Re: End of Delta IV?

Ed Kyle wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
Ed Kyle wrote:
The end of Boeing's Delta IV EELV could be looming, at least
according to:

"http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/business/060212/boeing.shtml";

which says:

"Complicating the picture for Decatur is the possibility that the
beginning of
the ULA (United Launch Alliance) would spell the end of Delta IV. An
Internet
aerospace publication edited by a former Boeing employee recently
reported
Boeing would drop its expensive Delta IV program for the cheaper Atlas
5
program if the ULA gets approval from the feds.

A presentation about the ULA, given in May by a Boeing official and
leaked to
the press, tends to support the theory. That might mean problems for
current Boeing employees, who fear they would lose out to Lockheed
workers
for spots on the production floor if Lockheed's heavy-lift product wins
out."
And meanwhile NASA wastes $BILLIONS$ on a Schtick for a CLV,
when the Boeing Delta IV Medium is sitting there good to go.

Does anyone else utterly fail to see the logic of that?

Well, for starters Delta IV Medium can't lift enough mass to
haul CEV.

There is no CEV just as there is no CLV or lightweight
capsule or ISS lifeboat. VSE and ESAS will be dead
in late January of 2009. We need a Soyuz alternative
right now for the ISS. I posit the Delta IV Medium
is the only credible manned vehicle in the US fleet.

But upon further review, it appears that the "Internet
aerospace publication edited by a former Boeing employee"
was usspacenews, according to:

"http://www.al.com/business/huntsvilletimes/index.ssf?/base/business/1138702606236670.xml&coll=1";

I could not find the story on the usspacenews web site today,
so the "internet aerospace publication" must have pulled its
"story".

Despite the source, the story does have a ring of truth to
it. Why else would Boeing and Lockheed agree to this
United Launch Alliance? If ULA wins approval, Boeing
stands to keep billions of dollars that it otherwise would
have to pay for Lockheed's EELV lawsuit. The only
reason I can think that Lockheed would agree to ULA
would be to eliminate a competitor.

Right, we need less competition. I wonder why the Air Force
even bothered to let them compete in the first place. Oh well,
another 39 billion dollars down the tubes.

But I'm just speculating. We will know the truth soon
enough. The drop dead date on the agreement is April 1.

They can all drop dead as far as I'm concerned, as soon
as this corrupt administration and the US economy fails.

What we need is a high launch rate, be it the shuttle
or the Delta IV Medium. It's the only way the numbers work.

The Delta IV Heavy, the Schtick and ESAS are a bad joke.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: End of Delta IV?
    ... the ULA would spell the end of Delta IV. ... Boeing would drop its expensive Delta IV program for the cheaper Atlas ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: End of Delta IV?
    ... the ULA (United Launch Alliance) would spell the end of Delta IV. ... Boeing would drop its expensive Delta IV program for the cheaper Atlas ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: End of Delta IV?
    ... the ULA (United Launch Alliance) would spell the end of Delta IV. ... Boeing would drop its expensive Delta IV program for the cheaper Atlas ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Boeing Selected to Build NASAs Upper Stage for Ares I
    ... United Launch Alliance, how do they relate to United Space Alliance????? ... Boeing can have a fire sale on C-17s. ... runs Delta and Atlas, as well as some subsidiary support functions at ... Delta and Atlas are built in Decatur, ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: End of Delta IV Looming?
    ... the ULA would spell the end of Delta IV. ... Boeing would drop its expensive Delta IV program for the cheaper Atlas ... for spots on the production floor if Lockheed's heavy-lift product wins ...
    (sci.space.policy)