LSA CRITICS LAUNCH ARGUMENTS, MISS THE MARK, IMPLODE

The second phase of the Air Force’s Launch Service Agreement is beginning to pick up steam, and with it, the program’s critics are coming out of the woodwork. Perhaps the most prominent among them is Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. On March 28, 2019, Smith sent a letter to Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson, detailing his concerns regarding the Launch Service Agreement. But despite marshaling his best arguments against the program, his criticisms miss the mark; rather than landing with devastating effect, his critiques fall flat.

The Launch Service Agreement—or LSA for short—is one of the military’s ambitious aerospace programs. Its purpose is to restore American independent operations in space. Designed to move the United States’ space infrastructure away from its reliance on foreign rockets—namely the Russian RD-180—the LSA recently concluded its initial phase in October 2018. To relatively little fanfare, the Air Force selected three contractors and tasked them to develop domestic launch system prototypes. Those prototypes would then be used to facilitate the program’s transition into its crucial second phase. The execution stage of the Launch Service Agreement, Phase 2, will see all potential aerospace contractors compete for an additional $2.3 billion in domestic launch contracts. However, from that pool of competition, the Air Force will only select the two standout firms to award its exclusive LSA contracts. The program is undoubtedly high-stakes, but it was designed that way. Still, that hasn’t stopped Chairman Smith and some others from criticizing the LSA’s second phase on the structure of its competition. In his 2019 letter, Smith lamented the Air Force’s decision to limit competition in Phase 2 to only two aerospace contractors. Instead, he argues that other launch providers might be able to compete successfully if given the opportunity. That is, of course, true, but it misses the point entirely. One might expect that Smith, as the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, would have some experience trying to herd cats. Whether you’re dealing with felines, members of Congress, or aerospace contractors, it’s impossible. But that fact is apparently lost on the Chairman since it’s the very thing Air Force was trying to avoid. By limiting the contractors to only the two best options, the Air Force is adjusting to logistical realities to get the most out of a challenging situation and funneling rapidly toward the 2022 deadline. The program retains the benefits of competition—lower costs, greater quality, more options—while also ensuring stability and manageability, both of which are vital to the LSA’s future success. It seems Chairman Smith failed to recognize that, when managing a program as complex as the Launch Service Agreement, it’s detrimental to have too many cooks in the kitchen.

---

But Smith, in his opposition to the Launch Service Agreement, didn’t stop there. He went on to “encourage” the Air Force to conduct an independent review of its approach to the LSA, insinuating that the Air Force’s selection process created an unequal competitive landscape for the aerospace contractors. Yes, you read that right. In one breath, Smith criticized the LSA program for not allowing enough competition, then in another, he seemingly attacks the Air Force’s entire competitive process for creating inequality. Mr. Chairman, you can’t have it both ways. Similarly, Smith’s call for an independent investigation is equally misguided because it fails to take into account one key factor: time. As previously mentioned, the purpose of the LSA is to develop domestic launch vehicles for spaceflight and eliminate America’s reliance on the RD-180 rocket. The Air Force, however, has limited time to make this transition a reality. By law, the United States must completely phase out the RD-180 by 2022. That’s just over 2.5 years from now and doesn’t give the LSA much time to work. If the Air Force decided to dedicate its limited time to conducting an independent investigation, rather than progressing with the program, that would increase the already-tight time restrictions and create a higher risk for catastrophic mistakes to be made. For the sake of American national security, that can’t be allowed to happen. The Air Force is doing its best to make its 2022 launch window. Ultimately, Chairman Smith should think twice before interfering and potentially slowing the LSA down. His suggestions to Secretary Wilson demonstrate an alarming misunderstanding of the Launch Services Agreement as a whole. His arguments against the program implode upon close examination, and his recommendations mustn’t be implemented, lest he dooms the LSA to the same fate.