And no, it doesn’t appear to be an approaching train. Officials with Lockheed Martin and Boeing confirmed earlier this week that they have received a draft version of the FTC “consent decree” that would permit the formation of the United Launch Alliance, with conditions. The details of the consent decree haven’t been revealed, but according to the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) are expected to include protections for competing satellite manufacturers, like Northrop Grumman, as well as “traditional antitrust safeguards aimed at promoting competition from other rocket providers”, most notably SpaceX. This development came after Michael Wynne, secretary of the Air Force, told MarketWatch that the FTC was taking too long to make a decision about the ULA.
What about competition from other Boeing and Lockheed alliances for marketting other rockets, like Sea & Land Launch and ILS’ proton? What do I do if I want to buy an Atlas 5, do I buy it from ULA or from ILS?
I think I saw one on eBay…
Call Mexican Aeronáutica y Spacia Administración?
The ULA is only for marketing to government customers and is an attempt for them to reduce their overhead. So if you are a commercial operator you would still approach ILS for an Atlas commercial launch. My question is are they going to merge the 2 vehicles in the next generation launcher once it doesn’t matter who gets the government contracts and they just share profits regardless of if it is an Atlas or a Delta?
I’m pretty sure in the current market that there are no profits to share. If there were though, the profit sharing arrangement would be an internal matter.
I think the answer is “no”. The idea as expressed to the employees and indeed in the media is that both vehicles are necessary indefinitely to realize the “assured access to space” goal. Hopefully once ULA is created, there won’t be too much intermingling of the programs such that if one program has a problem, both wind up grounded.