Rocketdyne

[Testing]

Word has it that P&W has bought Rocketdyne from Boeing but I don't see it in the newswire. Can anyone confirm? Curious as to how they will handle the cleanup at SSFL. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

Here you go.<br />http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050222/cgtu071_1.html<br /><br />Press Release Source: Boeing <br /><br /><br />Boeing to Sell Rocketdyne Propulsion Unit to Pratt & Whitney<br />Tuesday February 22, 4:15 pm ET <br /><br /><br />ST. LOUIS, Feb. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The Boeing Company (NYSE: BA - News) announced today that it has reached an agreement to sell its Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power business to Pratt & Whitney, a United Technologies company (NYSE: UTX - News), for approximately $700 million in cash.<br /><br />The transaction is subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions. Boeing expects to recognize a gain on the sale.<br /><br />Rocketdyne is primarily a rocket engine developer and builder, and provides booster engines for the Space Shuttle and the Delta family of expendable launch vehicles, as well as propulsion systems for missile defense systems. The divestiture includes sites and assets in California, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. Approximately 3,000 people support the operations at those sites<br /><br />"This transaction makes sense for Boeing, for Rocketdyne's employees and customers, and for Pratt & Whitney," said Jim Albaugh, president and chief executive officer of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. "The acquisition of Rocketdyne by Pratt & Whitney will benefit our customers, as Pratt & Whitney is a company dedicated to the business of propulsion and is in the best position to build upon Rocketdyne's proud heritage. I have great confidence that the proud legacy of Rocketdyne from Mercury to Saturn V to the Space Shuttle will be in good hands. The sale also reinforces our strategic business aim to be horizontally -- not vertically -- integrated."<br /><br />Albaugh said that Boeing would continue to build launch systems and that the divestiture would enable Boeing to serve its customers more effectively, while pre <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

More selling going on...<br /><br />http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050222/boeing_wichita_6.html<br /><br />Associated Press<br />Boeing Selling Commercial Aircraft Plants<br />Tuesday February 22, 7:43 pm ET <br />By Roxana Hegeman, Associated Press Writer <br />Boeing Selling Commercial Aircraft Plants in Kansas, Oklahoma to Toronto-Based Investment Group <br /><br /><br />WICHITA, Kan. (AP) -- Boeing Co. is selling its commercial aircraft plants in Kansas and Oklahoma to a Canadian-based investment group, part of the aerospace giant's strategy to focus on design and final assembly. <br /><br />Onex Corp. on Tuesday agreed to buy Boeing's commercial aircraft facility in Wichita, along with plants in Tulsa and McAlester, Okla., for $900 million cash and the assumption of $300 million in liabilities. Chicago-based Boeing has been trying to sell the plants for more than a year.<br /><br />"There have been terrible job losses at these plants over the last several years. We confidently believe that can be reversed," Seth Mersky, a managing director of Toronto-based Onex, said in a statement.<br /><br />Separately, Boeing announced the sale of its Rocketdyne rocket engine subsidiary to United Technologies Corp., parent of jet-engine maker Pratt & Whitney, for about $700 million cash. Rocketdyne, based in Canoga Park, Calif., has sites and assets in California, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida and 3,000 employees.<br /><br />Onex's new aerospace company, which has yet to be named, would include members of Boeing management. Also undecided is how many Boeing workers would be hired at the new company -- those decisions are still awaiting negotiations with union officials.<br /><br />Boeing is Kansas' largest private employer; about 7,200 people work at the Wichita commercial plant, along with as many as 1,300 at the two smaller facilities in Oklahoma. Boeing's defense operations in Wichita, which employ approximately <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

One minor nitpick in the article.....<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Rocketdyne is primarily a rocket engine developer and builder, and provides booster engines for the Space Shuttle and the Delta family of expendable launch vehicles, as well as propulsion systems for missile defense systems.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Rocketdyne does not and never has supplied boosters for the Space Shuttle. It supplies the SSMEs (as the second article correctly indicates). The boosters are supplied by Morton Thiokol, which of course is not a Boeing company. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[najab]

><i>One minor nitpick in the article..... </i><p>Well, if you <b>really</b> want to nitpick, 'booster' is used to refer to the first stage of a step rocket. Since the SSME's are burning during first stage flight you <i>could</i> call them booster engines, though I suppose the fact that they provide less than half the liftoff thrust and continue to burn after staging would make them 'sustainers'.</p>

 

[propforce]

OK... as long as we're being anal about this.... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Historically, solids were never referred to as "engines" but rather as "motors", e.g., solid rocket <i>motors</i>, or solid rocket <i>boosters</i>. Often only the pump operated liquid propulsive devices were referred to as <i>engines</i>, e.g., liquid rocket engines, but never liquid rocket <i>motors</i>. <br /><br />Small thrust, liquid propulsive, devices were referred as <i>thrusters</i> and not engines, e.g., attitude control thrusters. Whereas solids are once again referred as <i>motors</i>, e.g., apogee motors. <br /><br />Booster is often referred to the first stage of a <i>launch vehicle</i>. So the SRB is a booster, but since the SSMEs were on during the boost stage, I guess it can be called a booster engines as well. It's actually more like the a parallel burn 2nd stage engine but people use these nomenclature loosely :shrug: <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>