This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

FTC Investigating United Launch Alliance

By Marc Boucher
NASA Watch
June 13, 2013
Filed under ,

Exclusive: Antitrust probe of Lockheed-Boeing rocket venture
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is investigating whether United Launch Alliance (ULA), a joint venture of Lockheed Martin Corp and Boeing Co, violated federal antitrust laws by “monopolizing” or restraining competition through an exclusivity agreement with the maker of the engines used in its rockets, according to a FTC document obtained by Reuters on Wednesday.
RD Amross, a joint venture of Russia’s NPO Energomash and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, a unit of United Technologies Corp, provides RD-180 engines for ULA rockets.
Industry sources say ULA is preventing RD Amross from selling the engines to other rocket makers, including Orbital Sciences Corp, which is trying to break into the lucrative market for government rocket launches.

SpaceRef co-founder, entrepreneur, writer, podcaster, nature lover and deep thinker.

4 responses to “FTC Investigating United Launch Alliance”

  1. John Kavanagh says:
    0
    0

    FTC signed off on ULA’s government-sanctioned launch monopoly in 2006 and now they’re worried about RD-180 engine sales? This market distortion investigation involves a pittance compared to the sole-source prices that ULA’s charged Defense and NASA over the last few years. ULA has little incentive to control costs or innovate as long as they’re not subjected to competitors. USAF has been complicit has they pursue over-the-horizon bulk buys of ULA core stages.

    “NASA and the Air Force agree that EELV program costs have recently risen by about 50 percent in the last year alone.”
    http://www.spacenews.com/ar

  2. John Gardi says:
    0
    0

    Folks:

    Huh? It took this long? Not because ULA made exclusivity agreements to launch Air Force payloads on their rockets? Not because ULA lobbied lawmakers to bully and budget NASA into using their rockets? It was because they prevented their subcontractors from selling rocket engines to the competition? What were they afraid of?

    Maybe this: What if Orbital saw the writing on the wall and decided to make a reusable first stage like SpaceX is attempting? The RD-180 might just fit the bill so they could short circuit the development time for an engine to speed things up. With a recoverable first stage and a solid fuel second stage, Orbital just might be economically competitive with SpaceX.

    Nope, RD-180 not available to Orbital. So, they have to settle for a less powerful rocket motor giving them no margin for recovery systems and less payload capacity than SpaceX’s Falcon 9.

    I’d consider that a pretty effective way to stifle innovation. Worse, ULA is doing this because they have no intentions of innovating at all (unless the government puts up the cash, up front with cost overruns built in, etc.).

    Sorry ULA, your rockets don’t deserve the first ‘E’ in ‘EELV’ and you should have been trying to get rid of that second ‘E’ from day one, like SpaceX is.

    tinker

    • jchisum says:
      0
      0

      twin AJ26 config has more thrust than the 2 barrel RD180. as for your stipulation that the future is re-usable that is at best a hope. just because your hero is the modern Henry Ford of Rockets doesn’t mean his “re-usable” rocket will be the mustang. more likely it will be his Edsel. Much.

  3. tejasmojo says:
    0
    0

    Well it is about time that something was done about ULAs monopolistic practices.