Space Force's Reliability Verdict: Falcon 9 Beats Vulcan for Critical GPS

The U.S. Space Force just turned what looked like a launch scheduling tweak into a public reliability verdict: for now, when GPS timing matters, Falcon 9 is the safer bet than Vulcan.

In a DVIDS statement from Space Systems Command, the service said it is moving the upcoming GPS III-8 National Security Space Launch mission from United Launch Alliance (ULA), the Boeing-Lockheed Martin launch joint venture, to SpaceX's Falcon 9. The statement adds details the wire clips tend to blur together: the rocket swap is tied to delivery of the final GPS III spacecraft, SV-10, with launch now targeted no earlier than late April from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

That framing matters. This is not just a paperwork reshuffle. It is the operational consequence of a launch vehicle anomaly still under investigation.

According to SpaceNews, the Space Force said on Feb. 25 it would pause additional Vulcan national security missions pending resolution of a booster performance issue observed during ULA's Feb. 12 USSF-87 launch. The same reporting notes that observers saw an irregular plume pattern from one of Vulcan's Northrop Grumman-built GEM 63XL solid boosters, and that the event resembled Vulcan's second flight in October 2024, when a booster nozzle failed during ascent.

Vulcan still completed both missions. That distinction is important, because it is the core of ULA's argument: mission success despite off-nominal performance. But for military launch planners, mission success is only one layer of reliability. The other is confidence in repeatability. If an anomaly appears twice in related hardware, the decision calculus changes from "can this rocket make orbit?" to "can we trust this system on schedule for high-priority payloads?"

The March 20 provider exchange appears to answer that question, at least for now.

And this is where the broader pattern gets hard for ULA to dismiss as a one-off. As SpaceNews reported in its March 20 coverage, this is the fourth consecutive GPS mission to be shifted between providers, and the latest move pushes ULA's Vulcan to USSF-70 no earlier than summer 2028. In plain language: Space Force is using SpaceX as the near-term shock absorber while Vulcan's anomaly investigation runs.

That has two strategic implications.

First, GPS deployment risk is being actively managed by swapping vehicles, not by waiting for a full Vulcan return-to-confidence timeline. For Pentagon users, that is the immediate win: keep the positioning, navigation, and timing modernization train moving.

Second, the National Security Space Launch model is being stress-tested in real time. NSSL was built on assured access through multiple providers. But in this moment, redundancy is procedural more than practical: one provider is paused for additional national security flights, and the other is carrying the urgent load.

To be fair to ULA, the company is in a difficult transition window. Vulcan is meant to replace Atlas V and ramp cadence across military and commercial manifests. A rocket family does not earn trust from PowerPoint; it earns it from uneventful repetition. ULA can still get there. A completed anomaly investigation, validated corrective actions, and a clean run of subsequent flights would quickly change this narrative.

What we do not know yet is almost as important as what we do. Space Force has not provided a public estimate for when the Vulcan review will conclude, nor whether more NSSL assignments will be moved in the interim. ULA has not publicly closed the loop on whether the 2026 booster issue shares a root cause with the 2024 nozzle problem, or merely presents similar flight symptoms.

For founders and investors tracking launch markets, the takeaway is straightforward: the U.S. military is currently valuing schedule certainty and demonstrated cadence over theoretical dual-provider balance. SpaceX's advantage is not just lower cost or higher tempo in the abstract; it is the ability to absorb mission reassignments on short notice when the government needs satellites up now.

The next real signal is not another statement. It is Vulcan's next national security mission after the investigation closes. If that return flight is clean and followed by a steady string of clean flights, this episode will look like a painful but recoverable reliability dip. If further anomalies or delays emerge, this stops being a temporary swap story and becomes a structural shift in who the Pentagon trusts to launch its most time-sensitive payloads.