ULA to trim management by 30%
The competition heats up: In order to make itself more efficient and competitive, ULA has decided to cut its management by 30%.
ULA CEO Tory Bruno has said ULA must shrink to remain successful under reduced U.S. military budgets and with Elon Musk’s SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies Corp.) being certified to compete against ULA for national security mission launches. “To achieve that transformation, we are reducing the number of executive positions by 30 percent and offered a voluntary layoff for those interested on the executive leadership team,” said ULA spokeswoman Jessica Rye. “It is important for ULA to move forward early in the process with our leadership selections to ensure a seamless transition and our continued focus on mission success.”
This news should be looked at in the context of a proposed Senate bill that requires the Air Force to significantly cut funding to ULA.
Not only would the bill cut an annual $1 billion payment from the Air Force to ULA, it would put severe restrictions on the number of Russian engines ULA could use in its Atlas 5, which in turn will limit the number of launches the Air Force can buy from the company.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
The competition heats up: In order to make itself more efficient and competitive, ULA has decided to cut its management by 30%.
ULA CEO Tory Bruno has said ULA must shrink to remain successful under reduced U.S. military budgets and with Elon Musk’s SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies Corp.) being certified to compete against ULA for national security mission launches. “To achieve that transformation, we are reducing the number of executive positions by 30 percent and offered a voluntary layoff for those interested on the executive leadership team,” said ULA spokeswoman Jessica Rye. “It is important for ULA to move forward early in the process with our leadership selections to ensure a seamless transition and our continued focus on mission success.”
This news should be looked at in the context of a proposed Senate bill that requires the Air Force to significantly cut funding to ULA.
Not only would the bill cut an annual $1 billion payment from the Air Force to ULA, it would put severe restrictions on the number of Russian engines ULA could use in its Atlas 5, which in turn will limit the number of launches the Air Force can buy from the company.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
Is it true that Musk has been significantly subsidized by our government to the tune of about 5 billion dollars?
With SpaceX, he has a $1.6 billion contract to supply cargo to ISS. It is not subsidization, because he has to deliver services to get the money. It is a straightforward business deal. Similarly, the SpaceX crew ferrying contract is payment for services delivered, bringing crew to ISS.
His deal with Tesla, however, is subsidies. He isn’t providing the government any services, merely taking advantage of the Obama administration’s naive belief that anything that says it will help the environment will, and thus must be given a blank check of taxpayer money.
Once your operation is of sufficient size that it cannot hide from political attention, the degree of government intervention in the economy, especially the technical development portion of it, has reached the point where *not* publicly accepting government money, in some way, marks you as an “Enemy of the State” to many “progressives” I’ve talked to. The immediate assumption about someone refusing both contracts and subsidies, amongst many “progressive” friends, is that “He must be an extremist”.
In addition, accepting government money is so common that not dong so makes it harder to find investors, because “you don’t have your eye on profits”. Only when it became obvious that Congressional intervention was destroying spaceflight progress did this change with Musk and a few large investors. Even then, once a new group accepts government money, of *any* sort, its established competitors can then turn around and grind the handle of a rumor mill, to say that *every* dime you get is subsidy. Yes, government contracts in 2008 saved SpaceX, financially, but those were real service delivery contracts, not subsidy.
The LA Times article was misleading. Tesla and SpaceX got very few direct grants of money. Those would be reasonably objectionable. Also, most of the number quoted are for things spread over 10-20 years. Usually tax breaks, which lots of industries get.
Also, the EV credits are interesting, since they get paid from other companies, who are required to build EV’s but are not. So instead since Tesla is making only EV’s they have extra credits to sell. Allowing sale of these is a strange model, but whatever, it is how the rules work. So although they get counted, it is not from a government program, it is other companies paying for it.
As Bob noted, contracts for services should not count. (Development contracts do not count either. NASA paid for the COTS program so that at the end, technology would be developed so they could buy flights and it worked. Then they bought flights in CRS, and soon in CRS-2, and again in CCtCAP/Commerical Crew. Boeing/ULA do not launch Atlas/Delta/SLS for free, they charge to develop the tech, build the vehicles, run the launch site, etc).
At least one of the $400 million loans has been paid back in full, early.
So the number cited in the article is click bait, The details are more complex. But when you break it down, they worked within the system as it exists, taking advantage of the same things every company tries to take advantage of, if available.
Tom wrote, “Yes, government contracts in 2008 saved SpaceX, financially, but those were real service delivery contracts, not subsidy.”
Not only were they not subsidies, but milestones were required to be met before milestone payments were made. This is analogous to hiring a contractor to work on your house, he gets paid for progress completed. Payments to SpaceX and the other contractors/competitors were for goods or services rendered.
Kistler had one of these contracts, but was unable to make enough milestones to get paid enough to remain in business. Being awarded the contract does not guarantee payment or the company’s survival.
Meanwhile, ULA has been receiving actual subsidies, which the Air Force has decided to phase out in order to provide a more level field for competition.
http://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/air-force-subsidies-to-ula-to-end/