Urgent.News

What's breaking now, across thousands of outlets.

Tech

Could United Launch Alliance's money problems finally force its owners to sell?

ULA is preparing to resume launching the Vulcan rocket in the coming weeks.

Could United Launch Alliance's money problems finally force its owners to sell?

The rocket company United Launch Alliance (ULA) may be facing a potential sale due to financial difficulties, according to wire material. ULA, which is owned by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, has been struggling with money issues. Despite these challenges, ULA is one of only two U.S. rocket companies still adhering to the principles of reusability and diversification.

SpaceX, the third U.S. rocket company, has taken a more aggressive approach, branching out from reusable rockets to a diverse range of space services. These include cargo delivery, human spaceflight, satellite production, broadband, and potentially, orbital data centers and in-space manufacturing. Blue Origin, another U.S. rocket company, is also diversifying.

It is evolving from a pure rocket company into a satellite manufacturer, robotics developer, and a potential competitor for SpaceX's Starlink network. Rocket Lab, another U.S. rocket company, has taken a different path to diversification. After achieving success with its small Electron launch vehicle, it relocated its headquarters to Southern California, started building spacecraft and payloads, and embarked on a spree of corporate acquisitions to expand into satellite communications and become a merchant supplier of satellite components and sensors.

Rocket Lab is currently in advanced development stages for its partially reusable next-generation Neutron launch vehicle.

Written by urgent.news from Ars Technica's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.

Read the original at arstechnica.com →

More in Tech

Next.js 16's Turbopack is 2.5x faster, but the bundler is only 4% of your build

Next.js 16 makes Turbopack the default bundler and puts a number on it: builds 2 to 5 times faster than webpack. I wanted to know whether that holds on something bigger than the starter template, and…

  • Next.js 16 introduces Turbopack as default bundler, 2.5-5x faster than webpack
  • Bundler only 4% of total build time, other phases consume majority
  • Turbopack's caching accelerates compiling step 19x, but total build time only 4x faster

More from Friday 11 September →