Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CurtisLeow t1_j9usfhn wrote

This is highly dependent on Blue Origins ramping up production of the BE-4 engine for ULA. The engines were the main reason for the repeated delays in the first launch.

> "We have to ramp up," Bruno said. "Before the end of 2025 we expect to be really at a tempo, which is flying a couple of times a month, every two weeks."

Even SpaceX has never built first stages at that production rate. SpaceX didn't ramp up product that fast for the Falcon 9 either. It first launched in 2010, but didn't achieve a double digit launch rate until 2017, and that was with reusable first stages. The Soyuz had a higher production rate than that at one point, but the Soyuz is a substantially easier to manufacture rocket. The Soyuz doesn't use solid boosters. The Soyuz uses substantially easier to manufacture gas generator rocket engines.

The entire concept of Vulcan doesn't make sense. They're building a difficult to manufacture expendable rocket, with 3 different engines, including a complicated staged combustion engine. Then they're planning to launch it at a rate that only makes sense for a simpler mass produced rocket, or a reusable rocket. In any other industry they would just be shamelessly copying the market leader.

31

BlakeMW t1_j9y8iul wrote

I remember this ULA infographic "90% Flown Before Initial Launch Capability (ILC)" bragging about how tried and tested all the components are, except your know, the engines at the bottom at 0.

7