Space Access ’11: Gary Hudson Channels Admiral Ackbar

Gary Hudson
t/space
“It’s a trap” Monosony and NewSpace

What monopsony is:

• too many sellers with only one buyer (government!)

What it is not:

• Monopoly the Game
• Sony the company
• The kissing disease

The Back Story

• t/space proposed COTS to NASA as Alt Access — proposed a demo flight in 2004
• specifically wanted to avoid needing to go to ISS, competing with Constellation — it’s a trap
• Should have focused on crew capability first — once you have that, cargo is easy
• Mike Griffin mutated the program
• NASA went with cargo first and then went to crew
• NASA has ended up as the primary market — not a good development

The Result

• COTS has created ULA-lite companies — smaller, but not significantly so
• Only factor of 2 reduction in costs — not a factor of 10 as hoped
• Barriers to entry for new providers
• Would not be where we are without all the work NASA did — also wouldn’t have the barriers to entrepreneurship that have developed over last 50 years
• NASA adding money to COTS contractors for milestones is not fixed-price contracting — it’s the capture of contractors by NASA
• CCDev tied to job creation
• CCDev tied to funding for the Space Launch System (HLV)
• Drives costs up

Is There Any Hope?

• Sadly, no 🙁

Q&A

If SpaceX gets to $1,000 per pound to orbit, then Land Launch will be at that price as well

SpaceX will be charging NASA about $130 million for COTS flights on Falcon 9 while satellite companies will pay about $50 million — government paying about 2.5 times more