6 ms·

the large rocket you're talking about has been said to possibly make that particular company bankrupt if they don't manage to ramp up their engine production so

the large rocket you're talking about has been said to possibly make that particular company bankrupt if they don't manage to ramp up their engine production soon. and the market for heavy launch vehicle is tiny. only 3 FH were flown as far as i know. also the irony here is that the only the only client this company has now is itself to launch his telecom satellite swarm, which in turn will have a negative effect on ground observations, both in VIS and RF bands. astronomers heavily rely on ground based observations, because on the contrary to space telescope the can modify their instruments easily. you can do a lot with other technologies, for instance diffractive lenses, chronographs as a separate spaceship, etc, etc... the best for a telescope is not always to have the biggest single piece mirror. i know i know, i'll get heavily downvoted for the above, i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation.

chinathrow 5y ago
> has been said to possibly make that particular company bankrupt if they don't manage to ramp up their engine production soon. and the market for heavy launch vehicle is tiny. I read Musk's statements regarding this towards his workforce as a pure power play to put pressure on them working even harder on ongoing issues like you mentioned.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  So is there any indication his statements aren't true?
  - chinathrow 5y ago
    I don't have any insights into this but that wasn't my point. I simply pointed out my opinion, that the message was so intense, that it was looking to me as a pressure play. That being said - if you can produce n amount of engines per time frame, I am positive that they manage to achieve n*x amount of engines per the same time frame as well.
    - micromacrofoot 5y ago
      I see, I was wondering why an intense message would indicate a pressure play rather than a grim reality.
detritus 5y ago
> i know i know, i'll get heavily downvoted for the above, i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation. Wasn't that a bit of over-inflation from dodgily-backed NIMBYs, especially in a state where petrochemical industries have abused a lot more natural environments?
_joel 5y ago
There's not just SpaceX creating large rockets. Neutron, New Glenn etc. I'd hope some of those would be running in 20 years time or even better. FH can have a larger fairing but it's not 9m, not by a long shot. Also we'll see 3 this year, there was supposed to be one a couple of months ago but the payload wasn't ready. Also, sure you can have more complex methods to get to the stage where it's analogous to a single large mirror, but that's why it took 25 years to make JWST (amongst policical reasons too, but still). If constellations are so bad to astronomy, why do ESA want one? Finally, I think you'll find KSC in Florida is slap bang in the middle of a huge nature reserve, as it has been for the past 50+ years
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Those all have a fraction of the chances of success that SpaceX has.
  - _joel 5y ago
    Really? RocketLab are going great guns. There's nothing outlandishly novel with their Neutron design (bar the 007 style fairing). If you've not seen the recent interviews with Peter Beck, I'd highly recommend you to do so.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Their payload masses are a joke, and they are more than a decade behind SpaceX at this point in terms of development and experience. Falcon 1 was retired more than a decade ago, and they are still flying the equivalent today. I don't think they realistically stand a chance to outcompete SpaceX within the next ten years on any dimension, after all, SpaceX is a fast moving target itself. But that's just my opinion, so we'll have to wait to see how it plays out. It would be great to have a real competitor to SpaceX, that can't come soon enough, I do give them better chances than Bezos and his toy factory.
      - _joel 5y ago
        For space telescopes (which this topic is about) doesn't need super heavy lift capability, just larger diameter. Neutron is planned to be 7m diameter. Please, just watch the interview. It might change your opinion by listening to the plan, I know I felt much more optimistic about more serious players in the field.
dharmaturtle 5y ago
> i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation I guess you must really hate NASA then. > Visitors to Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex are often surprised to discover that they are just as likely to be greeted by an alligator or dolphin. This is because Kennedy Space Center sits in the middle of the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge adjacent to Canaveral National Seashore, one of the largest and most diverse wildlife preserves in Florida. In fact, the refuge supports one of the highest numbers of threatened and endangered species anywhere in the nation. https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/blog/07/the-wild-side-of-kennedy-space-center https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/blog/07/the-wild-side-of-...
- ncmncm 5y ago
  You don't have to hate NASA to lament their riding roughshod over threatened species' habitats on a routine basis.
  - _joel 5y ago
    Do you have sources for them doing that on a routine basis?
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      I see a very large amount of launch infrastructure. You don't build that much without disregarding the needs of what lived there first. Much of it was built before the EPA existed, so routine was routine. But, it is still being expanded, lately on behalf of SpaceX. Scheduling in lots of studies and meetings just amount to delaying, if they can't actually affect whether the paving happens. No amount of public hand-wringing gives a turtle back the nesting site its ancestors have returned to for a million years, or a hundred million.
      - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
        You may as well condemn all of south Florida. How dare they.

chinathrow 5y ago

> has been said to possibly make that particular company bankrupt if they don't manage to ramp up their engine production soon. and the market for heavy launch vehicle is tiny. I read Musk's statements regarding this towards his workforce as a pure power play to put pressure on them working even harder on ongoing issues like you mentioned.

micromacrofoot 5y ago
So is there any indication his statements aren't true?
- chinathrow 5y ago
  I don't have any insights into this but that wasn't my point. I simply pointed out my opinion, that the message was so intense, that it was looking to me as a pressure play. That being said - if you can produce n amount of engines per time frame, I am positive that they manage to achieve n*x amount of engines per the same time frame as well.
  - micromacrofoot 5y ago
    I see, I was wondering why an intense message would indicate a pressure play rather than a grim reality.

detritus 5y ago

> i know i know, i'll get heavily downvoted for the above, i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation. Wasn't that a bit of over-inflation from dodgily-backed NIMBYs, especially in a state where petrochemical industries have abused a lot more natural environments?

_joel 5y ago

There's not just SpaceX creating large rockets. Neutron, New Glenn etc. I'd hope some of those would be running in 20 years time or even better. FH can have a larger fairing but it's not 9m, not by a long shot. Also we'll see 3 this year, there was supposed to be one a couple of months ago but the payload wasn't ready. Also, sure you can have more complex methods to get to the stage where it's analogous to a single large mirror, but that's why it took 25 years to make JWST (amongst policical reasons too, but still). If constellations are so bad to astronomy, why do ESA want one? Finally, I think you'll find KSC in Florida is slap bang in the middle of a huge nature reserve, as it has been for the past 50+ years

jacquesm 5y ago
Those all have a fraction of the chances of success that SpaceX has.
- _joel 5y ago
  Really? RocketLab are going great guns. There's nothing outlandishly novel with their Neutron design (bar the 007 style fairing). If you've not seen the recent interviews with Peter Beck, I'd highly recommend you to do so.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Their payload masses are a joke, and they are more than a decade behind SpaceX at this point in terms of development and experience. Falcon 1 was retired more than a decade ago, and they are still flying the equivalent today. I don't think they realistically stand a chance to outcompete SpaceX within the next ten years on any dimension, after all, SpaceX is a fast moving target itself. But that's just my opinion, so we'll have to wait to see how it plays out. It would be great to have a real competitor to SpaceX, that can't come soon enough, I do give them better chances than Bezos and his toy factory.
    - _joel 5y ago
      For space telescopes (which this topic is about) doesn't need super heavy lift capability, just larger diameter. Neutron is planned to be 7m diameter. Please, just watch the interview. It might change your opinion by listening to the plan, I know I felt much more optimistic about more serious players in the field.

dharmaturtle 5y ago

> i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation I guess you must really hate NASA then. > Visitors to Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex are often surprised to discover that they are just as likely to be greeted by an alligator or dolphin. This is because Kennedy Space Center sits in the middle of the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge adjacent to Canaveral National Seashore, one of the largest and most diverse wildlife preserves in Florida. In fact, the refuge supports one of the highest numbers of threatened and endangered species anywhere in the nation. https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/blog/07/the-wild-side-of-kennedy-space-center https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/blog/07/the-wild-side-of-...

ncmncm 5y ago
You don't have to hate NASA to lament their riding roughshod over threatened species' habitats on a routine basis.
- _joel 5y ago
  Do you have sources for them doing that on a routine basis?
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    I see a very large amount of launch infrastructure. You don't build that much without disregarding the needs of what lived there first. Much of it was built before the EPA existed, so routine was routine. But, it is still being expanded, lately on behalf of SpaceX. Scheduling in lots of studies and meetings just amount to delaying, if they can't actually affect whether the paving happens. No amount of public hand-wringing gives a turtle back the nesting site its ancestors have returned to for a million years, or a hundred million.
    - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
      You may as well condemn all of south Florida. How dare they.