.” – John Elbon, COO, United Launch Alliance (ULA)

 

Advertisement

In reality, Boeing was so desperate to secure USAF launches – despite the fact that it knew full well that Delta IV was too expensive to be sustainably competitive – that dozens of employees were eventually roped into a systematic, years-long, highly-illegal program of corporate espionage specifically designed to beat out government launch competitor Lockheed Martin. Humorously, Delta IV was not even Boeing’s design – rather, Boeing acquired designer McDonnell Douglas in late 1996, five days before the USAF announced the decision to reject Boeing and another company’s EELV proposals, narrowing down to two finalists (McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed Martin).

Seven years after the original lawsuit snowballed, Boeing settled with Lockheed Martin for a payment of more than $600M in 2006, accepting responsibility for its employees’ actions but admitting no corporate wrongdoing. Five years after that settlement, John Elbon became Vice President of Boeing’s Space Exploration division. This is by no means to suggest that Elbon is in any way complicit, having spent much of his 30+ years at Boeing managing the company’s involvement in the International Space Station, but more serves as an example of how recent these events are and why their consequences almost certainly continue to reverberate loudly within the US space industry.

SpaceX forces change

Worsened significantly by the consequences of Boeing’s lies about the actual operational costs of its Delta IV rocket (it had planned to secretly write off a loss on each rocket in order to steal USAF market share from LockMart), the commercial market for the extremely expensive rocket was and still is functionally nonexistent. 35 out of the family’s 36 launches have been contracted by the US military (30), NOAA (3), or NASA (2); the rocket’s first launch, likely sold at a major discount to Eutelsat, remains its one and only commercial mission.

ULA’s Delta Heavy seen during the August 2018 launch of NASA’s Parker Solar Probe. (Tom Cross)

Atlas V, typically priced around 30% less than comparable Delta IV variants, has had a far more productive career, albeit with very few commercial launches since the Dec. 2006 formation of the United Launch Alliance. Since 2007, just 5 of Atlas V’s 70 launches have been for commercial customers. Frankly, although Atlas V was appreciably more affordable than Delta IV, neither rocket was ever able to sustainably compete with Europe’s Ariane 5 workhorse – Ariane 5 cost more per launch, but superior payload performance often let Arianespace manifest two large satellites on a single launch, approximately halving the cost for each customer. Russia’s affordable (but only moderately reliable) Proton rockets also played an important role in the commercial launch industry prior to SpaceX’s arrival.

After fighting tooth and nail for years to break ULA’s US governmental launch monopoly, SpaceX’s first dedicated National Security Space launch finally occurred less than a year and a half ago, in May 2017. SpaceX has since placed a USAF spaceplane and a classified NSS-related satellite into orbit and been awarded launch contracts for critical USAF payloads, most notably winning five of five competed GPS III satellite launches, to begin as early as mid-December. Falcon 9 will cost the USAF roughly 30% less than a comparable Atlas 5 contract, $97M to ULA’s ~$135M.

 

Advertisement

A bit more than two decades after Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas and began a calculated effort to steal trade secrets from Lockheed Martin, Elbon – now COO of the Boeing/Lockheed Martin-cooperative ULA – seems to fervently believe that the most critical mistake made in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the USAF’s decision to partially support the development of two separate rockets. Elbon concluded his remarks on the topic with one impressively unambiguous summary of ULA’s position:

“We have to make sure that we don’t get too much supply and not enough demand so that the [launch] providers can’t survive in a robust business environment, and then we lose the capability as a country to do the launches we need to do … [That’s] the perspective we have at ULA and it’s based on the experience that we’ve been through in the past.”

In his sole Delta IV vs. Atlas V case-study, what ULA now seems to think might have been “too much supply” under the USAF’s EELV program appears to literally be the fundamental minimum conditions needed for competition to exist at all – two companies offering two competing products. Short of directly stating as much, it’s difficult to imagine a more concise method of revealing the apparent belief that competition – at all – is intrinsically undesirable or risky.

A recording of the Von Braun Symposium’s Commercial Space panel can be viewed here at timestamp 01:11:40.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla launches new color from Gigafactory Berlin

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has launched a new color at Gigafactory Berlin in Germany, home of the company’s “world-class paint shop,” as Elon Musk once called it.

Bringing a new color to Tesla’s Model Y, there are now five available colors for those who will receive a vehicle from Gigafactory Berlin, with four of them being colors offered in other markets.

However, there is now one distinct color that is only available in Germany: Marine Blue.

Priced at €1,300, Marine Blue will cost the same as both Diamond Black and Stealth Grey, while Quicksilver and Ultra Red are available for double the price.

It is the third shade of blue Tesla offers across its lineup, as Deep Metallic Blue and Glacier Blue are also offered, but in other markets.

Tesla has routinely flexed Giga Berlin for having the most advanced paint shop throughout its factories, and it has produced some interesting colors over the past few years, some of which were truly awesome.

Tesla Giga Berlin is getting a world-class paint shop, new color ‘layers’ to come

Advertisement

In 2020, Musk said, “Giga Berlin will have the world’s most advanced paint shop, with more layers of stunning colors that subtly change with curvature.”

He also detailed the company’s plans to upgrade the Fremont and Shanghai paint shops. Gigafactory Texas was not yet unveiled. Tesla has worked to improve those facilities, especially in Fremont.

It was able to roll out the new Diamond Black color earlier this year.

However, Giga Berlin seems to remain the standard in terms of paint for Tesla. It routinely offers new colors.

For example, back in 2022, Tesla rolled out its familiar Quicksilver color for the Model Y, while also introducing Midnight Cherry Red, a color close to burgundy. However, the company chose to discontinue the color after determining internally that customers no longer wanted to buy it.

Advertisement

Midnight Cherry Red was removed as an option earlier this year, likely to make way for the development of the new Marine Blue.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Autopilot visualization gets big upgrade with tons of new additions

The AP visualization shows up on the center touchscreen and illustrates the surroundings of the cars. It has gotten better in recent years, as it is able to outline types of vehicles, pedestrians, animals, and more.

Published

on

Credit: @greentheonly | X

Tesla’s Autopilot visualization just got a big upgrade as the company added tons of new additions to what it will be able to render in terms of a vehicle’s surroundings.

The AP visualization shows up on the center touchscreen and illustrates the surroundings of the cars. It has gotten better in recent years, as it is able to outline types of vehicles, pedestrians, animals, and more.

Tesla just fixed a four-year-old bug with Full Self-Driving visualization

However, it still does not have every single application, and acquiring them will take some time. If an object or vehicle is visible to the vehicle but an accurate render is not available, the car will instead pick whatever is closest.

For example, I passed an Amish family yesterday in Lancaster, PA, and instead of illustrating the horse and carriage, it simply showed a small box truck.

Advertisement

In an effort to make the Autopilot and Full Self-Driving suites more robust and accurate, Tesla has added a substantial amount of vehicle renders, which will become available in the coming weeks.

The visualizations were found by Tesla hacker @greentheonly, who posted them on X.

The new visualization renders are:

  • Ambulance
  • Firetruck
  • Garbage Truck
  • Schoolbus
  • European Semi Truck
  • Golf Cart
  • Person on a Scooter
  • Person on a Skateboard
  • Stroller
  • Street Sweeper
  • Three-Wheeler
  • Trailer
  • Train
  • Tram
  • Person in a Wheelchair

Here is an image with all of the Autopilot visualization renders:

Credit: Green

The visualization is a crucial part of manual operation and can be considered a distinct advantage that Tesla has over other companies.

It continues to be an effort that Tesla invests heavily in, as it keeps refining the suite and making it more robust with additional visualizations and animations.

Recently, it was revealed that Tesla is planning to utilize Unreal Engine for driver visualization to create a realistic depiction of the vehicle’s environment. Tesla has not yet confirmed this, but coding found with the Model S and Model X showed it could be coming in the near future.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla dominates best-selling EVs in Q3, but there’s one disappointment

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla dominated the sales figures for electric vehicles in the third quarter in the United States, but there was one disappointment: the Cybertruck.

As a whole, the EV industry benefitted from the loss of the $7,500 EV tax credit in Q3, which was something many expected. As the credit expired, consumers rushed to showrooms to take the credit and remove $7,500 from the purchase price of their new vehicle.

Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might

It was a very interesting time for many companies as they scrambled to figure out how to push as many vehicles out the door as they could in preparation for the tax credit’s removal. In typical fashion, Tesla was able to top every manufacturer and secure a dominating portion of the overall market in Q3.

However, some other OEMs pulled out some surprises, including Chevrolet, Honda, and Ford, which managed to get two vehicles in the top 10, as many as Tesla.

Advertisement

Cox Automotive compiled the data in its Q3 Electric Vehicle Sales Report:

  1. Tesla Model Y – 114,897
  2. Tesla Model 3 – 53,857
  3. Chevrolet Equinox EV – 25,085
  4. Hyundai Ioniq 5 – 21,999
  5. Honda Prologue – 20,236
  6. Ford Mustang Mach-E – 20,177
  7. Volkswagen ID.4 – 12,470
  8. Audi Q6 e-tron – 10,299
  9. Ford F-150 Lightning – 10,005
  10. Rivian R1S – 8,184

10.5 percent of the automotive sales in the U.S. in Q3 were electric, a new record that surpasses that of Q3 2024, where the total share of sales for EVs was 8.6 percent.

Now, the disappointment that is evident from this list is the fact that there is no Tesla Cybertruck listed. That’s because it was the second-best-selling EV pickup on the market. The company sold 5,385 Cybertruck units in Q3.

The Cybertruck has been a vehicle that has confused many Tesla fans and owners, especially considering the company had such stratospheric expectations for the vehicle while it was in development. Reservation trackers had the truck sitting between one million and two million orders, but it has not lived up to that.

Pricing is the main issue with Cybertruck. Tesla introduced the pickup with Single, Dual, and Tri-motor configurations, priced at $39,990, $49,990, and $69,990. Those price points are simply a thing of the past.

Continue Reading

Trending