You mean SpaceX? I don't think large R&D orgs have a monopoly on innovation. And they aren't guaranteed to produce good results. In context, though, the US put

You mean SpaceX? I don't think large R&D orgs have a monopoly on innovation. And they aren't guaranteed to produce good results. In context, though, the US put people on the moon 50 years ago at the cost in present dollars of $.5T. Easily that much or more has probably been invested in the defense side of rocket development. I think SpaceX was applying 50 years of incremental improvements to a technology that was relatively stagnant ("it just works" conservative approach/lower government funding/general risk aversion profile). This is not to slight them at all, just putting it in perspective. But look at the payloads. Right now it's satellites/cargo. They still haven't done a manned mission. Commercial aircraft fly thousands of miles per day and carry hundreds of people. They do this while being repaired by different teams around the world. It's not as glamorous, but incremental updates in adhesives, radar, rivets, and other safety and repairability are big deals and R&D into safety and reliability shouldn't be discounted. That's on top of the satellite division and Phantom Works (sustained and controlled hypersonic scramjet, wings that change shape). I am not a rocket scientist, so take it all with a grain of salt.