from the Evolved-Expendable-Launch-Vehicle...-made-with-reusable-boosters dept.
The U.S. Air Force will award five contracts for satellite launches later this year as part of its Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program:
The U.S. Air Force announced plans to award space launch contracts later this year for five satellites that include some of the military's most sensitive big-ticket payloads.
The competition comes less than two years since SpaceX became a legitimate competitor in a market that used to be entirely owned by United Launch Alliance, a partnership of Lockheed Martin and The Boeing Company. If SpaceX is able to win at least one or two launches in this next round of contracts, it would further cement its standing as a market disruptor and set the stage for the company to win even more military work when the larger Falcon Heavy rocket gets certified to fly government payloads.
The Air Force on Wednesday released a final request for proposals for Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch services for two National Reconnaissance Office payloads, the fifth Space-Based Infrared System geosynchronous Earth orbit satellite, an Air Force Space Command mission dubbed AFSPC-44 and a secret surveillance mission code-named SilentBarker. Proposals are due April 16 and contracts are expected to be awarded in late 2018.
The Air Force recently stated that they "did not identify any information that would change SpaceX's Falcon 9 certification status" despite the recent failure of a secret "Zuma" payload to separate from a Falcon 9 rocket.
SpaceX, which is behind schedule in building a new launch facility at Boca Chica beach near Brownsville, Texas, has requested $5 million in additional funding from state lawmakers:
SpaceX isn't talking, but a state representative said the company's request for additional state funds could point to an expansion of SpaceX's plans for its Boca Chica Beach launch site.
[...] Hawthorne, Calif.-based SpaceX broke ground on its Boca Chica Beach launch site 23 miles east of Brownsville in September 2014, with the first launch initially targeted for 2016. Later it was discovered that the site required stabilization, and the company trucked in 310,000 cubic yards of soil over months. Development also has been slowed by the company's focus on repairing and refurbishing its Cape Canaveral launch site that was damaged by an explosion in September 2016.
[The Falcon Heavy • Demo Flight is currently scheduled for Tuesday February 6 with a launch window of 1830-2130 UTC (1:30-4:30 p.m. EST) from launch site LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida. --Ed.]
Related Stories
A classified satellite launched by SpaceX on Sunday may be experiencing a classified failure:
Later on Monday afternoon another space reporter, Peter B. de Selding, reported on Twitter that he too had been hearing about problems with the satellite. "Zuma satellite from @northropgrumman may be dead in orbit after separation from @SpaceX Falcon 9, sources say," de Selding tweeted. "Info blackout renders any conclusion - launcher issue? Satellite-only issue? — impossible to draw."
Update: SpaceX said the Falcon 9 rocket performed nominally, but unnamed sources reportedly told the Wall Street Journal that the payload did not separate from the Falcon 9 second stage and that both fell into the ocean:
An expensive, highly classified U.S. spy satellite is presumed to be a total loss after it failed to reach orbit atop a Space Exploration Technologies Corp. rocket on Sunday, according to industry and government officials. Lawmakers and congressional staffers from the Senate and the House have been briefed about the botched mission, some of the officials said. The secret payload—code-named Zuma and launched from Florida on board a Falcon 9 rocket—is believed to have plummeted back into the atmosphere, they said, because it didn't separate as planned from the upper part of the rocket.
The WSJ report has been disputed. Space-Track has catalogued the Zuma payload as USA 280, international designation 2018-001A, catalog number 43098, but that doesn't necessarily mean Zuma survived. CelesTrak lists the status as operational (search 43098 in NORAD Catalog Number field).
If the mission did fail, SpaceX could also blame Northrup Grumman for using their own payload adapter.
Also at CBS News, SpaceFlight Insider, Bloomberg, Popular Mechanics, CNBC, and USA Today.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday February 02 2018, @05:19PM (3 children)
Are they really going to compete on price, or on congressmen?
> Later it was discovered that the site required stabilization
No shit, Sherlock. I hope they mean "even more stabilization", because just looking at that area on a map (right by the border between Texas and Mexico at the sea), it's pretty friggin' obvious that it's gonna need a lot of stabilization, and I know nada about the topic.
They'll need lots of bug spray, and a 1km tall wall to protect the rockets from cartels taking pot shots with Cal-50 from the other side of the border, too.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Immerman on Friday February 02 2018, @05:26PM (2 children)
Why would cartels take pot-shots? There's no profit in it, and much potential to attract unwanted attention. Besides, they're going to want to be on SpaceX's good side once the "pot shots" are slang recreational moon base supplies...
(Score: 4, Funny) by bob_super on Friday February 02 2018, @05:40PM (1 child)
If I was any good at conspiracy theories, I'd point out that cartels like money. Someone could (continue to) make hundreds of millions, even billions, if SpaceX rockets failed just a bit too often.
But that doesn't sound plausible enough to be a good conspiracy theory. No US citizen or company would ever willingly associate with disreputable people to sabotage a competitor, for mere hundreds of millions of dollars of gains.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday February 02 2018, @06:44PM
Or billions of dollars in gains.
If SpaceX launches from a certain facility had a higher than usual failure rate that would raise suspicions.
When SpaceX had the spectacular flaming ground explosion, they considered everything. Including sabotage, which was mentioned. And talk was about a laser rather than a pellet gun.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 02 2018, @05:42PM (3 children)
This is huge. I know some people say it's too early to say this, but I think Elon Musk will go down as one of the most influential humans of all time, surpassing Einstein and Newton. He is responsible for so much and he's still young. He will be known for colonizing Mars and changing the human race to use only 100% renewable energy which will save us all.
(Score: 2) by Uncle_Al on Friday February 02 2018, @05:48PM (2 children)
"I think Elon Musk will go down as one of the most influential humans of all time, surpassing Einstein and Newton."
Henry Ford is rolling over in his grave.
At least he built cars people could afford.
(Score: 5, Funny) by DannyB on Friday February 02 2018, @06:48PM (1 child)
Nikola Tesla is spinning in his grave.1
Thomas Edison is spinning in his grave.2
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
1generates an AC current
2generates a DC current
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Friday February 02 2018, @08:20PM
Shouldn't Edison be taking credit for the DC current produced by the spinning grave of someone who's slower at patenting ?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 02 2018, @06:32PM (2 children)
...despite the recent failure of a secret "Zuma" payload to separate from a Falcon 9 rocket..
What failure? No one knows if it is a failure. And if zuma did not separate, it is not the fault of Falcon 9, as it has been repeated ad nauseam all over the internet. The possibility that the author of the article somehow missed this is zero, imo.
And what is this about "behind schedule"? It is totally irrelevant. So, the construction of a structure in Texas is delayed. So what? Does this somehow prevents SpaceX to compete for one or more launches?
This is fear uncertainty and doubt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 02 2018, @07:16PM (1 child)
Wow, and I thought I was a SpaceX fanboy.
Originally I was going to post that Northrup Grumman was responsible for fucking up the payload adapter but it's not super relevant. The point of mentioning Zuma at all is to show that the Air Force is still confident in the operation of the Falcon 9 rocket despite the all-but-confirmed loss of a $1+ billion spy satellite that was lifted by a Falcon 9. Air Force is indirectly telling us that SpaceX is not to blame. It is a pro-SpaceX line.
But apparently I can't state something factual about their Texas facility without it being called FUD. Or are you another hater of multiple stories in one and the semicolon?
- t
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 02 2018, @09:46PM
One dollar plus a billion satellites??? What kind of contracts are the Air Force writing anyway??