5 ms·

> Only in America things like this can happen. > A whole industry bootstrapping itself to make semi-conductors doubling every 18 months, going from exotic, mis

> Only in America things like this can happen. > A whole industry bootstrapping itself to make semi-conductors doubling every 18 months, going from exotic, mission critical hardware to commodity; Silicon Valley did not bootstrap itself. It received untold billions of dollars from the US government during the Cold War (and lots of stuff happened during the WW2 economy, when the US was the Allies' armorer). Do you think it a coïncidence that most spy satellites are launched from Vandenberg? Or that Skunk Works, located in California, developed so many secret aircraft? Do a search for "The secret history of Silicon Valley": * https://steveblank.com/secret-history/ https://steveblank.com/secret-history/ > SpaceX is doing the same thing with flight hardware. Notwithstanding the millions that NASA gave them in their early stages. * https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/news/COTS_selection.html https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/news/COTS_selection.html The list of spinoff technologies just from NASA is impressive: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies The fact that the US was, post-WW2, the largest economy in the world, and the main developed nation that didn't see mass destruction, certainly didn't hurt. The fact that the US government throws a lot of money around certainly helps private industry: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entrepreneurial_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entrepreneurial_State This also does not diminish the entrepreneurs that, once the baton is handed to them, charge forward. My main argument is that there's not as much "bootstrapping" as many people believe.

sandworm101 5y ago
>> Notwithstanding the millions that NASA gave them in their early stages. And the billions spent on the technologies that allow those engines to exist. SpaceX didn't invent rocket engines. It stands on the shoulders of many giants going back through Apollo to the early days. There are even traces of Soviet tech in the raptor (ie closed cycle). Nearly all of that work was funded by taxpayers ... and by whatever funded the soviet programs. Building a better mousetrap is great, but that doesn't mean that all the previous mousetraps were not also great too.
- devoutsalsa 5y ago
  Watching the Falcon Heavy take off & land was one of the coolest things in my life. Watching Starship take off, land, and blow up was neat. The fact that these things build on previous accomplishments doesn’t make them any less impressive. Enjoy the ride & don’t poop on the party.
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    >> Enjoy the ride & don’t poop on the party. Legitimate criticism of SpaceX fanboys is not "Pooping on the party". People who pretend that this is a ground-up space program, an icon of how private enterprise is always better at everything, need to be educated in the history of spaceflight. I myself could build a car in my garage that is better/faster/cheaper than everything available in decades past. That doesn't mean that I am one iota smarter, better organized or more innovative than the engineers who built those classic cars.
    - lfuller 5y ago
      If you truly believe that you can make a car that is significantly better than the current state of the art AND turn it into a viable business at scale, then what are you waiting for? You’ll be a billionaire.
      - sandworm101 5y ago
        Key words: in decades past.
    - nickik 5y ago
      The problems is other who are standing on the same shoulder of the same giants, even the original giants themselves fail to turn this theoretical advantage into actually being > better/faster/cheaper than everything So do talking down SpaceX based on that makes no sense.
- dnautics 5y ago
  > SpaceX didn't invent rocket engines They kind of did invent full-flow engines though, which were an unattained holy grail of rocketry.
jvm 5y ago
This is such an annoying argument. The government gave $18B to the SLS and so far has vapor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System The government spent $211B on the shuttle program and got 133 launches. SpaceX will probably surpass that number this year at a fraction of the cost. NASA's record on rockets since Apollo has been abysmal. I don't think government is necessarily bad (the Russians did a much better job in recent decades!) but it leans into its failures and often has bad incentives. SpaceX fails fast, has great incentives, and has achieved an incredible amount on a (comparatively) shoestring budget.
- SahAssar 5y ago
  SpaceX has had very impressive successes, some government programs have failed or run over budget. Some government programs were also impressive, both in the US and abroad. I think we can all agree on those points. The point of the GP that I (and I think many others) react to is the "Only in America things like this can happen" part. I just don't get American exceptionalism I guess.
  - adampk 5y ago
    Do you mean you don't understand why American's would think that America has done incredible things, or do you not believe America has done incredible things?
    - SahAssar 5y ago
      Neither, the term refers to the belief that the US is somehow inherently different from other nations, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism Saying that something "could only happen in America" (usually) indicates a view that America is somehow unique (as in the American exceptionalist view). I'm not saying that America hasn't done great things, or that Americans shouldn't believe they have done great things. It's just that no country is unique in this manner, and Americans seem to often say they are in ways that I rarely see other countries do.
Pokepokalypse 5y ago
Spy satellites launch from Vandenberg due to the favorable azimuth for high-inclination orbits.
throwaway3neu94 5y ago
> Do you think it a coïncidence that most spy satellites are launched from Vandenberg? It's not a coincidence, it's geography. It is desirable for reconnaissance satellites to cover the entire planet regularly. That means high inclination orbits. That means southward launches (as opposed to eastward). That requires a launch site with ideally lots of ocean and not a lot of population to the south/southeast. The US does plenty of military launches into other orbits from the east coast.
- dnautics 5y ago
  technically you could also do northward launches, but if you look at the geography of the US, it does not cooperate and provide northward ocean in many places.
dmix 5y ago
I thought SpaceX was based near LA and more recently doing a lot of work in Texas? Is it really a Silicon Valley company? Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX > SpaceX was first headquartered in a warehouse in El Segundo, California. By November 2005, the company had 160 employees. > El Segundo is a city in Los Angeles County, California,
garmaine 5y ago
> Do you think it a coïncidence that most spy satellites are launched from Vandenberg? That's the only place you can launch a polar mission over ocean from the continental United States.

sandworm101 5y ago

>> Notwithstanding the millions that NASA gave them in their early stages. And the billions spent on the technologies that allow those engines to exist. SpaceX didn't invent rocket engines. It stands on the shoulders of many giants going back through Apollo to the early days. There are even traces of Soviet tech in the raptor (ie closed cycle). Nearly all of that work was funded by taxpayers ... and by whatever funded the soviet programs. Building a better mousetrap is great, but that doesn't mean that all the previous mousetraps were not also great too.

devoutsalsa 5y ago
Watching the Falcon Heavy take off & land was one of the coolest things in my life. Watching Starship take off, land, and blow up was neat. The fact that these things build on previous accomplishments doesn’t make them any less impressive. Enjoy the ride & don’t poop on the party.
- sandworm101 5y ago
  >> Enjoy the ride & don’t poop on the party. Legitimate criticism of SpaceX fanboys is not "Pooping on the party". People who pretend that this is a ground-up space program, an icon of how private enterprise is always better at everything, need to be educated in the history of spaceflight. I myself could build a car in my garage that is better/faster/cheaper than everything available in decades past. That doesn't mean that I am one iota smarter, better organized or more innovative than the engineers who built those classic cars.
  - lfuller 5y ago
    If you truly believe that you can make a car that is significantly better than the current state of the art AND turn it into a viable business at scale, then what are you waiting for? You’ll be a billionaire.
    - sandworm101 5y ago
      Key words: in decades past.
  - nickik 5y ago
    The problems is other who are standing on the same shoulder of the same giants, even the original giants themselves fail to turn this theoretical advantage into actually being > better/faster/cheaper than everything So do talking down SpaceX based on that makes no sense.
dnautics 5y ago
> SpaceX didn't invent rocket engines They kind of did invent full-flow engines though, which were an unattained holy grail of rocketry.

jvm 5y ago

This is such an annoying argument. The government gave $18B to the SLS and so far has vapor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System The government spent $211B on the shuttle program and got 133 launches. SpaceX will probably surpass that number this year at a fraction of the cost. NASA's record on rockets since Apollo has been abysmal. I don't think government is necessarily bad (the Russians did a much better job in recent decades!) but it leans into its failures and often has bad incentives. SpaceX fails fast, has great incentives, and has achieved an incredible amount on a (comparatively) shoestring budget.

SahAssar 5y ago
SpaceX has had very impressive successes, some government programs have failed or run over budget. Some government programs were also impressive, both in the US and abroad. I think we can all agree on those points. The point of the GP that I (and I think many others) react to is the "Only in America things like this can happen" part. I just don't get American exceptionalism I guess.
- adampk 5y ago
  Do you mean you don't understand why American's would think that America has done incredible things, or do you not believe America has done incredible things?
  - SahAssar 5y ago
    Neither, the term refers to the belief that the US is somehow inherently different from other nations, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism Saying that something "could only happen in America" (usually) indicates a view that America is somehow unique (as in the American exceptionalist view). I'm not saying that America hasn't done great things, or that Americans shouldn't believe they have done great things. It's just that no country is unique in this manner, and Americans seem to often say they are in ways that I rarely see other countries do.

Pokepokalypse 5y ago

Spy satellites launch from Vandenberg due to the favorable azimuth for high-inclination orbits.

throwaway3neu94 5y ago

> Do you think it a coïncidence that most spy satellites are launched from Vandenberg? It's not a coincidence, it's geography. It is desirable for reconnaissance satellites to cover the entire planet regularly. That means high inclination orbits. That means southward launches (as opposed to eastward). That requires a launch site with ideally lots of ocean and not a lot of population to the south/southeast. The US does plenty of military launches into other orbits from the east coast.

dnautics 5y ago
technically you could also do northward launches, but if you look at the geography of the US, it does not cooperate and provide northward ocean in many places.

dmix 5y ago

I thought SpaceX was based near LA and more recently doing a lot of work in Texas? Is it really a Silicon Valley company? Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX > SpaceX was first headquartered in a warehouse in El Segundo, California. By November 2005, the company had 160 employees. > El Segundo is a city in Los Angeles County, California,

garmaine 5y ago

> Do you think it a coïncidence that most spy satellites are launched from Vandenberg? That's the only place you can launch a polar mission over ocean from the continental United States.