It’s about NASA lunar lander contract: “The protest focuses on the decision to award only one company, SpaceX, the lunar lander contract from a three-way competition. Alabama-based Dynetics also had developed a lunar lander for the contest.” (Via Instapundit) …Look, I like Amazon just fine. Amazon Prime, affiliate revenue, it’s my publisher.
But… Blue Origins is a privately funded spaceflight research organization that brings payloads along for the ride, and SpaceX is an unmanned and manned orbital transport enterprise. I have no doubt (and some hopes) that Jeff Bezos will eventually have an extremely profitable company and a fleet of silver rocketships; it’s just that, in the meantime, we’re trying to get back to the moon before I die of old age. Well, that’s maybe not NASA’s specific rationale – but it absolutely should be. I’d have given SpaceX the contract, too: they’ve got direct experience at this point. That includes, again, manned missions.
Moe Lane
Blue Origins hasn’t gone orbital yet, have they? They’ve done those fun little sub-orbital hops that will make for a nice tourist income mission, but crossing the Karman line isn’t the same as putting something all the way into a stable orbit.
And complaining about 1 winner in a 3-way competition? What, do they want two companies working on the same project? Then why not award all three companies?
Anyway, I’ll stop here before I veer into government contracting and other political crap.
These things are common in government contracting, and usually don’t reverse the decision. It all depends on how they can use loopholes in the RFP and bids.