ula United Launch Alliance (including Boeing and Lockheed-Martin) Updates

[Unobscured Vision]

I figured it was time to start one, for good or ill. We discuss ULA and its' parent companies Boeing and Lockheed-Martin a fair bit here in the Science Section.  First ULA-specific news item for the thread in-work.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Unobscured Vision

[Unobscured Vision]

Air Force Moving Forward After Blue Origin 'Setback'

Article link | Article link #2 | SpaceNews.com website | Investors Business Daily website

A Blue Origin BE-4 engine powerpack undergoing testing on a company test stand. Credit: Blue Origin

Quote

by GILLIAN RICH | 6/05/2017

 

The Air Force said Monday it is working to "figure out how to progress forward" after a setback in the development of a U.S.-made rocket engine.

 

Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, military deputy in Air Force acquisition, pointed out that the Air Force has agreements with both Blue Origin and Aerojet Rocketdyne (AJRD) to build a replacement for the Russian-made RD-180 engine.

 

"We are working with Space and Missile Center to figure out how to progress forward," Bunch told reporters at an Air Force Association breakfast Monday. "We are aware of the Blue Origin setback and we are in dialogue on how to more forward. It is one we are watching because we know the commitment we made to get off of the 180 as quickly as possible."

(...)
Blue Origin is developing the BE-4 engine for ULA as well as for its own New Glenn orbital launch vehicle. Aerojet Rocketdyne has a separate agreement with ULA and the Air Force to develop another domestically produced engine, the AR1.

Wow. This is a surprise that the AR-1 is still being funded and developed ... and it's NOT for a ULA launcher, either (but it could be).

 

Very, very interesting.

 

Your thoughts, people?

Edited June 7, 2017 by Unobscured Vision

[DocM]

Doubtful AR1 will continue to be funded by USAF after the Vulcan engine down-select. We'll see after the upcoming EELV procurement.

 

One funded engine which hasn't been discussed much is the RS-22 reusable engine for the Boeing Phantom Express (XS-1) flyback launcher. Initially it's being built from parts leftover from an early RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine design.  It literally begs to be used in a 5 engine cluster on a big, reusable conventional vertical launcher.

Edited June 7, 2017 by DocM

[Unobscured Vision]

Yeah, that's what surprised me -- I thought it'd already been down-selected and shelved. It's got plenty of promise though; and Kerolox still has a future if it can be made more efficient ... IF. And there's still an industry built around that fuel.

 

And OH YEAH -- RS-22 ... slap four of those into a nice, big, reusable booster with a crossfeed x4 that leads to a nice, big LF/LOX tank and you've essentially got Energia. I'm a fan of that configuration .. and it's kung-fu was strong.  

[IsItPluggedIn]

Why is the USAF funding this again? It made sense a couple years ago, but with spacex, why the continued funds towards ULA.

 

The only logic I can see is having dual launch providers, but if that is the case then ULA should fit the bill not the USAF, ULA still has the delta which could be used as a secondary or ariane if it comes down to it.

[DocM]

Its a USAF spacecraft, so they pay for its launch.

 

There are only 3 Delta IV Medium flights before it's retired next year, and only 7 Delta IV Heavy flights before it's retired in 2023. They're too expensive, and their line is being shut down after those cores are built. ULA will spend the next 2+ years tooling up for Vulcan, which won't fly until 2019-2020.

 

Atlas V is another kettle of worms because of the Russian embargo; under US law ULA can buy all the Russian RD-180 engines for commercial launches it wants, such as launching Cygnus for NASA,  but only a limited number for USAF launches, and the Atlas V is being phased out for those.

 

US national Atlas V security launches will be switched over to Vulcan, Falcon 9, Blue Origin and Falcon Heavy initially. There's a competition starting soon to see who replaces Delta IV Heavy as the primary big dawg.

[Unobscured Vision]

1 hour ago, DocM said:

There's a competition starting soon to see who replaces Delta IV Heavy as the primary big dawg.

[IsItPluggedIn]

8 hours ago, DocM said:

Its a USAF spacecraft, so they pay for its launch.

 

There are only 3 Delta IV Medium flights before it's retired next year, and only 7 Delta IV Heavy flights before it's retired in 2023. They're too expensive, and their line is being shut down after those cores are built. ULA will spend the next 2+ years tooling up for Vulcan, which won't fly until 2019-2020.

 

Atlas V is another kettle of worms because of the Russian embargo; under US law ULA can buy all the Russian RD-180 engines for commercial launches it wants, such as launching Cygnus for NASA,  but only a limited number for USAF launches, and the Atlas V is being phased out for those.

 

US national Atlas V security launches will be switched over to Vulcan, Falcon 9, Blue Origin and Falcon Heavy initially. There's a competition starting soon to see who replaces Delta IV Heavy as the primary big dawg.

 

So Atlas V is a USAF not a ULA spacecraft?

 

Will Vulcan be a USAF spacecraft or a ULA?

 

The reason for having a second launcher after SpaceX is ensured access to space, which they can use the Delta heavy if SpaceX has issue, yes it is expensive but they still have access to space.

 

Once Vulcan and Blue Origin launch then the investment kind of seems to be a waste.

[DocM]

5 hours ago, IsItPluggedIn said:

 

So Atlas V is a USAF not a ULA spacecraft?

It's a ULA (Boeing + Lockheed joint venture) launcher certified to fly USAF missions, a monopoly until very recently when SpaceX knocked down that door.

 

Quote

Will Vulcan be a USAF spacecraft or a ULA?

ULA, built on the former Delta IV production line and (most likely) using Blue Origin BE-4 methane fuelled engines instead of Delta IV's RS-68A hydrogen engines. 

 

Quote

The reason for having a second launcher after SpaceX is ensured access to space, which they can use the Delta heavy if SpaceX has issue, yes it is expensive but they still have access to space.

 

Once Vulcan and Blue Origin launch then the investment kind of seems to be a waste.

All of these launchers will also fly commercial missions, so none will be a "waste." Things look to be very busy, with even more US spaceports opening starting with one in southern Georgia.

 

Vulcan will fly in 2 versions; one with a Centaur upper stage (1 or 2 engines) and one with an ACES upper stage (up to 4 engines.)  Only Vulcan-ACES could substitute for Delta IV Heavy, but it won't be ready for a test flight until about 2024 which is after Delta IV Heavy disappears. Even then, Vulcan-ACES would need to fly several qualification missions to become USAF certified. Only then could it be added as a backup  launcher.

 

Falcon Heavy will fly long before either Vulcan or Blue Origin, so it'll have the lead in terms of certification flights.

 

[Unobscured Vision]

Yep. With all of the development going on, the mid-2020's on up look to be much more favorable for US-sourced vehicles from all vendors. ULA will be in a much better position than they are now.

 

And keep in mind that SLS is also a ULA product. If the need arises, it'll be available sometime after FY 2022 (*) for missions @US $500 million per launch.

 

(*Assuming no further issues arise in development)

[DocM]

ULA says it wasn't allowed to compete for the X-37B launch which was awarded to SpaceX.

 

OpEd: could be USAF is looking at it as a qualification launch for bigger things, or it's unofficial 'punishment' for ULA not bidding on the first GPS-3 launch because SpaceX was allowed to - a bit of a tantrum on their part which raised eyebrows. 

 

Reuters....

 

Quote

United Launch Alliance, a partnership of Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) and Boeing (BA.N) said on Friday it was not given an opportunity to bid against rival SpaceX for the upcoming launch of the U.S. Air Forces miniature X-37B space plane.

>
"ULA did not have the opportunity to bid for the Air Forces fifth X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV) mission which was recently awarded. ULA remains fully committed to continuing to support Americas national security missions with world-class launch services," the company said in a statement.
>

[Unobscured Vision]

Probably because of the RD-180 issue. There's likely a new set of directives from JCS saying "No, they're still using those engines so they're disqualified".

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Today is the 60th anniversary of the first Atlas launch.  It blew up  

 

 

 

[Unobscured Vision]

ULA Atlas V requires telemetry transmitter fix ahead of NROL-52 launch

 

Article Link | NASASpaceFlight.com website

 

Quote

United Launch Alliance’s clandestine Altas V launch in support of the US National Reconnaissance Office is still waiting for a launch date after failing to dodge bad weather and then a telemetry transmitter issue. Liftoff of NROL-52 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station is now waiting for a new launch date, following the latest delay on Saturday.

NROL Launch:

 

Following Friday’s scrub after several attempts to find a gap in the weather, ULA was aiming to attempt another launch on Saturday. However, a hardware issue delayed the mission several hours ahead of the launch window opening.

 

“The launch was scrubbed today due to an issue with a telemetry transmitter on the launch vehicle. The team will replace and retest the hardware on the launch vehicle in the Vertical Integration Facility prior to another launch attempt,” noted ULA. “A new launch date will be released when it’s established.”

 

(... please read the rest of the article at the link above.)

Oh my. The past several launches have each had issues that caused them to be late. ULA having some Q/A problems as a result of all the layoffs and downsizing? Possibly .... eeek.  

[DocM]

I think that QA is definitely a big part of it, and let's not forget the launch they almost lost because of Russian RD-180 engine quality issues. That one almost went down because of a bad propellant  metering valve.

[Beittil]

Very nice article (as usual) from Eric Berger on the imminent ULA choise between BE-4 and AR1 for Vulcan:

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/09/financial-document-reveals-vulcan-rocket-engine-competition-is-over/

 

Quote

The latest financial release from aerospace manufacturer Aerojet Rocketdyne reveals that the company spent none of its own money on development of the AR1 rocket engine this spring. Moreover, the quarterly 10-Q filing that covers financial data through June 30, 2018 indicates that Aerojet may permanently stop funding the engine with its own money altogether—a sign the company has no immediate customers.

 

Quote

Already this year, Aerojet has publicly acknowledged that it has renegotiated the 2016 deal so that the government will pay five-sixths of the cost of the AR1 engine. Not only does the document confirm this, but it also states that the agreement has been scaled back to less than half the funding needed to complete AR1 development and that Aerojet considers its financial contributions to the agreement completed.

 

I already called it earlier this year when Aerojet announced that they wanted the Air Force to cough up more of the share so they could do less. They already saw it coming that BE-4 was going to kick their butts hands down in this competition and nobody else would need AR1 ever. Ugh...

[Unobscured Vision]

 Shame. But we pretty much saw this happening. A powerhouse RP-1 platform with no customers. The industry has moved on to CH4 already.