ULA Sold for Sierra Space! Big Solution to Solve Dream Chaser TROUBLE...

[@markmaz56]

"In talks to sell" is NOT the same thing as "Sold!"

[@lepompier132]

The Vulcan booster is not designed to land; only dreamchaser spacecraft will. Therefore, Sierra/ULA may not be in direct competition with SpaceX. Additionally, Blue Origin has yet to produce a sufficient number of BE-4 engines for both ULA and its own needs, making their engine production a critical factor. It seems Boeing could face the greatest loss if they are forced to abandon their Starliner spacecraft due to its ongoing issues.

[@Warchin007]

Sierra Space, Dream Chaser is definitely going to challage dragon capsule. That being said My answer is No they are not going to challage Space X in other specialities. Starship is changing the entire game! Just like inflatable habitat are going to replace ISS. I will use a saying that Scott Manely used from my POV. I am an "All Space Fan". Good show. 😊 Sidenote: Tory Bruno said they have over 100 resumes to replace each engineers who is leaving.

[@Michael_Scott_Howard]

Click bate: Fake news.. ULA as this post has yet to be sold to ANYONE. $3B is beyond bad money .

[@kurttate9446]

3 billion for ULA sounds like a fire sale with all the merchandise turned into charcoal briquettes. If true ULA will not be an entity within two years.

[@trebormints3739]

buying into a company 'that has an unrecoverable launcher and relies on another company "that is renowned for slowness and litigation".👍 yep i'll buy into that ,must be way cheaper than renting . oh and by the time they do get a viable system running ,spacex will probably have a block 5 starship running a rapter 4 motor

[@t.c.2776]

Buying into something Boeing and its subcontractors has touched might be a nightmare waiting to happen... Why was it sold in the first place?... Why would Elon want to buy into problems he doesn't need and maybe take on engineers he doesn't want? He could also wait to see if Sierra fails and buy it cheaper, or even modify SpaceX to handle Dream Chaser...

[@jonny777bike]

This will be better for ULA. Hope this doesn’t hurt Sierra space given the failures of ULA. Getting Boeing out of ULA will be a positive.

[@colonbina1]

Yeah

[@ronhoffman1008]

No. ULA needs Blue Origin BE-4 engines to fly. That supply chain conflict, due to competition, may result in delayed shipments, or out-and-out refusal to supply BE-4;s.

[@MichaelNichols-ec9pt]

OK, could Sierra Space buy unused Raptor 1 engines from Space X? Win, Win?

[@theguyfromsaturn]

This is definitely the best outcome if it is realized. ULA can actually become a big player if it happens (it was headed for the dumpster of history). Multiple players are the only way for the future to become bright.

[@kenwhitfield219]

I totally agree. New innovation, the very life blood of a historically successful company is essential to longterm growth. Consider Apple as a perfect example. Continuous innovation of new ideas and the products that morph from those groundbreaking ideas is Apple’s reason for continuously improving growth and customer excitement. Boeing once had that DNA in the aerospace industry too. But has completely lost that mojo. Just like McDonnell/Douglas did before it reverse merged with Boeing to rescue itself from bankruptcy.

[@kevinbissett293]

Good Morning, Kev. If Sierra Space purchases ULA. It best be pennies on the dollar. Purchasing it might ULA might be light purchasing a White Elephant. To much wrong with that company. You've listed and explained all the reasons to pass on purchasing ULA. I think if anything. They should partner up with Musk. I don't like the idea of a inflatable module system. To flimsy for me. I understand it's cheep to build. I don't want to live in an innertube. They can go pop. The air is kind of thin up there. Like no air. They do lack experience for sure. They should try to not eat this elephant in one bite. I love the Challenge meme. Blue Origin? What happened to them? You talk like they are a strong contender to SpaceX. The only thing Bezos is good at is lawsuits. Great Update. Great Episode again, Kev. Have a Great Day my Friend.

[@colonbina1]

Hello Kevin, do you think Sierra Space can make ULA better?

[@kevinbissett293]

@@colonbina1 I think the purchase could make them better. I would like to see Dreamchaser have a successful launch first. If they did purchase ULA. They would have to do complete overhaul of it. There is a lot of baggage going along with it. To be successful. They would a have to adopt the SpaceX philosophy to a point of creating a reusable rocket program. SpaceX has set the bar pretty high. Really SpaceX has set a new stand of rocketry. Thanks for asking.

[@byrw9557]

I just want to see SpaceX always excel beyond the others as they have shown how great their operation is and how much they have accomplished in a relatively short time !!! The more I know about Bezos, the more he scares me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@victorkrawchuk9141]

Vulcan Centaur isn't completely non-reusable. ULA's SMART Reuse concept is designed to save the two BE-4 engines while the rest of the main booster is discarded. With side boosters, the MECO and stage separation point typically occurs later and higher on Vulcan Centaur than with Falcon 9. The greater speed that the detached booster is traveling might make it very difficult to land it without expending a lot of fuel in the re-entry burn or adding a lot of shielding. Saving just the engines might bring the cost down enough to allow it to compete with Falcon 9, but I think the two rockets really cover different requirements. Vulcan Centaur is able to launch bigger and greater payloads to LEO than Falcon 9 even if the Falcon 9 booster is discarded. About 10 years ago ULA proposed an orbital refueling system based on hydrogen production plants located on the Moon. However this idea was shot down by co-owner Boeing which saw it as a potential threat to SLS. But with the Centaur V 2nd stage of Vulcan Centaur using LH2-burning RL-10 engines, and Boeing's resistance gone, I'm wondering if these 2nd stages could then be salvaged for use as general-purpose tugs rather than being discarded. The non-reusability concerns with Vulcan Centaur could be further reduced. Whatever happens, and so far nothing has been finalized, if Sierra Space does buy ULA, I hope that they don't lose Tory Bruno in the process. His vision and leadership would probably be critical to making the joint venture a success.

[@privateerburrows]

I don't understand how this is supposed to work. Well, I never understood how ULA buying engines from its competitor, Blue Origin, was supposed to work, and it didn't. BO's best interest was to bankrupt ULA rather than sell engines to them. But so, now Sierra will be in the same bind of dependency on BO, with BO's best interest being to NOT deliver BE4 engines? It would be funny if it wasn't sad.

[@khyron6]

Hell Yes, SIERRA SPACE is a Great company. America's space program is about to skyrocket. ;)

[@colonbina1]

♥️♥️♥️

[@alkimball8920]

Misleading title. This hasn't happened yet.

[@alexanderSydneyOz]

ULA's brand new rocket is not reusable. Maybe I'm missing something that I don't see that as competition for anyone let alone SpaceX. Vulcan centaur appears only useful to fulfil the existing contracts. Regarding blue origin... Bezos has taken his time developing his products, but after all he can a ford 2 and it doesn't really need to worry about the commercial aspects, does he? But it's products are reusable, add New Glenn has already demonstrated that. Ergo, ULA is not and will not be a competitor giving blue origin a run for its money. ULA is stuck in the past. The best use of it would be to take the infrastructure and IP embodied in the company and it's staff, such as it is, and redeploy towards reusable rockets. If possible

[@colonbina1]

Thanks for your great analysis

[@MichaelNichols-ec9pt]

I just want Sierra Space to have a chance.

[@rwesenberg]

What does Sierra Space produce that generates revenue? All I can find is prototypes and developments. It's valuation is based upon the success of these innovations.

[@colonbina1]

Let's wait for the upcoming competition

[@markg3831]

What happened to the USSF missions that ULA have committed launches? Does that just go away?

[@Amack1964]

In my opinion Sierra Space will probably drop Blue origin engines and develop something that can be mass produced quickly while still using BE4 engines for a while

[@MichaelCarriger]

Unless Sierra removes Tory from any management functions within ULA, they are going to have the same issues ULA has today; slow production and an emphasis on getting government payloads scheduled over commercial payloads given government finds for overly long delays in scheduling launches that have languished for years waiting for ULA to come up with a new launch vehicle. The Vulcan is an impressive vehicle but falls short given that it is not reusable. Sierra might do better finding a different rocket engine than Blue Origin who can not seem to figure out how to mass produce their rocket engines. ULA is still going to be held up to when and if BO produces the engines they need.

[@metriczeppelin]

JB not wanting to buy ULA shows his "measured" interest in the rocket business. To him, ULA would be more trouble than it's worth. ULA is a dated company trying to adapt to the fast pace of this new era of private rocket companies and the pace of advancement. SS purchasing ULA makes a lot of sense on more than one level. Congrat's to them, hope they can make it happen!

[@william4292]

Better! Much less sensationalist than usual. Keep it going!

[@CrotalusHH]

It's a dumb move. ULA is still completely dependant on Blue Origin for engines. Blue Origin's engines are still unproven and delivery is sti) very slow.

[@Whitehouse69]

ULA has never made their own engines, and neither has Northrop Grumman and Boeing doesn’t even make their own service module, mass outsourcing is a glaring weakness, something SpaceX and Blue Origin don’t have to worry about. I love sierra but this deal may not work due to disposable rocket and outsourced engines

[@anthonykevinkerr3594]

'...Blue Origin might get left behind.' How can you get left behind when you haven't even started? Sierra Space is handicapped by depending on BO for the BE4 engines for future Vulcan flights. Any delays in Vulcan certification would mean whoever owns ULA would lose future DOD contracts.

[@colonbina1]

👍👍👍

[@richiexp2]

I hope Sierra Space buys ULA, with all the projects they're developing from their vehicle to the Orbital reefs it make sense for them to have a launch vehicle they own to avoid logistic situations beyond their control.

[@kaiwheeler64]

All that ULA has to offer is a rocket with no engines that's at least ten years behind and a bunch of launch obligations that may be hard to fulfill.

[@colonbina1]

This is a big disadvantage for Sierra Space

[@jkleylein]

It's not going to solve much of anything if it takes BO a year to make each engine.

[@Mike4Studio]

I'm not at all sure ULA is a good investment for Sierra. I don't see how their cost structure will compete with SpaceX, especially once startship moves into full operation.

[@HarryOttele]

ULA issue is the engines from BO. The Booster is not recoverable yet and Sierra Space will need to develop a landing system. On the other handle Sierra can lunch on there time line.

[@colonbina1]

They will still need using BO engine for Vulcan

[@fgeiger41]

If they purchase they'll still be using an eighty percent throwaway rocket and loss per launch

[@XCX237]

I hope sierra does well👍

[@colonbina1]

👍👍👍

[@SliceofLife7777]

ULA's rocket depends on Blue Origin. Would anyone want to depend on the timely delivery of engines from your competitor. Slow to make engines, that New Glen will soon need. Wait for ULA's price to come down, then maybe buy it. Sierra has a mini shuttle with no ride if Vulcan isn't available, and it won't be available very often, unless Blue Origin can increase production to the point that there are enough Be4's to go around.

[@deltavee2]

In the words of a poster further down "ULA Sold for Sierra Space! " EPIC BULL SHIT! " and it is. He mentioned fact checking, (good man) so I did a little of my own. In this calendar year, only Blue Origin's Jeff Bezos has shown any recorded interest and he has sold off billions of Amazon stock with intent to sell another 8 or 9 billion later in the year. Sierra is not mentioned anywhere that I could find. Look at the article by Ars Technica. I have followed some of GREAT SPACEX off and on but this flat out lie trumpeted as news hit the limit. . You have been removed from YT recommendations permanently.

[@kenwhitfield219]

Boeing has been losing experienced engineers for years too. It’s different now because the historically based brain drain is not cutting into Boeings’ innovation DNA. Which is why Starliner has failed. And partly to blame for the recent Commercial Airplanes disasters. 737, 777x, and 787 problems are more largely the result of the cost cutting to enhance profits focus of management. But, one cause has led to all the other cause of Boeings’ significant problems. I worked there for 18 years and saw dozens of professionally unsatisfied co-workers leave for greener pastures. Even before the 1997 merger with McD, this was becoming a noticeable issue. Instead of experience seeking out opportunities with Boeing, too many of Boeings’ best and brightest were leaving.

[@We_the_People_2A]

Sierra Space doesn’t have enough vehicles to make the acquisition of ULA profitable. If they don’t crank up customer paid launches, their own space plane launches will be minor, and it will probably fail. They just don’t have the volume to make it worthwhile.

[@erik-3185]

This deal will definitely put and keep SiaraSpace in a stationary state of progress.. SiaraSpace needs to cut ties with bezzos and boys.

[@colonbina1]

😂😂😂

[@timothycrystal2623]

Companies go into these sorts of discussions all the time. Nothing in the article mentions Sierra securing financing or anything that leads to this being anything other than a press stunt. If it did happen, hopefully they ax Tory Bruno and move towards reusable rockets. But again, this deal is very unlikely at this point.

[@colonbina1]

👍👍👍

[@dammy]

Bad idea, ULA is too far behind the power curve development wise to survive in a field filled with young guns.

[@sonnynguyen2653]

Yes🚀🚀🚀

[@mountedpatrolman]

I'd rather see Sierra Space focus more on reusability. A reusable rocket used with Dream Chaser would be a much better move.

[@gordonstewart8258]

Excitement guaranteed!

[@colonbina1]

😍😍😍😍😍

[@johnwiles4391]

I'm not a well informed space market analyst or anything, but this feels right to me.

[@colonbina1]

Thanks your support

[@pegasusted2504]

The thing for me is the main guy at ULA looked at Raptor 3 and publicly online for the whole world to see said, basically, "Stop bullshitting about your engine, it isn't even fully built" then getting blown out by said engine functioning properly. This goes to show the sad level of thinking by the companies bosses when they can't even comprehend of such ideas and results.

[@Columbus1152]

Not having a reusable rocket is what's dooming ULA, ultimately Vulcan won't be able to compete with SpaceX and possibly Blue Origin. I also fear that Sierra would be making the mistake of holding a lot of debt, but not getting an asset that will help them in their early stages of development. ULA's inventory of rockets are already contracted for, so they won't be able to take one and bolt the Dreamchaser to it. We also don't know their ability to scale up production, but we do know it's going to require even more capital to do that. I'm not so sure this would be a good move for Sierra.

[@mruiz8607]

agree

[@colonbina1]

👍👍👍

[@borerunner8659]

No. ULA knows something. Engineers knew something.

[@WilliamBusuttil]

20-08-2024. Fire fly was my bet, but if Searra space wants to go for it, go right ahead, Space X will pick them up like Rockefeller did to his competition.

[@colonbina1]

♥️♥️♥️

[@johnc2438]

Yes! Competition is a good thing!

[@stephensfarms7165]

The main thing wrong with ULA, it’s all expendable, it all goes in ocean. Never will bet SpaceX without reusing the core and payload fairing. Go luck 🍀.

[@colonbina1]

Yes, SpaceX is on the different level

[@NOM-X]

Until they stop dumping billions of dollars into the ocean, there is no match. They need to start from scratch, and learn from Elon;s team on how to land a booster. He said it himself that the door is open." When I hear these names, I can only think of billions of dollars sinking to the bottom of the ocean. What a waste. Thanks for the episode.

[@lionellwilson2069]

Whatever it takes to get the space plane flying. Lets light this candle

[@michaelburke9153]

Yes. Sierra would be an excellent choice.

[@alkimball8920]

At very least economically viable boosters of the future must be reuseable...unless your #1 priority is how many tons you can lift to orbit. Vulcan will need a long lengthy complete make-over... so what is Sierra Space buying?

[@colonbina1]

🤔🤔🤔

[@leonardodavinci303]

I don't see this combo as threat to SpaceX over the next 5 years. They absolutely need reusability to be competitive. I was hoping SpaceX would acquire ULA. But maybe they should wait until this new combo is struggling and acquire them both in 3 years.

[@johngalt5602]

Fs in the chat for Sierra Space. Why buy a failing and incompetent rocket company? Your buying a company that is 80% DEI advisors and 15% managers and 5% engineers....

[@UghIHateTheseThings]

While I do agree with your statement, I think the overall pros outweigh the cons due to the fact that Sierra Space will no longer be held back by constraints with other companies. Had ULA already been absorbed by Sierra, then the Dreamchaser would have already gotten off the ground. Granted they’ll still be subjected to Blue Origins ability to produce BE-4 engines on time, but I think cutting out the middle man of ULAs poor scheduling abilities would be a worthwhile increase to Sierra Spaces efficiency.

[@abigailsworldomg6427]

No I beleave that the problem with ULA is the infrastructure. Sierra space should work with space x. Both companies have tremendous innovation ideas that can advance us far beyond anything other countries can develop. Not to mention competition against spacex could bankrupt Sierra space

[@clivemitchell3229]

Dependence on BE4 means Blue Origin could charge anything.

[@FLuFFyDawgg]

Hopefully sierra space will do a better job than Boeing and Lockheed Martin did. What a blunder

[@richardrigling4906]

I'm excited to get Boeing and Lockheed, the dinosaurs of the space launch business, out.

[@colonbina1]

Boeing? It’s quite hard

[@myredeemerlivesakatom2314]

This does nothing for Sierra Space. Sierra will need to fulfill all of ULA’s Government contracts if they want to continue to work with the US Government. It will not speed up the launch of Dream Chaser.

[@colonbina1]

Exactly 👍

[@alexanderSydneyOz]

That is true as a very short term statement. In the longer run, Sierra space would own its own launch. The problem remains however that Vulcan Centaur it's not reusable, and therefore appears to be dead on arrival.

[@myredeemerlivesakatom2314]

Plus this will not fix the qualified employee problem. The big winner from this deal will be SpaceX and Blue origin. Any engineer worth their salt will jump ship immediately.

[@pstaires]

Not sure about this

[@BRG9121]

Yes!

[@Blue.4t2]

Sierra Space: launch Space force on Vulcan, DreamChaser on Falcon...

[@colonbina1]

😂😂😂

[@rickhick4408]

I wish them both well, NASA and Boeing laughed at Space X ten years ago, but look at them now. I hope the new kids on the space block have great success. Because I have observed, good competition drives innovation. Everybody wins 👍

[@powderperson1949]

YES!

[@michaelporter8208]

It only makes sense. Sierra is doing great things, but they can't get a ride to space. Putting Sierra engineers into ULA could fix Vulcan's problems.

[@andremartel828]

Space X has over 500 Raptor V2 s in stock and are changing over to V3 and V4. Screw the BE4s and replace with Raptor V2s. Everybody wins. Everybody but BO 😅

[@bobroemer4138]

IMO, SpaceX would be wise (and Elon certainly is wise) to scrap the obsolete Raptor V2 engines ... Unless ULA develops a reusable booster program, they'd become spaceship sea anchors "Ker-Plunk !!!" Consequently, ULA would unlikely be able to replenish the same engines for future ships and missions ... So, how would SpaceX benefit except for the financial aspect ... SpaceX (Elon) doesn't need the money !!!

[@TimothyLipinski]

Great Video ! Hope this deal does not fall apart ! SNC picked up the Dream Chaser from the the sale of the Benson Space Co. from the Benson family ! Talked to Jim Benson at ISDC 2001 ! Hope the Sierra Space new space station is in a low inclination LEO CSS with a Fuel Depot nearby and heading East from the KSC ! Hope Tory Bruno and his ULA Vulcan Centaur can be Crew Rated soon and also recover the engines of the Vulcan rocket ! Tory Bruno and ULA is the company to build and design the rocket to return to the moon to stay (and maybe for landing on Mars) ! tjl

[@eliasb8]

No! 😁

[@colonbina1]

👌👌👌👌

[@morien5062]

YES

[@ieuanjones7436]

yes it a good idea

[@colonbina1]

Okey

[@merrillkingston8807]

I think there is plenty of business for two excellent space launch and exploration companies.

[@kwichzwellbreck697]

Example of "Long Distance Hauling": As one drives a wooden cart under horse power at quadruple or more the costs and the other a modern electric 18 wheeler I guess your statement is kind of invalid 😂😂😂😂😂 Noone can compete with SpaceX if they dont copy reusability ..... and they all dont have the tech or man power and for sure not the production possibilities to catch up. It is like apes watching from their carts the a.m 18 wheeler going by and thinking they could copy that ....... Not even the space flight "experts" have a clue how far ahead SpaceX is ..... just look at their comments at Raptor 3 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@merrillkingston8807]

My statement was "there is plenty of business for two excellent space launch and exploration companies". And, there is. Whether a second company emerges as a true competitor for SpaceX remains to be seen. At this point in time, SpaceX, as great as they are, cannot meet all the demand. If they could, there wouldn't be so many other companies being contracted to perform launch services. I'm sure one of them will emerge as a competent competitor and there will remain more demand than both can completely satisfy. My statement was valid.😇

[@kwichzwellbreck697]

@@merrillkingston8807 Unfortunately (or fortunately??) there will be no secondary. All the "heavy lift" satelites which require a F9 or even a F9 heavy will soonish fly "a ride share" mission similar to the transporter missions now on F9 on starship. That means one Starship flight will bring 3 or more BIG satellites into Orbit as well as structures that have never been able to send to orbit before. Noone not even Sue Origin can do that. Maybe New Glenn ist big enough but first of all let that sucker get to LEO and secondly the production scale Sue Origin can muster is so low it will not matter at all! Go figure why they all sue SpaceX = they know they have no chance rather than try to forbid SpaceX. Companies like ULA, Boing, Rocket Lab, Sue Origin will not be able to compete and will go obsolete. In 2013 the ESA director laughed at landing rockets and they all still "think old industry" with open government contracts and throw away rockets. The genie is out of the bottle and no old style rocket company will survive.

[@spencerarno5565]

Yes!!!

[@XCX237]

Good video 👍

[@colonbina1]

♥️♥️♥️

[@patrickcerv4847]

yes they should

[@bobroemer4138]

An insight regarding mergers from a "mouse purchasing a dragon" perspective ... Typical required PPE on the work floor is Steel-Toed Footwear to protect the toes ... In resulting "merged" organization,, contrasting mission, vision and values may require Steel-Toed Footwear for the office management personnel to avoid "Stepping-on-toes" !!!

[@Tacklebox378]

Yes

[@richardcorwin1828]

I believe that Elon will welcome the competition as has stated before that competition is a good thing for the industry. This is good news and Jeff Bozo can just go away as BO is just a hobby and grift for him.

[@colonbina1]

Yes, SpaceX won’t be worry about this, they are on the different level now

[@Noneya-bw5gm]

Sierra Space should not be taking up the burden of launch vehicles and a dysfunctional company like ULA, and then find themselves competing with SpaceX. Stick with what you know best. They can use SpaceX and save tons of money

[@colonbina1]

👍👍👍

[@therealcyber5]

when they are launching every 3 days, they will be a threat

[@colonbina1]

Why?

[@martyanderson3390]

Haha, so sad. A company that’s building a yet to fly obsolete re-entry vehicle, buys a manufacturing company that builds very pricey obsolete launch vehicles………… what can go wrong.

[@colonbina1]

😂😂😂

[@terrygelinas4593]

ULA (Boeing/Lockheed) is in talks, not sold

[@philippostiglione2011]

ULA and Sierra Space could be good merger

[@colonbina1]

Yeah

[@OilMan-gz3jm]

yes

[@colonbina1]

♥️♥️♥️

[@mikepetersen5024]

Sierra will have to plan on designing a reusable rocket immediately. They will have to pull an Elon and fire 80% of the management force so as not to have internal friction to change.

[@FarginBastiges]

Yes. The more, the merrier.

[@danielcorcoran7132]

How can two hardware poor companies (no thanks BE4, and just one dream chaser) combined compete with a hardware rich company?

[@danielcorcoran7132]

Best thing for Sierra Habitats and Dream Chaser, is to be launcher neutral. Fly commercial and military payloads with SpaceX in US now and Europe later, fly NASA payloads with anyone but SpaceX to be truly 2nd option. ULA acquisition will be a drain on cash to be an almost (sans BE4) fully vertically integrated company like SpaceX.

[@richardcasecase7445]

Competition is good

[@StuSaville]

So doesn't this leave Boeing Starliner without a ride?

[@markg3831]

Great question

[@myyklmax]

Should SierraSpace be give the OK to acquire ULA, I feel their will be an aire of friendly competition between SpaceX and SierraSpace; instead of thw antagonist one between SpaceX and Blue Origin. There would definitely be more opportunities for collaboration; which would take much of the stress off that NASA and the FAA have fxffxfffzdone between SpaceX and Blue Origin.

[@colonbina1]

Let's wait for this interesting competition

[@jameslmorehead]

I'd love to see SpaceX take the Raptor and make a Falcon 9 type rocket around it. Each of Falcon 9/Falcon heavy's Merlin engines provides roughly 100 tons of thrust. A Raptor 3 provides about 280 tones of thrust. The different in propellants means the rocket bodies will need to have different tank proportions. Raptor and Merlin are close enough in size that the ground equipment could stay mostly unchanged. They could even do a super heavy variant to lift a total mass of 840 tons at liftoff. Having 100, 300, single 280, 840, and 9,200 ton reusable rocket variants would put SpaceX in the perfect position to maintain LEO dominance. Maybe a small version of the Raptor 3 with a target thrust in the 20 to 50 ton range would allow for even less expensive ride sharing for micro satellites and/or payloads not meant to stay in orbit long such as a manufacturing process requiring zero Gs. Pharmaceuticals and metallurgy would greatly benefit from this.

[@colonbina1]

♥️♥️♥️

[@kwichzwellbreck697]

Sierra DONT BUY ULA. Never buy a dead horse. Use your money to buy rides on Falcon9 and starship. With the high 2-4 flights per week cadence going with SpaceX will surely not constrict any schedule planning for Sierra.

[@royh6526]

I agree, but part of Sierra's problem is that NASA wants to have an alternate system to fly to the ISS. This rules out SpaceX. I actually thought Northrup-Grumman was the most likely to buy ULA.

[@kwichzwellbreck697]

@@royh6526 Nasa went over a decade with a non American rocket solution = Roskosmos Surely they can do the same for a decade with an American one ^^

[@ProjectPlanetree]

No. if you buy a tech company, but not its key engineers, you did not a company, you bought its overhead.

[@colonbina1]

Can’t they improve the situation if the leader is changed

[@ProjectPlanetree]

​@@colonbina1 Indeed true. But only if ULA has the only launch vehicle that will meet their need.

[@philsmith2346]

Nope. I'm not excited. Bored kinda, but nope... Too much other stuff to do here in West Virginia.

[@francoismourot490]

ULA has no reuse and is old culture It's good for ... scrap ( Sierra should avoid it at all costs, even for free )

[@fionajack9160]

ULA SOLD FOR SIERRA Can’t be this hard If the titles aren’t Clickbait, then they read as gibberish The first 29 seconds, and you’re claiming that Sierra space shows significant potential to rival SpaceX in the future, but two days ago you were claiming that Dreamchaser was going to be launched by SpaceX ? Dreamchaser, after all this time, hasn’t even had a test flight, but Sierra Space somehow, is shockingly, going to potentially humiliate SpaceX in surpassing them ? Also why is your voiceover so slow and muted. Sounds like a bot voiceover bot

[@hippygaming2740]

"ULA SOLD TO SIERRA" is what it should say. Obvious mistake to notice . Sierra does show significant potential to rival SpaceX in the human transport and re-supply of space stations, especially now they can launch their own ships. I agree that this man spends to much time on worrying about his voice and crapply editing of the narrative. It needs to be more natural, no repeating narrative, and energetic. I don't see why he has so much problems with audio. Other creators do not have repeating audio, so why does this man settle for it. Oh, to be picky about mistakes, your last 3 words are gibberish. 😛 Yea, it's obvious that you meant to delete the first "bot" and add a period or exclamation point at the end. Have a great day.

[@fionajack9160]

@@hippygaming2740 My bad with the last sentence Sierra Space doesn’t even even have a flight tested vehicle. Even if they did, Dreamchaser. offers no advantages over falcon 9 and falcon heavy, let alone Starship Two days ago, according to this site, Dreamchaser was going to be launched by SpaceX. Now they are a serious competitor ? Does this sound like quality research? Even at SpaceX’s pace, there’s not enough going on to justify daily Space Industry coverage, So exaggeration, repetition, or just made up storylines fill the void.

[@hippygaming2740]

@@fionajack9160 SpaceX didn't have a flight proven vehicle before falcon. Didn't mean that they were not serious competitors to ULA at that time. When I watched that video you are referencing, I thought it said that SpaceX was a possibility. It mentioned all the problems, like Falcon faring being to small for DreamChaser and other fitting problems. Nasa has stated that they want more than one vehicle/company to call on. ULA also has a flight proven vehicle that will be Sierra property. Dreamchaser doesn't have to compete with Falcon, only the capsule on top (Dragon). There is alot going on with the space industry. I see many of the same topics posted by similar creators. It is what it is. As I grew up, I learned that not everyone will do what I want them to do or how i want them to do it. :-) Have a great day.

[@fionajack9160]

@@hippygaming2740 The take away from the video two days ago, was that this author has no idea what’s gonna happen, in contrast to the video title SpaceX has better than 80% of the global launch market, flying reusable rockets Vulcan isn’t reusable,is not cost competitive , won’t be much of a competitor

[@fionajack9160]

I guess it’s possible that blue origin become competitive with falcon rockets Competition is good for the industry

[@l.ls.8890]

Not excited at all about this competition. Competition will evolve when BO and ULA/Sierra have proven their ability to send to orbit and return safely like SX.

[@countmorbid3187]

The dino's have bled NASA dry. NASA was the goose with the golden eggs. Their era is over now.

[@gregorybyrne2453]

Luke 21:28 Keep looking up

[@XCX237]

There's blood in the water🤔

[@bobbyquack4908]

What does that say about Boeing being involved in ULA? More misappropriation of the money? More loss.?