I meant launches that are specifically aiming for Mars.
Musk revealed his roadmap to Mars. Why haven't we heard about Boeing's?
SpaceX still doesn't have a launch vehicle in production capable of getting humans to Mars, unlike Boeing.
From [0]: "Senator Orrin Hatch made sure the new rocket used solid boosters, manufactured in his state. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby insisted that Marshall Space Flight Center design and test the rocket. Florida Senator Bill Nelson brought home billions of dollars to Kennedy Space Center to “modernize” its launch facilities."
Yuck.
ITS, on the other hand, is claimed to cost ~$10 billion, and begin putting people on Mars (in lots larger than half a dozen, mind you) sometime in the 2020s. Yeah, it's ambitious. They've missed other ambitious deadlines.
I personally feel, subjectively of course, that SpaceX is more ambitious and "hungry" to go to Mars than Boeing is. But that's just my gut feeling, and I have no data to back that feeling up.
[0]: http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/09/how-i-learned-to-stop...
S-1C Program (Saturn V Rocket First Stage): 12 successful launches, 0 failures.
IUS Program (Booster for interplanetary probes from Space Shuttle): 24 launches, 3 failures (2 Boeing's fault, 1 the space shuttle exploded).
Delta II: 153 Launches, 2 Failures.
Delta III: 3 Launches, 2 Failures.
Delta IV: 33 Launches, 1 Failure.
No. The new ULA Vulkan launch system doesn't have it's first test flight scheduled until 2019. Boeing (or really ULA) is developing the Vulkan Rocket. Which is partially recoverable, not fully. [1] The first launch of this vehicle is 2019. The entry level offering is quoted at ~$100mil per rocket (vs ~$164mil for a Delta IV) [2]. While a Falcon9 is $62mil [3].I see why ULA lost their contract, Musk cut their knee caps off.
[1] https://spaceflightnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/recove...
[2] https://spaceflightnow.com/2015/04/13/ula-unveils-its-future...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9