3 ms·
Two questions regarding Musk that people should ask more often: 1. If the public money being thrown at SpaceX were redirected, what could NASA (or other privat
by beloch 5y ago
Two questions regarding Musk that people should ask more often:
1. If the public money being thrown at SpaceX were redirected, what could NASA (or other private companies) do with it?
2. If the administrators of NASA collected $80B (combined) in salary and bonuses last year, largely from public coffers, would that be considered reasonable?
- ethbr0 5y agoIsn't the public money being thrown at SpaceX through NASA? NASA knows exactly what they're buying. They've just become such a bureaucratic, top-heavy, risk-adverse organization (by Congressional design) that it's a better deal to outsource pieces to SpaceX.
- mavhc 5y agoThey've always outsourced most of their stuff, to Boeing et al. Now they have a company to outsource stuff to that is 10x more efficient and will actually invent new systems.
- Gwypaas 5y agoI would say the difference is fixed-cost vs cost-plus contracts. Paying for the development or paying for the result with less constraints on how it is achieved. Look how hard Boeing has stumbled trying fixed-cost with Starliner.
- pbak 5y agoExcept for bigger, better more efficient engines : Although Raptors are a great achievement, their design if used alone is not made for bigger loads. SpaceX is stacking them now for larger ships. Hopefully the whole system will prove reliable on higher flights, and a different design won't be needed.
- anthonygd 5y agoAre you saying risk-adverse is a bad thing?
- simonh 5y agoThe total NASA budget is 22bn, so how can they be paying 80bn to administrators?