SpaceX wins $1.6B Space Force contract for 18 Falcon 9 launches

> planning to retire in 2028.

Yeah and that is not happened, its just the typical Musk style claim.

What do you think happens to this profit? Where does it go?

> You can never convince me profit is not a cost.

It is a cost, but with the cost you are getting something. And NASA (the US) as it happens literally got the best deal maybe in human history.

The US was literally sucking in space, their rockets were shit. Their human launch was shit. All their major space project were going to utter and complete shit and were literally an intersectional embarrassment. And btw the companies were still making profit, never in its history did NASA not primary work threw independent companies.

Then they bought things from SpaceX and yes SpaceX made some profit. That encouraged the largest ever investment surge into space industry. SpaceX used the profit to build a reusable rocket revolutionizing rockets and the US went from doing like 0% of the global commercial launch to like 80%.

Because that lowered cost many new in space ideas became possible. And US companies have taken that opportunity the best. Where in GEO launches the US was in tough competition against Europe and China. In LEO US is utterly dominated.

In addition to that a whole new crop of rocket launchers were designed. Many of the people designing them only got into the field because of SpaceX.

The location of SpaceX head quarter now sits in the most successful aerospace cluster in the world.

The US went from not making the best engine to making the most and the best engines in the world.

Let alone all the new companies trying everything they can think of. Space based solar to increase sat power. Platinum mining. And so many other things.

The US military profits form that too, cheaper then all global competitors. Allowing it to launch even more. And thanks to all competition in the launch market, some switched to hypersonics. Giving the military hypersonic test platforms they didn't have to develop themselves. Let alone all the crazy startups that pop up because they can find venture money.

Sorry that nobody takes you seriously when you complain about SpaceX making profit on launches when that very profit is what allowed for the US to go from being stagnate in space to being the unquestionable juggernaut all while the government was paying less then they had ever paid in their whole history.

Unless you can explain, how this would have happened, without allowing SpaceX some profit, go ahead.

Funny how people how hate Musk always reach for the 'but Gwynne Shotwell' nonsense.

Gwynne Shotwell was incredibly frustrated with the aerospace industry. So frustrated that she thought about leaving the industry. She didn't see any chance the industry and NASA as it existed to make progress.

That's exactly why she left and went to a company that tried to be different and break the mold. And guess what, without the government contracting strategy, such a company could have never arisen and never challenged general wisdom.

> All I am saying is in another universe, Gwynne Shotwell could have ran a kickass team at JPL with the exact same people doing the exact same thing and delivering the exact same rocket for even lower cost.

You should consider reading Road to Serfdom by Hayek. That explain to some extend why the people who 'would magically fix everything' don't actually end up on top of bureaucratic hierarchies.

Shotwell stomp on peoples necks hard core business attitude would not be considered a positive at JPL and she wouldn't be in that position. Its not that kind of organization.

And Musk insisted on hiring all the people personally. Putting them threw interviews and evaluating them. So the whole idea of 'Shotwell and the exact same people', is delusional. Team building itself is one of the most challenging things for a project. Musk hand picked all the top team leaders, Shotwell, Mueller, Königsman and so on.

Why don't you just argue that if NASA had just had the Falcon 9, then they could launch it for cheap. That's about as reasonable.

She wouldn't have had a team at JPL, let alone the freedom to develop a project like Falcon 1 or 9. The team certainty wouldn't be the same because they wouldn't be out of the box professionals and a bunch of young go getters from universities.

And of course you are ignoring that Musk was the one that pushed for reputability at all costs. Basically everybody in the industry said he was wrong and it was a dumb idea. Specially inside NASA and Arianespace.

Also its pretty bold to talk about JPL when the just monumentally fucked up bigger then they ever have in their history with Mars Sample return. A project so catastrophically managed that literally every single person would have been fired if they were at SpaceX. Just as Musk did with the whole Starlink leadership team. But again, there is a reason this isn't happening at JPL.

So in summary:

- JPL would never get to money to do such a project for many reasons

- JPL would never put Shotwell as her focus was business development (let alone Musk)

- Shotwell wouldn't have had the vision that Musk has (as she herself said, her focus when talking to Musk was making sure that the rocket being developed was something she could sell)

- JPL wouldn't ever have run the project the way SpaceX had because they have process around how to do things

- JPL wouldn't ever have hired the same group of engineers because of the way the do hiring.

- JPL couldn't ever run procurement and supplier relation the way SpaceX did because of government regulations about contracting

So no, Shotwell and the same team at JPL wouldn't have created Falcon 9. Let alone would such a team ever have existed.

You are literally just writing fan fiction.

> Profittaking was not necessary for any of this is all I am suggesting. Shame all the replies pushing back on me in my other comment thread on this are missing the forest for the trees.

You are seeing the forest and missing that its growing from the earth.

Why are you willingly refusing to look at the entire cost of SpaceX to the US economy and subsequently the taxpayers? THAT is 20x the cost of NASA. Easily.

Now that they are publicly traded, there may be less scope for shenanigans in those numbers. If they really had such great margins on falcon 9, an improved, cost reduced falcon rocket would make a lot of sense. Instead they're betting at all on a rocket that has a daunting list of unmet project milestones before it does what it claims it will do.

That makes me think that the cost efficiency of falcon nine rests almost totally on streamlined operations, not technology. And that there might be a shell game going on regarding real costs.