ULA's expendable next-generation rocket against SpaceX's reusable workhorse: list price and cost per kilogram, payload to every orbit that matters, career record, live launch cadence, and which missions fly on which. Catalogue figures are read from the SpaceNexus launch-vehicle registry; cadence is live from the launch tracker.
| Metric | Falcon 9 Block 5 | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | SpaceX | ULA |
| Status | Operational | Operational |
| First flight (this configuration) | 2018-05-11 | 2024-01-08 |
| Height | 70 m | 61.6 m |
| Core diameter | 3.7 m | 5.4 m |
| Fairing diameter | 5.2 m | 5.4 m |
| Liftoff mass | 549,054 kg | 546,700 kg |
| Stages | 2 | 2 |
| Metric | Falcon 9 Block 5 | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| Payload to LEO | 22,800 kg | 27,200 kg |
| Payload to GTO | 8,300 kg | 12,350 kg |
| Payload to SSO | 15,600 kg | Not listed |
| Payload to TLI (lunar) | Not listed | 8,900 kg |
| Engines | 9x Merlin 1D + 1x Merlin Vacuum | 2x BE-4 + 1-2x RL-10C |
| Propellant | RP-1 / LOX | CH4 / LOX (booster) + LH2 / LOX (upper) |
Vulcan Centaur out-lifts Falcon 9 to every orbit the catalogue lists for both, and the gap widens with orbital energy: the hydrogen-fuelled Centaur upper stage is the reason Vulcan carries a trans-lunar figure while the catalogue lists none for Falcon 9. Falcon 9's LEO number is the expendable-booster maximum; the reusable configuration it flies almost every mission in gives up some of that to land the first stage.
| Metric | Falcon 9 Block 5 | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| List / catalogue price per launch | ~$74M | ~$110M |
| Cost per kg to LEO (catalogue) | ~$3,246/kg | ~$4,044/kg |
| Cost per kg to GTO (price ÷ GTO payload) | ~$8,916/kg | ~$8,907/kg |
| Cost per kg to TLI (price ÷ TLI payload) | Not listed | ~$12,360/kg |
Per launch, Vulcan's catalogue price is higher, and per kilogram to LEO Falcon 9 is the cheaper ride by a clear margin. The per-kilogram gap narrows on GTO and disappears as a meaningful comparison at TLI, where only Vulcan carries a catalogue figure. Both are catalogue or list figures; government missions carry mission-assurance costs above them.
Figures as of 2026-09-01. Source: SpaceX published list and rideshare pricing, Rocket Lab and ULA public figures, SpaceNexus launch-vehicle registry. Full context in the launch cost guide.
| Metric | Falcon 9 Block 5 | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| Career launches | 680 | 4 |
| Successes | 677 | 4 |
| Failures | 2 | 0 |
| Partial failures | 1 | 0 |
| Success rate | 99.6% | 100% |
| Consecutive successes | 330 | 4 |
| Record verified as of | 2026-08-22 | 2026-09-01 |
From SpaceNexus's launch tracker (tracked since Oct 8, 2022); 8 on the manifest.
From SpaceNexus's launch tracker (tracked since Aug 13, 2025); 3 on the manifest.
ULA's next-generation launch vehicle replacing both Atlas V and Delta IV Heavy. Uses Blue Origin BE-4 methalox engines on the first stage and the proven Centaur V upper stage with RL-10C engines. Two flights have experienced GEM 63XL SRB anomalies while still reaching their intended orbits: the Cert-2 mission (October 2024, certified a success by ULA and the U.S. Space Force) and USSF-87 (February 12, 2026), after which the Space Force paused Vulcan national-security launches pending the SRB investigation. Designed for national security missions.
The workhorse of the global launch industry. First orbital-class rocket to achieve propulsive landing and routine reuse of the first stage. Dominates the global commercial launch market with 134 flights in 2024 and 165 in 2025. Boosters have been certified for up to 40 flights each. Block 5 variant first flew May 2018 (original Falcon 9 v1.0 debuted June 2010).
| Metric | Falcon 9 Block 5 | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| Reusable | Yes — first stage and fairings | No — expendable |
| Booster engines | 9x Merlin 1D | 2x BE-4 |
| Upper stage | 1x Merlin Vacuum | 1-2x RL-10C |
This is the structural difference behind every other row. Falcon 9 lands and reflies its first stage and recovers its fairings, so most of the vehicle's cost is amortised across many flights and the same hardware can fly again within weeks — which is what the cadence figures above show. Vulcan is expended every flight: a new pair of BE-4 engines, a new Centaur, and new solid boosters each time. ULA has talked publicly about recovering the engine section in future; nothing in the catalogue reflects it yet.
Almost everything: SpaceX's own Starlink batches, commercial geostationary and LEO satellites, Transporter and Bandwagon rideshares, NASA cargo and crew to the space station, and a share of national-security missions. The volume is why its per-launch economics are what they are.
Built for US national-security launches, where its high-energy upper stage and mission-assurance pedigree are the product, plus commercial work anchored by Amazon's Leo (Kuiper) constellation, which bought Vulcan launches in bulk. Cadence is set by how many of those missions are ready in a given year, not by a backlog of its own payloads.
Falcon 9. Lowest catalogue cost per kilogram (~$3,246/kg), the highest cadence, and a rideshare programme that sells slots by the kilogram.
Either. Falcon 9 is the cheaper ride per launch; Vulcan carries more to GTO on the catalogue (12,350 kg vs 8,300 kg), which matters for the heaviest buses or a higher-energy drop-off.
Vulcan on paper: the catalogue gives it 8,900 kg to trans-lunar injection and lists no TLI figure for Falcon 9, whose lunar payloads have been the smaller commercial landers. Falcon Heavy is SpaceX's answer at this energy.
Both are in the market; Vulcan was designed for it. Read the catalogue description above for Vulcan's current status — this page does not editorialise beyond it.
Falcon 9 only: Dragon flies on it. Vulcan has no crew vehicle in service.
No. On the catalogue, Falcon 9 lists at about $74M and Vulcan Centaur at about $110M, and per kilogram to low Earth orbit Falcon 9 is about $3,246 against about $4,044 for Vulcan. Vulcan narrows the gap on high-energy orbits, where its hydrogen upper stage carries proportionally more.
Vulcan Centaur on the catalogue figures: 27,200 kg to LEO and 12,350 kg to GTO against Falcon 9's 22,800 kg and 8,300 kg. Vulcan also carries a trans-lunar figure (8,900 kg); the catalogue lists none for Falcon 9. Falcon 9's LEO figure assumes an expendable booster — the routine reusable configuration carries less.
Both have a perfect or near-perfect record on the catalogue: Falcon 9 at 99.6% over 680 launches, Vulcan at 100% over 4. The difference is sample size — Falcon 9's record spans hundreds of flights, Vulcan's a handful, and the catalogue description notes two Vulcan flights with solid-rocket-booster anomalies that still reached orbit.
No. Vulcan is expendable; Falcon 9 recovers and reflies its first stage and fairings, which is the structural reason for the price gap and for the cadence difference in the live figures on this page.
Vulcan was designed for US national-security launches and carries a hydrogen upper stage suited to high-energy orbits; Amazon's Leo (Kuiper) constellation is among its commercial customers. Falcon 9 flies most of everything else — Starlink, commercial satellites, rideshares, NASA cargo and crew. Live cadence for each is on this page; the vehicle pages carry the manifests.