Hacker News Reader

Comment by SHIT_TALKER | Hacker News Reader

ULA's reasoning was pretty straightforward. The main reason they dropped out of the competition is because the bidding was to be decided largely on price,

The reason they had to drop out is because they're a space launch company without any goddamned engines. The chatter about the bid process is just the typical jawing members of the defense cartel engage in when they deign to speak of competitors. Sometimes they're even successful in reopening the bid process. [1]

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-X

View on HN

> (From Article) Congress wants to phase out the use of the RD-180 engine for national security launches by 2019 as a result of Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

I have't been paying close attention, but maybe you know this. Didn't Russia actually ban export of engines for military launches over Crimea before congress?

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/may/15/us-space-mili... http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-russian-rocket-ban-201...

Yes, like most people quit their jobs before they get fired.

As they say in the space industry...

All rocket, no engines.

I don't understand. Can you explain this and the parent's comment on engines?

The ULA launchers use the Russian produced RD-180 engine

Only Atlas-V. Delta-IV uses American hydrogen engines (RS-68); however Delta-IV is rather more expensive than Atlas-V. Even though Atlas-IV is rather more expensive than Falcon-9 - which uses simpler, less performant but cheaper technology.

ULA's vehicles were designed around the RD-180 rocket engine [1][2]. This is an engine built and designed in Russia.

After Russia annexed Crimea, Congress banned the Pentagon from using Russian rocket engines. Russia responded by counter-banning the Pentagon from using its engines [3]. This made things complicated for ULA.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-180

[2] http://www.ulalaunch.com/faqs-rd-180.aspx

[3] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-13/russia-ban...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=all%20hat%2C%...

So if you're a rocket company and don't make your own engines you're not really a rocket company, you're just talk.

Or if you don't have a reliable supplier of engines. In this case world politics meddled with space rocketry, so supplier's goods became less than completely available.

Bit embarrassing isn't it, that a joint venture between two of the US's (and world's) largest aeronautics and defence companies doesn't have their own engines – and has to rely on the Russians?

Well, Russians are world leaders in at least kerosene-based rocket engines for one. And ULA doesn't quite lack just any engines - they have RS-68 hydrogen engines.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com