The company also pointed to other criteria that it believed should have put it ahead, including its ability to lower costs and offer "commercially viable" cars. Rivals, SpaceX claimed, would have to "rely solely on" public contracts and thereby drain taxpayers' money. The ULA would even rely on Russian rocket engines and defeated the government's goal of reducing Russian hardware dependency. SpaceX also noted that Blue Origin and Northrop delayed their development plans soon after winning their contracts, negating the promises they made when controlling the money of the Air Force.
In addition, SpaceX said it was trying to dispute the prices through a neutral resolution process, but that the Air Force refused and gave only a vague summed up rejection of its arguments. In addition, the trial accused officials of changing the criteria for the contract without giving SpaceX or others a reply.
If the trial were to succeed, the trial would require the air force to stop the investment, reassess its offers and potentially "make a new award decision" based on new terms.
In a statement, a SpaceX spokesman for the Engadget said the company was fine with Air Force which continued with the second phase of its rocket buying process "as currently planned" but "disagreed" with the original choice. The private spaceflight outfit filed the trial to "ensure a level playing field", the spokesman said.
It's hard to say whether SpaceX's suits will succeed. While the trial shows some reasons to believe that SpaceX was the victim of an unfair process, critics could characterize the case as sour grapes ̵