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.

Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Energy shines with substantial YoY growth in deployments

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Megapack

Tesla Energy shined in what was a weak delivery report for the first quarter, as the company’s frequently-forgotten battery storage products performed extraordinarily well.

Tesla reported its Q1 production, delivery, and deployment figures for the first quarter of the year, and while many were less-than-excited about the automotive side, the Energy division performed well with 10.4 GWh of energy storage products deployed during the first quarter.

This was a 156 percent increase year-over-year and the company’s second-best quarter in terms of energy deployments to date. Only Q4 2024 was better, as 11 GWh was recorded.

Tesla Energy is frequently forgotten and not talked about enough. The company has continued to deploy massive energy storage projects across the globe, and as it recorded 31.5 GWh of deployments last year, 2025 is already looking as if it will be a record-setting year if it continues at this pace.

Tesla Megapacks to back one of Europe’s largest energy storage sites

Advertisement

Although Energy performed well, many investors are privy to that of the automotive division’s performance, which is where some concern lies. Tesla had a weak quarter for deliveries, missing Wall Street estimates by a considerable margin.

There are two very likely reasons as to why this happened: the first is Tesla’s switchover to the new Model Y at its production facilities across the globe. Tesla said it lost “several weeks” of production due to the updating of manufacturing lines as it rolled out a new version of its all-electric crossover.

Secondly, Tesla could be facing some pressure from pushback against the brand, which is what many analysts will say. Despite the publicity of attacks on Tesla drivers and their vehicles, as well as the company’s showrooms, it would be safe to assume that we will have a better picture painted of what the issue is in Q2 after the company reports numbers in July.

New Tesla Model Y was a best-seller in China in March 2025

If Tesla is still struggling with lackluster delivery figures in Q2 after the Model Y is ramped and deliveries are more predictable and consistent, we could see where the argument for brand damage is legitimate. However, we are more prone to believe the Model Y, which accounts for most of Tesla’s sales, and its production ramp is likely the cause for what happened in Q1.

Advertisement

In what was a relatively bleak quarter, Tesla Energy still shines as the bright spot for the quarter.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla bull Wedbush responds to Q1 deliveries: ‘A disaster on every metric’

Published

on

Credit: diagnosticdennis/Instagram and @smile__no via Tesla Owners of Santa Clarita Valley/X

Tesla bull Wedbush has responded to the company’s lackluster Q1 delivery figures, which were released on Wednesday morning in a new note from analyst Dan Ives.

Tesla reported deliveries of 336,681 vehicles in the first quarter of the year, a far cry from the Wall Street estimate of 352,000 and whisper numbers of roughly 350,000. At first glance, it seems to be a disaster, but Tesla said it lost “several weeks of production” in Q1 due to the ramp of the new Model Y at all four of its vehicle production factories.

Tesla (TSLA) reports 336,681 vehicle deliveries for Q1 2025

This could be part of the reason that the company experienced a quarter of this performance, but there are also factors stemming from CEO Elon Musk’s involvement in the U.S. government, which has created some pushback in various markets.

It’s tough to say how much of each issue caused this type of quarter, but Ives wrote in a note to investors that Wedbush could not look at this “with rose-colored glasses,” as the performance “was a disaster on every metric.”

Advertisement

Ives believes it is time for Musk to make a move:

“The Street and us knew a bad 1Q was coming but this was even worse than expected. The time has come for Musk….it’s a fork in the road moment. The more political he gets with DOGE the more the brand suffers, there is no debate. This quarter was an example of the damage Musk is causing Tesla. This continues to be a moment of truth for Musk to navigate this brand tornado crisis moment and get onto the other side of this dark chapter for Tesla with much better days ahead.”

Interestingly, the stock dropped over 5 percent after the delivery report. It quickly rebounded 8 percent and is currently up over 5 percent on the day after a report from Politico stated that Musk and President Donald Trump have discussed the CEO stepping back from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Based on that, it seems that investors were looking for Musk to step back from his government duties and show more public attention to Tesla. Realistically, we do not know how much of his time is being devoted to Tesla and its EV initiative. However, it seems investors were ready to hear something along the lines of Musk being more involved and speaking openly about Tesla and its projects.

It’s not all bad. Ives still recognizes Tesla’s prowess with the rollout of robotaxi and Full Self-Driving and how much impact it could have moving forward:

Advertisement

“Autonomous remains the biggest transformation to the auto industry in modern-day history and in our view, Tesla will own the autonomous market in the US and globally with the launch of unsupervised FSD in Austin kicking off the autonomous era at Tesla that we value at $1 trillion alone on a sum-of-the-parts valuation…”

With that being said, he also wants Musk to balance responsibilities with DOGE and Tesla:

“BUT…Musk needs to stop this political firestorm and balance being CEO of Tesla with DOGE. The future is so bright but this is a full blown crisis Tesla is navigating now and its primarily self-inflected. We remain firmly bullish on the long-term Tesla story but Musk needs to get his act together or else unfortunately darker times are ahead for Tesla.”

Tesla shares are trading at $283.01, up 5.42% at 1:57 p.m. on the East Coast.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla shares Optimus’ improved walk in new update video

The video featured an Optimus robot confidently walking in a humanlike manner.

Published

on

Credit: Elon Musk/X

During Tesla’s Q1 2025 All-Hands meeting, CEO Elon Musk stated that the company will attempt to produce its first “legion” of humanoid robots this 2025.

A recent video from Elon Musk suggests that work continues to be underway to refine the humanoid robot before it enters production.

A Better Walk

Tesla’s new Optimus update video was shared on social media platform X by CEO Elon Musk, who described the video with the words, “Accurate actuators accelerate automation.” The video featured an Optimus robot walking confidently, in a manner that is significantly more humanlike than its previous iterations.

A post from Tesla Vice President of Optimus (Tesla Bot) Milan Kovac shared more context about the new video. As per Kovac, the short clip demonstrates the humanoid robot’s latest walk, with “straight knees, smoother heel-to-toe gait, and arms sway.” Kovac also noted that the humanoid robot was “Entirely trained in simulation with RL.”

Optimus’ Quick Progress

Optimus was initially announced in 2021 during Tesla’s AI Day event. At the time, Tesla only had a static model of the humanoid robot, as well as a literal man in a suit. Fast forward to today, and Optimus has already undergone several iterations. Several of its components have also been vastly improved, such as its hands, which is expected to feature 22 degrees of freedom when it enters production.

Advertisement

Tesla seems determined to start production of Optimus quickly. During the Q1 2025 All Hands meeting, CEO Elon Musk stated that the Fremont Factory had produced its first humanoid robot from its Optimus production line. Musk also noted that while Tesla is internally aiming for enough parts to produce 10,000 to 12,000 Optimus robots this year, the company could very well be capable of producing 5,000 units of the humanoid robot this 2025. 

“So this year, we hopefully will be able to make about 5,000 Optimus robots. We’re technically aiming for enough parts to make 10,000, maybe 12,000, but since it’s a totally new product with a totally new, like everything is totally new, I’ll say we’re succeeding if we get to half go the 10,000. But even 5,000 robots, that’s the size of a Roman legion, FYI,” Musk stated.

Continue Reading

Trending