Capitalism in space: SpaceX decided to scrub its Falcon Heavy static fire test today soon after they had loaded propellants into the rocket during countdown.
No details, but it appears to me that they are taking this test very seriously, and approaching each step with care. This was the first time they had loaded the entire Falcon Heavy, and I am not surprised they saw an issue that made them hesitate about continuing.
SpaceX has rescheduled the launchpad static fire test of its first Falcon Heavy rocket 24 hours, with a test window beginning at 1 pm Eastern.
Capitalism in space: Arianespace yesterday announced that it has purchased the last ten Ariane 5 rockets as part of the company’s transition to its new Ariane 6 rocket in 2020.
These rockets appear to be for launches from 2020 to 2023, during a time period when they will be testing Ariane 6 and initiating its first operational flights.
Doug Messier today has written a sad summary of the status of the Google Lunar X-Prize, and it does appear that no one is going to meet the March 31, 2018 deadline.
The news yesterday that Team Indus failed to raise the cash to pay for its rocket launch appears to have killed both it and the Japanese competitor. Lack of funds also appear to have stopped the Israeli team. Meanwhile, delays in getting the rockets operational for Moon Express and Synergy Moon leave both stranded on the ground.
Capitalism in space: SpaceX has raised its first Falcon Heavy rocket onto the launchpad in preparation for the static fire test required before the rocket can do its first launch.
SpaceX’s first Falcon Heavy rocket has been raised vertical at pad 39A for the second time in advance of a planned hold-down test-firing of its main engines tomorrow during a window that extends from 1-7 pm EST (1800-0000 GMT). Kennedy Space Center employees were told to expect an estimated 15-second firing.
Capitalism in space: Several large hotel chains are putting up new hotels in the Boca Chica area near SpaceX’s new spaceport, expressly because they are anticipating a tourist demand once launches begin.
None of this is a surprise. It is good news, nonetheless.
ULA has settled a lawsuit with a whistleblower who claimed the company had defrauded the federal government of at least $90 million by overbilling employee work hours.
Unlike the commercial marketplace where prices of goods and services are determined by market forces including competition, sellers in the aerospace industry face little or no competition and contract pricing is based largely on a contractor’s estimated costs, the lawsuit says.
ULA charged the government tens of millions of dollars for work that was never performed and inflated the estimated labor hours including the time required to buy parts and materials from vendors, the lawsuit says.
ULA retaliated against Scott [the whistleblower] by forcing him out of the company after he revealed the alleged illegal activities. ULA officials placed a camera above his desk, monitored and questioned his cell phone and computer use, and suggested he violated the law or engaged in improper bidding practices himself, the lawsuit says.
ULA used a system called the Keith Crohn model that creates a grid using the cost of equipment to reach an employee cost. A labor value was placed on the grid for every item ordered through the company’s purchasing department. For example, any item that cost between $1 and $1,000 would be assigned a labor value of 8 hours. It didn’t matter what part it was, the lawsuit said. The U.S. bans arbitrary cost estimates when actual data is available that establishes the cost.
The first paragraph of the quote above actually describes the bad deal that the Air Force made with ULA back in the early 2000s, giving the company a monopoly on launches while subsidizing it to the tune of $1 billion per year. That deal is now dead, and ULA is instead forced to compete with SpaceX (and soon others I hope) for launch contracts. Not surprisingly, their prices have dropped considerably.
The competition heats up: Arianespace officials told reporters today that it plans to complete 14 launches in 2018, which would be a record for the company.
For 2018, the company is targeting seven launches of the Ariane 5 model, four launches for the Soyuz model and three launches of the Vega satellite launcher.
Isn’t competition wonderful? SpaceX forces everyone to lower their launch prices, and instead of going out of business, which the old rocket companies were saying would happen for decades should they be forced to drop prices, everyone gets more customers, more business, and more profits. I am shocked, shocked!
Whether Arianespace can maintain this growth however is another story. As newer rocket companies, such as Blue Origin, come on line with even lower costs, I am not sure their more expensive rockets will survive.
Link here. The article provides a nice summary of all the reports on the SpaceX launch and its mysterious top secret payload Zuma, including outlining the various failure possibilities. The one scenario they do not mention, however, is that the failure story itself is entirely bogus, a misinformation campaign by the unknown government agency that launched it.
I have no idea what happened, though it still appears to me most likely that SpaceX’s rocket performed as contracted.
India’s competitor for the the Google Lunar X-Prize, Team Indus, has exited the competition because it could not raise the funds needed to buy a launch on an Indian PSLV rocket.
It is unclear how this will effect Japan’s team, Hakuto, which was going to fly on the same rocket, mounted to the Team Indus lander. I suspect that their effort is over as well.
Capitalism in space: Blue Origin has released a short video showing a recently completed successful static fire test of its BE-4 rocket engine.
You can see the test here. The article above actually doesn’t provide much information about the engine’s testing program, other than claiming that the company is ramping up its testing.
Anonymous sources are suggesting that the top secret government payload that SpaceX successfully placed in orbit two days ago might have been lost.
Very little is presently known. Statements from SpaceX suggest that its Falcon 9 rocket worked perfectly, which would suggest the problems occurred after second stage separation. However, one source seems to suggest otherwise.
Until I get more information, I am therefore still counting this launch as a success for SpaceX.
