Dear Blue Origin: Please Put Something Into Orbit
Blue Origin protests launch contract rules as it competes with SpaceX, ULA, Northrop Grumman, Geekwire
“Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin space venture is protesting the rules of the game for awarding future national security launch contracts, while continuing to play against SpaceX, United Launch Alliance and Northrop Grumman. All four companies have submitted bids in the second phase of an Air Force competition aimed at selecting vendors for launches in the 2022-2026 time frame. In the first phase of the competition, the Air Force said it would set aside as much as $2.3 billion to support the development of Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket, ULA’s Vulcan rocket and Northrop Grumman’s OmegA rocket. All those rockets are scheduled to enter service in the 2021 time frame. However, the Air Force said it would reduce the field to two companies next year. Moreover, SpaceX – which didn’t qualify for development funds in Phase 1 – is joining the field for Phase 2 with its Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, both of which are already flying.”
In addition to @BlueOrigin other expected USAF competitors are @SpaceX @ulalaunch @northropgrumman #BlueOrigin has put nothing into orbit – yet. #SpaceX had same problem which they solved when they started to put things into orbit. Time for some #BlueOrigin launches Just sayin'
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) August 12, 2019
I recalled SpaceX sued to get development funds from phase 1 for Starship.
After launching things into orbit.
It’s been said many times that Blue Origin needs more Ferociter and less Gradatim. It’s still true, and if it doesn’t change soon wrt BE-4’s development hell ULA’s Vulcan will also be impacted.
The strategy Bezos uses will result it five orbital launches with that rocket, that will not recoup his development costs, and it will already be obsolete.
As I understand it, SpaceX didn’t get any funds from that case, but they did get the ability to compete in stage 2.
Blue Origin are simply arguing that the govt shouldn’t down-select to two vendors on the basis that four vendors is better. That might be true, but duopolies are a tried and tested solution to limit vendor development costs and standing costs whilst maintaining at least some level of competition. Considering USAF only recently went from a monopoly with ULA, a duopoly is progress 🙂
Also, I didn’t see Blue Origin complaining about the down-select process when they won funds in the first stage. Where you stand depends on where you sit, obviously.
Blue Origin are also not precluded from competing for future launches if they develop their own hardware with their own funds (or funds from other sources, eg, NASA if they can get it), like SpaceX. As Keith says – put things into orbit.
I feel like it should at least be three firms, given that we know a duopoly can evolve into a monopoly as with ULA.
No, if they lost, Blue Origin would not be able to compete for future launches. At least not for a fairly long time. The Launch Services Procurement is for _all_ national security launches through the end of 2026. There was a proposed amendment to the defense authorization act, opening up bids on launches after the first 29, but I’m fairly sure that didn’t pass.
That’s really the basis for Blue Origin’s complaint: The terms could basically lock them out of this market for seven years. They lobbied hard to either delay the selection (to give them more time to work on New Glenn) or limit the duration of the contracts. The Air Force didn’t want to do either.
I understand. By “future” I mean post-2026. That’s not that far away for businesses with such long product development cycles. And reasonable too, considering what it must cost USAF to run a tender for such a large contract. Running open bids for every launch, or small packets of launches, has costs associated with it which are often not recouped by the savings that the additional competition provides. If Blue Origin plan on having a truly competitive service, and I believe they do, they still have an opportunity to prove it in the commercial market while they wait for the next round of national security launch contracts.
I was just describing why, as I understand it, Blue Origin is complaining. You’re providing reasons why the Department of Defense doesn’t want do things the way Blue Origin would like, and why the complaint is, to be blunt, whining. I think what the two of us have said is consistent and correct. This isn’t exactly the first time a company whined and filed nuisance lawsuits over government procurement plans.
I don’t think we know that. SpaceX did sue, and then later dropped the suit. At the time, the details of the suit were not publicly disclosed. I don’t think they ever were. The same is true about the content of the SpaceX proposal. (Although Mr. Musk did say they didn’t do a very good job of writing it.) So we don’t know if they proposed Starship. It could have been a proposal to use the Falcon, and get funding for all the extra infrastructure and support services the Department of Defense expects for national security launches.
There was some discussion in Congress over this, with a proposed amendment to make the Air Force give extra money to any company selected in Step 2 but not Step 1, specifically to cover those extra costs not to help develop a new launch vehicle.
It is almost as though Besos is saying to believe him, if given a contract then he will show you what he can do, but in the meantime he has never launchéd anything into space or into orbit. Seeing is believing, so show us what you an do and THEN we will co insider you for a space launch contract.
His suborbital rocket made it to the space barrier didn’t it?
I agree that BO needs to put something into orbit. But the strategy seems to be using ULA partnership to gain contracts and as a ride along while Bezos pumps billions into the R&D, slow and quiet growth. Until eventually Boeing, and Lockheed abandon investment in ULA and Blue Origin by that time takes over.
“The Air Force argues that increasing the number of providers in Phase 2 increases cost for all missions because each provider would get fewer launch contracts” Sure, when your only customer is the government.
The situation, no matter your point of view, is decidedly muddy.
In the end, though, the goal has been broader the the immediate government contracts. As in the case of SX, the idea is to help stand up a strong rocket company that is capable of serving a broad customer base.
To some extent. But the Department of Defense requires a whole lot of things, in terms of oversight, special processing and services, and just plain old contractual paper work. Some of that involves accounting systems which no sane company would touch if they weren’t interested in DoD business. The cost of all that gets passed on to the customer. And all that overhead for four companies costs more than for two companies.
Two words – and, I like Jeff Bezos and Blue Origin – “sour” and “grapes”.
KILL SLS.
We should note that three of the four applicants are at least capable of building (some of ) their own core engines. The fourth — the ULA Cabal — sold off their engine maker to buy greymarket Russian powerplants . Now their new Vulcan-Centaur depends on getting BE-4 engines from Bezos’ Blue Origin to make a viable bid . ULA boasts that the Atlas V and Delta IV have beenthe backbone of the military- intelligence launch capacity for a long time, but no longer make their own liquid fueled engines ? What am I missing here ?
A bit sad about Aerojet Rocketdyne. The most storied and legendary rocket manufacturer in history no longer has a new, 500K pound thrust liquid fueled engine in active development. The DOD should have just coughed up the money for completion of the AR-1 development (including testing)…if only to have an alternative, modern staged combustion engine sitting, at least virtually, on the shelf.
Blue Origin also needs a little more transparency. SpaceX has thousands of devoted fans, and puts their tests on YouTube Live. There are unofficial channels devoted to watching workers build SpaceX’s next-generation vehicles. Blue Origin has none of this.
I’m not sure what you mean by that. Fans don’t help companies win Department of Defense contracts. If you mean, personally, you’d like to see more of what they’re doing, I agree that might be nice. But it isn’t going to help the company financially.
If they want to win contracts, it might help them to be more open about where, exactly, they are in their development progress.
As it stands, the only flight-demonstrated hardware they have is a reusable suborbital platform that is undergoing testing. So does Virgin Galactic, and many people have given up and gotten their deposits back from VG because they are taking so long to move from testing to production. So a beta version of a reusable suborbital craft by itself just doesn’t mean that much.
Being more open, assuming they are actually making steady forward progress, could win them more friends (not just “fans”) in both DoD and Capitol Hill, and then maybe they wouldn’t need a lawsuit to get everyone to acknowledge that they are a capable provider.
Yes, no and yes.
First yes: Blue Origin has to have more information in their proposal than we know about. If they don’t, the proposal has exactly zero chance of being selected. You are completely right about that.
No: Proposals of this sort are not public, and every page has a “Corporate Proprietary Material” stamp on it. The reviewers are required to sign non-disclosure agreement, and we (the public) see very few of the details. So the fact that we don’t know the details doesn’t mean the details aren’t available to the Department of Defense.
Second yes: If some important information isn’t publicaly available, they have to put it in the proposal. Since the length of a proposal is fixed, every column inch spent on describing one thing is at the expense of describing something else. So it is usually a good idea to put some information into the professional journals or into press releases. Then you can reference the papers or just state things which everyone knows. That saves room to convince the reviewers about other issue. And, if it’s about something that isn’t public, the reviewers might well say, “yea, sure, you’re saying that, but no one has independently confirmed those claims.”
I think Blue Origin has their own reasons for keeping their plans, or at least the details, out of the public eye. Those plans are almost certainly in their proposal. But they may or may not be playing this right. More public information could have allowed them to write a better proposal. But that’s up to them, and, if they are selected, then I guess their opinions on the subject were more correct than mine.
Yes, Blue Origin seems to be moving at the speed of NASA in developing its rocket.
Key word: Seems
Keith, I’ll understand if you block this, but I couldn’t resist… 😉
Paper Rockets
I realise the way your Flights deceive me
With fiery hype that I mistook for truth.
So take away the coverage that you showed me
And send the kind that you remind me of.
Paper rockets, paper rockets,
Oh how real those rockets seem to you
But they’re only imitation
Like your imitation love for me.
I thought that you would be a perfect launcher
You seemed so full of fire at the start
But like a big red rose that’s made of paper
There isn’t any orbit in your heart.
Paper rockets, paper rockets,
Oh how real those rockets seem to you
But they’re only imitation
Like your imitation love for me.
SpaceX is also up against the behemoths but they have put stuff in orbit. Bezos and Blue Origin need to put up or shut up.
What’s The Deal With Blue Origin?
I read the ‘space news’ widely, and internationally. I know enough – and I am sufficiently interested – that I can have an informed conversation around a wide variety of space policy issues, both domestically and internationally. I’m not a specialist, nor am I employed by a think tank. Yes, I have advanced degrees from an excellent public university, but in fields with no relationship to space. In summary, while not an expert, I know my way around the ‘space world’ as well, or better, as any other non-specialist, but interested citizen.
Why am I saying this? Because I can’t figure out how Blue Origin manages to carry a huge dish of gravitas. How did BO get a pass on the kiddie table, taking a seat with the adults?
Obviously some very smart people are impressed enough to, for instance, use a line of rockets developed by BO that are methane staged-combustion rocket engines. This rocket is understood to be a very non-trivial engineering marvel. Moreover, a variety of companies have engaged BO to launch satellites at some point in the future. These service buyers are experienced, no nonsense business people. Aren’t they?
https://youtu.be/Ug75diEyiA0
Comparison in the rocket business is about as useful as comparing girlfriends, but still: count the years (months!) consumed by SX as they developed several engine families, one printed – with three types of fuel! – and, I hasten to add, that two of these engines are conveniently mounted on the end of an orbital class, reusable rocket? (Answer, depending on a couple of things, is around five years or so).
On the other hand, BO has the aforementioned contracts, certainly not to be dismissed; and they have humongous buildings over at the Cape; and they have a cute little sub-orbital. Yes, and the engine.
They also have the serious sobriety of Mr. Bezos, and his Latin company description (a very awkward Latin phrase, I should add). And, of course, there’s Mr. Bezos $1 Billion annual pocket change, a sum which can, I have observed, purchase a great deal of solemnity all by itself.
I will bet $10,000 US Dollars with anyone – certified check held by Kieth – that BO will fly before SLS.
Takers?
Would you give me five to one odds on that? And make it a successful New Glenn flight to orbit and back, not just any Blue Origin flight? I think SLS will, eventually, fly at least once. I think there’s probably a 20% chance any rocket development project will hit major snags resulting in a long delay.
It will, however the bar is higher. New Glenn has to have GTO customers, and fly a certain number of times a year, to stop spending Jeff’s money.
I
also has to fly a certain number of times to pay Jeff back and to make an impact on the market. It probably has to do all of that before Starship hits the market because at that point the dealer will gather up all the cards, reshuffle the deck, and deal up a whole new game.
SLS doesn’t have to do any of those things.
My guess is that the hangup which is keeping New Glenn in the hanger is landing the booster. Bezos appears to be excessively risk averse and probably will not launch his baby until he’s convinced that the estimated success probability for landing is nearly 1. He’s staked his reputation on landing that booster and wants it done on the first flight.