Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

SpaceX vs. Everyone - ULA, NG, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

Bgarret

Model 3 ownin' Michigan scofflaw
May 10, 2013
1,175
3,891
Michigan
Just finished watching Elon's presser in Washington DC. I thought another thread might be in order. I've written before that I don't think I have ever seen a person as gifted as Elon at taking on the status quo...let's see how this goes.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I wish Elon was a little bit more polished as a speaker, but it is very refreshing to see such candor and honest feeling from a CEO.

Agreed. I was actually quite surprised at how genuinely hurt he seemed when discussing the ULA situation. A lot of his interviews are much more optimistic and focused in terms of the material. Was also surprised to see the jabs at Russia, I think it would have been fine to just say "in light of international events."

Hard to believe he nearly used converted Russian ICBM's to start SpaceX!
 
I love how every article I've seen so far reads: "SpaceX suing..." Where is the one about the awesome breakthrough in reusable rockets???

It's because most reporters (and the public at large) are science illiterate and can't grasp the incredible leaps Space X is accomplishing...but political corruption, lawsuits...that we understand.
 
Never thought I'd visit John McCains website, but by the time I had noticed it was too late: McCain has written inquiring emails to EELV officials regarding the block buy conttract: http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=c6782e97-ca58-47c4-991f-4587c8da1e9d

It reads more like the old McCain, before he ran for president...the real maverick and war hero. That was a quick shot across the bow and a nice counter balance to the mealy mouthed Shelby. I say go get em war hero.
 
Hard to believe he nearly used converted Russian ICBM's to start SpaceX!

I just thought I'd point out that this isn't true. Elon considered buying Russian ICBMs so he could send a greenhouse to Mars to drum up international support for a mission to Mars. When the cost ended up being prohibitively high, he began to realize that the reason we're not on Mars yet isn't due to lack of ambition, but lack of an inexpensive launch vehicle. It was at that point that he decided to start SpaceX - to create an inexpensive launch vehicle himself.

I highly recommend this article, previously posted to the "Elon Musk" thread:

Article:
Elon Musk Interview - Elon Musk SpaceX Interview - Esquire

Where it was discussed on this forum:
Elon Musk - Page 45

Here's a relevant part:

article said:
They weren't starting a rocket company. The idea at the start was, in Ressi's words, "to influence public opinion by launching a high-profile mission to Mars." That was it, and that was all — they planned to buy a rocket and then send it to Mars with something in it, something alive that had a chance of staying alive. At first, they were going to send a mouse; then they thought of sending a plant, maybe a food crop in its own biosphere. "We created a company called Life to Mars, because that was the objective," Ressi says. "We were going to show the world that two guys with money and vision could reach Mars, and that it wasn't that bad a place."

They began shopping for the rocket, or, in aerospace-industry parlance, the "launch vehicle." Cantrell had arranged for them to meet with Arianespace, the European consortium that sends a significant portion of the world's satellites into space, and Musk and Ressi arranged for them to stay in Paris. "We rented the penthouse suite of one of the major hotels in Paris, across from the Louvre," Ressi says. "We had the whole top floor, usually rented by the sultan of Brunei or something. Elon and I invited all our friends. It was basically about sixty hours of meetings and thirty hours of partying, and by the time we got to Russia, we were destroyed...."

They went to Russia because Arianespace's rockets were too expensive, and they'd been told that Russia was selling what Cantrell calls "repurposed ICBMs" for $7 million apiece. A superpower had collapsed, and Musk and Ressi thought they could cash in by buying three of its rockets. "This was when it was still the Wild West over there," Ressi says. "I mean, there were like dead people on the side of the road. We got pulled over multiple times, at gunpoint, and had to bribe the police. No reason. Just 'Give us money.' 'Okay....'

"Then we started having meetings with the Russian space program, which is basically fueled by vodka. We'd all go in this little room and every single person had his own bottle in front of him. They'd toast every two minutes, which means twenty or thirty toasts an hour. 'To space!' 'To America!' 'To America in space!' I finally looked over at Elon and Jim and they were passed out on the table. Then I passed out myself."

It was no different when the Russians visited Musk and Ressi in Los Angeles. "They came to L.A. to ask us for cash," Ressi says. "'We can't continue unless you give us $5,000 in cash.' We heard this on a Saturday, because they wanted party money for the weekend. How do you come up with five grand in L. A. on a Saturday? You don't. So we went to the Mondrian, where I knew the manager. 'I need all the cash you have... .' We cleaned the Mondrian out to give the Russians their fee. The final bits of cash were ones... ."

They had two more trips scheduled to Russia; now Ressi decided, as he says, "I didn't like dealing with Russians," and told Musk he wasn't going back. Musk went anyway. On the second trip, Musk brought his wife, Justine — "I think that's the trip when the lead Russian designer started spitting at us," Cantrell says — and on the third and final trip he brought his money. He was ready to buy three Russian ICBMs for $21 million when the Russians told him that no, they meant $21 million for one. "They taunted him," Cantrell says. "They said, 'Oh, little boy, you don't have the money?' I said, 'Well, that's that.' I was sitting behind him on the flight back to London when he looked at me over the seat and said, 'I think we can build a rocket ourselves.'"
 
It reads more like the old McCain, before he ran for president...the real maverick and war hero. That was a quick shot across the bow and a nice counter balance to the mealy mouthed Shelby. I say go get em war hero.

Itwas well delivered. However, I just have a hard time finding respect for politicians that say one thing and do another, and I refuse to forget like most the citizens who vote for these people.

Means I don't like many politicians :)

I came to the conclusion last night that the USAF is likely in a bind and will have to cave. That was before I found this letter too.
 
SpaceX tried prevent forming of ULA in 2005 but was dismissed for not be ready to compete in the EELV market. Now SpaceX have more merits to compete and it seem that ULA is pushing back more firmly.

Sorry for forbidden crossposting but this is official ULA's response:

SpaceX Actions are Irresponsible


SpaceX, through their judicial filings and their congressional supporters, is now attempting to instruct the executive branch in how to impose and monitor sanctions against Russia.

In their most recent filing with the court, SpaceX chastises the Department of the Treasury for improperly interpreting the sanctions Treasury itself is chartered to interpret and enforce.

In spite of the fact that four separate cabinet level departments — Justice, State, Commerce and Treasury—formally declared that “payments to NPO Energomash would not directly or indirectly contravene [sanctions],” SpaceX continues to irresponsibly push the issue.

The SpaceX argument, if followed, would lead to a dangerous expansion of sanctions far beyond the intent of those currently in place. The SpaceX logic would potentially apply to any U.S. entity engaged in any activity with any Russian entity, far beyond the intent of current foreign policy.

By meddling in foreign policy, SpaceX risks destabilizing a delicate international situation, and distracts administration officials at a critical time, ultimately harming the interests and security of the nation.
SpaceX purports to be taking this stand on principle, in a patriotic effort to ensure the laws of the land are upheld. But SpaceX’s patriotic zeal is limited to an injunction against NPO Energomash, who just happens to be the engine supplier for SpaceX’s most serious competition, the Atlas V.

If motivated by ideology, SpaceX should be just as concerned about many other activities involving U.S and Russian space cooperation. SpaceX attempts to link NPO Energomash to Deputy Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin through ROSCOSMOS, the Russian equivalent of NASA. Under SpaceX’s logic, for example, all the payments by NASA to ROSCOSMOS for Soyuz launches and other support to the International Space Station (ISS) should also be sanctioned, eliminating U.S. access to the station. Additionally, SeaLaunch should be sanctioned since it uses an engine sold by NPO Energomash. This would harm Ukraine, the makers of the first stage for SeaLaunch.

In fact, based on its overriding moral concern over cooperation with Russia, SpaceX should forgo its ISS cargo supply contracts which directly benefit Russia as a participant in the ISS program.

But SpaceX is not advocating other injunctions nor offering to give up its own missions that benefit Russia. Their patriotism on this issue is merely a façade to hide an overt strategy to eliminate their most serious competitor and avoid the prudent and rigorous process established by the Air Force to legitimately become certified and compete for critical national security launches.

George Sowers, Ph.D.
VP, Strategic Architecture
United Launch Alliance

 
So because they cannot address the competition aspect of the 36 cores they only address the sanctions and then of course go overboard with it. Well I do agree with them though. NASA should stop buying tickets from Russians to get their astronauts to space. They should accelerate SpaceX program to human rating and use them. So the idea is correct ;) However the reference to NASA ISS resupply missions is idiotic as that contains components from all countries, not just Russian and it doesn't necessarily depend on the russian components. Also, it's an ongoing existing station, the ATLAS V rockets are basically new rockets (I doubt the 36 cores that have been ordered have all their components already ready, more likely they'd source engines from Russia still).

But if one wants to sanction Russia, then buying rockets is not the proper thing. The same goes for French and their military ship sales to Russia. Both should be banned right now to hurt Russia. Especially if there are alternatives.