4 ms·
How about "Money!". Glibness aside, it's a private enterprise and is profitable, so even without mentioning Musk's ultimate goal of colonizing Mars, its existe
by fmihaila 10y ago
How about "Money!".
Glibness aside, it's a private enterprise and is profitable, so even without mentioning Musk's ultimate goal of colonizing Mars, its existence needs no further justification. It makes money and its shareholders are happy.
And before someone jumps in with the "SpaceX-is-propped-up-by-the-government" canard, the U.S. government also saves money when it launches military satellites with SpaceX. According to [1] (among many other sources), SpaceX quotes around $60m, compared to the United Launch Alliance price of about $125m (or even, depending on how you count, $200m).
[1] http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/ula-executive-admits-company-cannot-compete-with-spacex-on-launch-costs/ http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/ula-executive-admits-...
- throwaway_exer 10y ago> And before someone jumps in with the "SpaceX-is-propped-up-by-the-government" canard Well, actually, any flight to the ISS is a total waste of money as virtually no science is done there. It's just a bunch of people trying to stay alive in a bacteria-ridden tin can.
- untilHellbanned 10y agoI'm asking why a company who hasn't done anything novel in the realm of science garners so much attention for its science. The fanboy-ism for SpaceX seems uneducated. Please tell me how I am wrong.