61–63 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel we are better closing down instagram/ , and using freed up computer scientists to build something usefull.
I don't think you understand the difference between public and private money
The purpose of the space program isn't to explore space, it's to consume federal funds, accruing influence and kickback contributions to the politicians who arrange it. It's important you understand this primary purpose if you want to understand what happens at NASA. If you are a space program supporter who is okay with the situation as long as NASA is getting money, then you are the reason they can get away with thi…
It's so tiring that people are unwilling or unable to handle nuance and complexity. An organization can both be bloated and inefficient as well as bold and daring and on the cutting edge of science. I'll take a bloated NASA that sends probes to Pluto and funds new exciting programs such as Commercial Crew over no space program any day. If you'd like to provide a specific plan for effective reform, I'd be interested i…
A politician doesn't usually care about science. He cares about votes and influence. So when he gives money to NASA he is doing so to produce those, not to produce science. If science gets done it's almost accidental.
The reason politicians get away with this is that the public lets them. They accept that what NASA is doing is ok, even when it's not. Apologists like yourself are ultimately to blame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those numbers are not measuring the same thing. Those are the marginal cost per engine. What did it cost Space X to develop the design, and what did it cost them to build the production facilities? The price NASA is paying is for delivery, not the cost to produces one more after billions have been sunk. Also, how many do they plan to produce? NASA probably only needs a few dozen RS-25s for the life of SLS, so probabl…
The Merlin was developed for the Falcon 1, at a total cost of $90M (including the rocket itself; and Kestrel engine for 2nd stage). It was enhanced for Falcon 9, which has a total development cost of $300M for the first versions, including rocket, tanks, second stage, Merlin Vacuum. The RS-25 was developed in the 70s for the Shuttle, and had a quoted cost of $47M at end of Shuttle life. This is literally the cost to…
Merlin is much simpler and smaller and not really comparable to the other two.
The RS-25 got new life with SLS, I would expect future NASA craft to use Space X engines.