Not prospering The Pentagon seems to be fed up with ULA’s rocket delays "The ULA Vulcan program has performed unsatisfactorily this past year." Eric Berger – May 22, 2025 6:32 pm | 16 The second flight of United Launch Alliance's Vulcan rocket took off in October. The test flight was successful despite a malfunction with one of its solid rocket boosters. Credit: United Launch Alliance The second flight of United Launch Alliance's Vulcan rocket took off in October. The test flight was successful despite a malfunction with one of its solid rocket boosters. Credit: United Launch Alliance Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more In recent written testimony to a US House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees the military, the senior official responsible for purchasing launches for national security missions blistered one of the country's two primary rocket providers. The remarks from Major General Stephen G. Purdy, acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, concerned United Launch Alliance and its long-delayed development of the large Vulcan rocket. "The ULA Vulcan program has performed unsatisfactorily this past year," Purdy said in written testimony during a May 14 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. This portion of his testimony did not come up during the hearing, and it has not been reported publicly to date. "Major issues with the Vulcan have overshadowed its successful certification resulting in delays to the launch of four national security missions," Purdy wrote. "Despite the retirement of highly successful Atlas and Delta launch vehicles, the transition to Vulcan has been slow and continues to impact the completion of Space Force mission objectives." Bringing unhappiness into the open It has widely been known in the space community that military officials, who supported Vulcan with development contracts for the rocket and its engines that exceeded $1 billion, have been unhappy with the pace of the rocket's development. It was originally due to launch in 2020 and ferry critical national security missions shortly afterward. But this displeasure has largely remained out of the public eye. However, behind closed doors, missives have been flying. About a year ago, another Air Force official, Frank Calvelli, wrote to ULA and said he was "growing concerned" about the company's ability to scale manufacturing of the Vulcan rocket and meet the military's cadence needs. Calvelli noted that ULA had a backlog of more than two dozen national security missions that were sitting on the ground due to delays. Some of the displeasure was apparent in April when the US military announced that it would ask SpaceX to launch a plurality of its missions during the next round of national security launches, reversing the preeminent role that ULA had held for the last two decades. ULA retired its Delta IV Heavy rocket in April 2024, and the handful of Atlas V rockets that remain are committed to other missions. This has left the Air Force dependent on SpaceX, with its Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy vehicles, as the only provider of launch services to get its most expensive and highest priority satellites into orbit. ULA must “repair trust” In his testimony, Purdy said ULA completed certification of the initial variant of its Vulcan rocket for military launches from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on March 25, but added that "open work" remains. The military and the company are currently working through "risk reduction plans" to limit the chances of an issue with the first launch of a military payload on Vulcan. "To address these challenges ULA has increased its engineering resources and management focus to resolve design issues," Purdy wrote. "Government and Federally Funded Research and Development Center personnel have increased involvement in technical and program management challenges. Vulcan's first military mission, USSF-106, currently has a no earlier than launch date of July 2025, Purdy wrote. These outstanding risks will ultimately be assessed during a Flight Readiness Review a week or two prior to this launch. At the end of his written testimony, Purdy emphasized that he expected ULA to do better. As part of his job as the Service Acquisition Executive for Space (SAE), Purdy noted that he has been tasked to transform space acquisition and to become more innovative. "For these programs, the prime contractors must re-establish baselines, establish a culture of accountability, and repair trust deficit to prove to the SAE that they are adopting the acquisition principles necessary to deliver capabilities at speed, on cost and on schedule," Purdy said. Eric Berger Senior Space Editor Eric Berger Senior Space Editor Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston. 16 Comments