You have commented 0 times on Rantburg.

We're sorry, but only human beings are allowed to comment on Rantburg. If you're a human being, please take this simple test to prove it. If you're not, get lost.

Sock Puppet, though not of Doom
Swine in love
Tacky tatoo featuring a monkey's bumhole
Fluffy bunnies
A cat. It is not in a hat.
Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Lurid Crime Tales-
A legal war begins. (No not Trump - SpaceX vs AF)
2019-05-27
[CNBC] Just revealed SpaceX lawsuit alleges Air Force ‘wrongly awarded’ billions to rocket competitors

KEY POINTS
  • The full SpaceX complaint alleges that the Air Force’s Space and Missile Systems Center “wrongly awarded” the funds “to a portfolio of three unproven rockets based on unstated metrics.”

  • The Air Force awarded $2.3 billion in rocket development contracts last year to competitors Blue Origin, Northrop Grumman and United Launch Alliance.

  • SpaceX alleges that the Air Force “determined that SpaceX’s one development launch vehicle,” or Starship, “rendered the entire SpaceX portfolio” as “high risk.”

Posted by:3dc

#9  Amateur astronomer captures the amazing moment dozens of Starlink satellites soar through the sky in single file, after SpaceX launch sparked UFO fears
Posted by: Skidmark   2019-05-27 19:04  

#8  Also, 79 launches since it started launching in 2002? Really? That is completely pathetic by itself. Less than 5 a year. That number by itself should be evidence of incompetence.
Posted by: Vernal Hatrick   2019-05-27 18:09  

#7  The Atlas V is ancient, all current projects are extremely late and overbudget, and you know what? I wouldn't call using imported Russian technology a great idea. So no. No points should be awarded for the Atlas V's existence. Especially since it is too underpowered to be of any actual use in next-gen projects.
Posted by: Vernal Hatrick   2019-05-27 18:07  

#6  Ow!
Posted by: Lyzette Sphigmomanometer1176   2019-05-27 16:20  

#5  I nominate Vernal Hatrick to be the Herb McCoy of rocket science at Rantburg.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-05-27 16:04  

#4  Atlas V launches 78 successful of 79 launches. Delta launch rate 95% success rate. No. No track record at all at ULA.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-05-27 16:00  

#3  United Launch Alliance has no proven track record of any kind. They are nothing more than a government subsidy program. Blue Origin seems to be progressing nicely, but they are definitely behind Space X by a large distance. Either of them winning contracts instead of Space X is a sign of corruption. No idea what Northrup Grumman has been doing recently, but have they gotten anything to fly yet? If not, they too are far behind Space X (and Blue Origin, for that matter).
Posted by: Vernal Hatrick   2019-05-27 14:25  

#2  And I'd ad, the deeply beloved Augustine Commission said Constellation would be late and over budget. Never said it couldn't fly. And it was a Bath House operation, which the lovers should consider.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-05-27 13:26  

#1  Jury is out on Blue Origin, though their engine seems to be progressing through development well. Northrop Grumman and ULA have a track record, so I think it's safe to say Vulcan and whatever else they are working on will fly no problem. Whether it's cost effective is totally unknown at this point. I'm pretty sure USAF has been directed by congress to avoid having only one vendor, so that's going to happen, short of a change in congress' thinking on the matter regardless of what Elon Musk would like to see.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-05-27 09:55