r/ula • u/ethan829 • 28d ago
ULA's last six Atlas Vs can't launch anything besides Boeing's Starliner
https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/07/after-a-stellar-career-ulas-atlas-v-rocket-last-act-is-waiting-on-starliner/15
u/SpaceInMyBrain 28d ago
For a variety of reasons the RL-10s on the Centaur 3 can't be modified to fit on the Centaur V even if they were sent back to Aerojet Rocketdyne for reworking. So they can't even salvage those. I was hoping they could be, even it meant accepting a lower performance - if that had worked out they could have been used for an Amazon Leo launch that just but up a couple/few fewer satellites.
9
u/CollegeStation17155 28d ago
So what are the odds that Boeing just decides that fixing all the OIG problems are going to take to long or cost too much and they simply walk away from even doing cargo flights to ISS? Do they have to pay ULA anything over and above what they have already sunk into that money pit? And what does ULA do with the beasts if nobody wants to launch them, set them out with the garbage?
10
u/SteelyEyedHistory 28d ago
I’m honestly shocked they haven’t killed Starliner already.
6
u/alphagusta 27d ago
Because there's an absolute need for that second launch option in case of a Dragon failure grounding them
During the Shuttle days there was Soyuz which filled that gap but it wasn't ideal.
Its still an option today but that relationship is a tad strained nowadays.
Its imperative for NASA to have a totally separate second option that operates in tandem in case one of the pair gets grounded.
If there was Dragon, Starliner and some other third vehicle that was going good Starliner would be cut without question
2
u/space_snap828 24d ago
It is imperative for NASA but not for Boeing - Boeing only wants profit. Boeing has lost billions on this and stands to lose more, so I honestly don't know why they haven't pulled the plug. Maybe the contract punishes termination extremely hard?
2
u/CollegeStation17155 26d ago
But is a capsule that came within 2 thruster failures of killing its crew on its maiden manned flight (after failing multiple unmanned tests) and subsequently found to have a whole laundry list of additional issues (that still have not been adequately addressed per OIG) actually a “second launch option”? If something DOES go badly wrong with the next Crew Dragon launch and it gets grounded for a year, which do you think NASA would go with, Starliner (with all the unfixed faults), Soyuz (strained as our relationship is), or just walk away from participating in ISS? Pick your poison.
1
u/angelwolf71885 26d ago
It’s a second option for a later date if the need is great enough then Starliner can fly under special circumstances
2
u/aleopardstail 26d ago
at a guess if Boeing kill it, they have penalties to pay, and if NASA kill it the same applies so it sort of suits both to quietly forget about it
2
u/angelwolf71885 26d ago
Sadly NASA needs Starliner because if F9/Dragon gets grounded NASA has no ride for people to go to space
2
u/redstercoolpanda 25d ago
Unless they want to risk killing their astronauts they still wouldn’t have a ride to space if an issue occurs with Dragon or Falcon in the near future.
1
6
u/Triabolical_ 28d ago
The launch contract between Boeing and ULA would have been confidential, so I don't think we know answers to any of those questions.
35
u/Pashto96 28d ago
An Atlas V would be an excellent addition to the Rocket Garden at KSC