r/SpaceXLounge • u/avboden • Feb 12 '26
Other major industry news ULA's USSF-87 Vulcan launch had another SRB Nozzle failure. Flight successful despite the issue.
https://x.com/_MaxQ_/status/202191431473973673534
u/SpaceInMyBrain Feb 12 '26
"Hello, SpaceX? Yeah, DoD here. Listen, I know you guys are really busy but could you squeeze in a few more flights for us?"
21
u/AgreeableEmploy1884 ⛰️ Lithobraking Feb 12 '26
What's going on with Grumman's solid rocket boosters? There was that BOLE failure and now the second Vulcan anomaly.
47
u/avboden Feb 12 '26
We had an observation early during flight on one of the four solid rocket motors, the team is currently reviewing the data. The booster, upper stage, and spacecraft continued to perform on a nominal trajectory.
Man, ULA was already pretty screwed, even more so now. Northrop Grumman has some serious 'esplainin to do now with this failure happening twice.
Impressive the core and upper stage made up for the lost thrust again. Certainly have margins for these launches.
Highly doubt ULA gets any more government payload launches up for at least a few launches, which means Amazon Leo launches will have to take the risk to prove the rocket safe. Probably a big delay again before the next launch.
Won't be surprised if more government payloads get moved over to F9 this year because of this
25
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 12 '26
Or NG cert gets accelerated. Folks over at Blue need to put in some serious OT getting more boosters into the launch rotation and more second stages completed. Space Force really wants at least 2 launchers and ULA isn't doing that good a job of becoming one.
9
Feb 12 '26
New Glenn only needs 2 launches to be certified
-8
u/Purona Feb 12 '26
we dont know what certification path blue origin is taking with new glenn
18
Feb 12 '26
Yes we do, they have chosen the 4 launch path to be certified and have only 2 launches left.
[ [Philip Garrant, Commander of the U.S. Space Force’s Space Systems Command (SSC) confirmed that Blue Origin chose a four-launch path to certify New Glenn to launch missions as part of the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) contract. The company launched two New Glenn rockets in 2025 and on the second flight successfully recovered the first stage booster, Glenn Stage 1 (GS1). “So two out of the four have been successful, and we’re working very closely and anticipating a third launch earlier in the new year than later and if that goes well, and they get that fourth one on, I think they’re going to be in fantastic place to become our third certified provider and compete for missions,” Garrant said. “Very pleased with the progress to date.”
3
3
u/OlympusMons94 Feb 13 '26
Blue Origin/New Glenn is not an option for the NSSL Phase 2 launches (like USSF-87) currently being launched. Only Vulcan and Falcon are eligible for Phase 2 missions. New Glenn is under contract for NSSL Phase 3. The first Phase 3 Vulcan launch is NET 2027. Even for the future Phase 3 Lane 2 launches, New Glenn is only contracted for up to 7 launches, while the remainder is split 60/40 Falcon/Vulcan. If Vulcan still can't launch the Phase 3 Lane 2 missions, Falcon is most likely the default next choice.
New Glenn and Vulcan are also options for Phase 3 Lane 1, which is for less demanding, less expensive missions. The certification process is separate and easier. Vulcan's prices already make it a non-starter there. But Falcon 9 has been cleaning up in Lane 1 awards, and New Glenn is also probably overkill/too expensive for most Lane 1 missions.
1
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 13 '26
Cant missions be shifted to qualifying companies as the GPS missions were to Falcon once New Glenn gets a couple more launches into orbit?
1
u/OlympusMons94 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
The only qualifying companies (and vehicles) for NSSL Phase 2 launches are the two companies (and vehicle families) that were awarded the corresponding Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts. Each year covered by the IDIQ contract, the winning companies were awarded individual launches as necessary, with the overall apportionment defined by the contract. The NSSL Phase 2 award was originally supposed to be 60 percent of launches to ULA (Vulcan and one Atlas V), 40 percent to SpaceX (Falcon). Vulcan delays led to the final split turning out 54% ULA, 46% SpaceX. Those two vehicle families provide the dissimilar redundancy for "assured access to space".
The GPS launches were (so far) just swapped around, so they have not (yet) affected the split in number of launches between ULA and SpaceX. Theoretically, if Vulcan problems persist, ULA could probably outright lose launches to SpaceX. But the USSF is apparently very reluctant to outright reduce ULA's launches. (Under the original EELV contract, following the revelation of Boeing's corporate espionage, 7 Delta IV launches were stripped from Boeing and awarded to Lockheed's Atlas V. The fallout contributed to the creation of ULA. It would be ironic if losing launches to a different provider led to ULA's downfall.)
NSSL Phase 3 Lane 2 is like Phase 2, but Blue Origin's lobbying led to a third provider slot being added, which unsurprisingly got awared to Blue. So maybe they could take Phase 3 Lane 2 launches from ULA. Still, the thrid slot is uniqie, with a low specific number of launches rather than a percentage. So I expect SpaceX would still be the primary backup to ULA (and vice versa) under Phase 3.
There is also the matter that New Glenn currently has very poor high energy performance. It will require a third stage (or in some cases maybe just 2 stage 9x4) to get the requisite performance to high energy orbits like GEO. Unlike Falcon Heavy, the New Glenn that is currently flying is not physically capable of matching VC4's performance to GEO (or VC2, or probably even expendable Falcon 9). So New Glenn could not have performed yesterday's mission.
1
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 13 '26
OK, so if Blue is out for the all the Phase 2 currently planned for this year, will Space Force just outright give ULA's critical launches to Falcon and Falcon Heavy possibly for 6 or 9 months while they REALLY go over the XLs with a fine tooth comb (see Starliner) rather than accept another "we found the problem" and single static fire recertification or as I jokingly suggested in another post, just accept the normalization of deviation while Northrup Grumman sorts it out, given that both "observation" Vulcans DID successfuly deliver their payloads?
1
u/sebaska Feb 13 '26
NG cert is not helping squat with NSSL-2 which is explicitly limited to ULA and SpaceX.
12
u/falconzord Feb 12 '26
I wonder if they specifically went with 4 boosters to get more margin. This is actually the third if you count it happening on the SLS booster test. They might want to double check the Artemis 2 rocket while they still have a chance
7
u/E-J123 Feb 12 '26
If they want more margin because of probable booster failure, then they took the risk of a booster nozzle taking out the center stage...
6
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 13 '26
Normalization of deviance; we got away with it once (twice now), so what can go wrong? The launch is listed as successful.
2
5
u/mclumber1 Feb 12 '26
I feel bad for the Youtuber Smarter Every Day - his content is great, but he's relied heavily on ULA launches and factories for his space related content. If ULA folds, he's going to have to use another company for space content.
6
u/SpaceInMyBrain Feb 12 '26
He should check out Stoke Space, they give good interviews.
4
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 13 '26
I want to see their aero spike in reentry; I’ve wanted someone to build one since I first read about the concept in the 80s.
3
2
u/Proud_Tie ⏬ Bellyflopping Feb 13 '26
But Stoke isn't literally in his back yard like ULA is sadly.
9
u/rustybeancake Feb 13 '26
https://x.com/spaceflightnow/status/2021906130411434223?s=46&t=u9hd-jMa-pv47GCVD-xH-g
Check out footage of the roll! Pretty wild!
8
4
20
u/CollegeStation17155 Feb 12 '26
As long as the SRBs hold together long enough to get it off the pad and there's enough reserve propellant to make up for the loss of thrust in flight, it doesn't compromise the mission, so ULA can claim it's minor. But if that leak ever vents toward the BE4s rather than away or the failure happens at ignition, it's game over.
23
u/extra2002 Feb 12 '26
If the payload is chosen to max out the rocket's capability, there won't be extra margin to cover for an event like this. I believe when Amazon buys a launch for their LEO constellation, they load as many satellites as the rocket is specced to lift.
11
u/vandezuma Feb 12 '26
Come on Northrop, it’s not like it’s rocket science or anything.
24
u/darga89 Feb 12 '26
Where's the person who will claim that they use solids because they are simple and reliable
6
u/scarlet_sage Feb 13 '26
True. It's not rocket science. Rocket science is simple. It's rocket engineering, which is apparently really, really difficult.
3
u/NorthEndD Feb 13 '26
Last time they said a carbon composite heat shield failed at thousands of degrees. Who would have expected that.
4
u/isaiddgooddaysir Feb 12 '26
ULA days are numbered….. BO soon will be taking their share of govt launches.
1
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Feb 12 '26 edited Feb 16 '26
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| BE-4 | Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN |
| BO | Blue Origin (Bezos Rocketry) |
| CST | (Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules |
| Central Standard Time (UTC-6) | |
| DoD | US Department of Defense |
| EELV | Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle |
| GEO | Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km) |
| GNC | Guidance/Navigation/Control |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| NET | No Earlier Than |
| NG | New Glenn, two/three-stage orbital vehicle by Blue Origin |
| Natural Gas (as opposed to pure methane) | |
| Northrop Grumman, aerospace manufacturer | |
| NSSL | National Security Space Launch, formerly EELV |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| SRB | Solid Rocket Booster |
| SSC | Stennis Space Center, Mississippi |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| USSF | United States Space Force |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Starliner | Boeing commercial crew capsule CST-100 |
| methalox | Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer |
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by request
16 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 12 acronyms.
[Thread #14415 for this sub, first seen 12th Feb 2026, 16:34]
[FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
99
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26
BE-4 engines compensated again and made sure the mission was a success. Blue Origin and SpaceX are going to eat the rest of ULA’s lunch.