251–260 of 839 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is quite an achievement. This paves the way forward for eventual space colonization.
Agree with it being an achievement. And watching the first stage land was amazing. But chemical engines can get us only to the asteroid belt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And now you know why Boeing never bothered to develop reusable rockets.
No, that doesn't make sense. SpaceX can achieve much higher profit margins by reusing rockets, even with lower prices, because their costs are lowered by a much greater proportion thanks to reusability. Also, Boeing doesn't make mistakes as the result of some bizarre conspiracy that turns out to benefit them in the end. Most of Boeing's mistakes hurt Boeing.
What I've always heard is the legacy defense contractors are used to cost-plus contracts where you don't make bigger profits by reducing costs. They sometimes don't adapt well to firm-fixed-price contracts because changing the organizational culture takes ages. And also the reality is that they can keep raking in money anyway -- Boeing is in fact collecting more cash than SpaceX, so it's not even clear the incentives have changed that much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SpaceX has brought the costs down a lot. Around $500mil for a shuttle launch.
Didn’t shuttle have a larger payload? Up to 8 people and larger cargo. NASA gave a $55million estimate on cost per seat on crew dragon, which would be about $440 million to launch 8 people. Not sure that is factoring in reusability once they are willing to use that for crew missions (or offset price reusing crew boosters on non crewed missions). Another issue with shuttle was reliability though. It may take hundreds…
They'll have to stop blowing them up, but at two prototypes per month I think they'll make rapid progress.
How wonderful! Congratulations to the entire Space X team, this is a real accomplishment and I'm sure not one that came easily. It's exciting to see relatively small companies fulfilling roles that people thought might require massive military contractors. Elon is an interesting figure. He is, I think, a paradigmatic example of the imperfect creator. His undeniable success in difficult endeavors can create an aura of…
For me the better precedent for Elon's eccentricities might be someone like Henry Ford. Ford was an undeniable genius and innovator in a way that inspired broad admiration, but he was also troublingly paternalistic with his workers--providing above-market pay and benefits but expecting them to live up to his moral standards in their personal lives. He was also a massive sponsor of anti-Semitic publications and, prior…
I'm surprised how I almost ended up tearing up and was close to crying while watching this. Saying this as someone who is not a huge NASA or space enthusiast. I did study physics, and I'm more into science than the average person though.
Me too, and I'm not even an American (but live in the US)! Would have wished they would make it a little bit less "good for the US" and a little bit more "good for the free world".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Crew Dragon is only making money from the government, how would it still be there tomorrow if the government weren't paying? Do you really imagine that there will be a market for this as it stands today? How much training and medical evaluation have the astronauts gone through to ensure they could survive the trip and know how to operate?
They've already got several private customers who have booked missions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the better precedent for Elon's eccentricities might be someone like Henry Ford. Ford was an undeniable genius and innovator in a way that inspired broad admiration, but he was also troublingly paternalistic with his workers--providing above-market pay and benefits but expecting them to live up to his moral standards in their personal lives. He was also a massive sponsor of anti-Semitic publications and, prior…
I think the comparison between Elon Musk and Henry Ford starts to break down a bit towards the end of your comment. Elon Musk tweets plenty I don't like, but he's far from a Nazi.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the government paid to develop crew dragon. And they buy launch services which is another source of revenue. The government paid for Apollo. And once they decided they no longer wanted it, it became impossible to use Apollo parts, technology, or any of the engineers or technicians to put people into orbit. The capability "vanished." If the government never bought another ticket to space, Crew Dragon could be mad…
If Crew Dragon is only making money from the government, how would it still be there tomorrow if the government weren't paying? Do you really imagine that there will be a market for this as it stands today? How much training and medical evaluation have the astronauts gone through to ensure they could survive the trip and know how to operate?
SpaceX owns the Crew Dragon IP and tooling, and they can sell flights to private citizens - in fact I believe they said today that they are contracted with Space Ventures to fly 4 people next year. Previously Space Ventures could only buy from the Russians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
factory of rockets Rocket factories existed over 50 years ago. But they were making ICBMs.[1] The big change is that it's now possible to make money launching. [1] https://youtu.be/Pqw9YOOOuKk
Rockets were being made long before 50 years ago. There were plenty of rockets in WWI. And there were smaller rockets going back to before the US war of independence (ie "the rocket's red glare" ). If we are talking big metal things that fly into space being produced on an assembly line, then those operating in Germany during late WWII making the V2s (75years ago) were probably the first rocket factories. But I'm not…