3 ms·
Do people not consider SpaceX a defense company? At the very least I thought people always considered it dual-use
by atlasunshrugged 4y ago
Do people not consider SpaceX a defense company? At the very least I thought people always considered it dual-use
- xxpor 4y agoYou can't work there (except possibly in some minor roles) if you're not a US Person as defined by ITAR for a reason.
- more_corn 4y agoITAR applies because rockets are indistinguishable from ICBMs
- xxpor 4y agoExactly. Rocket companies are always defense companies.
- zardo 4y agoUntil you get down to the details of what makes a good orbital launch vehicle vs what makes a good ICBM.
- nradov 4y agoWhile there is some overlap, it's quite easy to distinguish between civilian launch vehicles and military ICBMs. All major civilian rockets use liquid fueled core stages. But all ICBMs are solid fuel.
- georgeg23 4y agoSpaceX tries not to highlight their military work but it is a majority of their business, even with "commercial" Starlink. A more direct offensive buildup is happening with their government Starlink satellites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Military_capabilities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Military_capabilities
- robonerd 4y agoAs a "get to Mars" company it makes very little sense, they've invested virtually nothing into colony technology, just rockets. Mars is to SpaceX what manganese nodules were to Hughes' Glomar Explorer, a flimsy cover story that only seems plausible because everybody knows the guy in charge is wacky. I believe the real purpose of their attempt to create a rapidly reusable heavy lift rocket (Starship) is to rapidly replenish a massive constellation of expendable interceptors in LEO, for ballistic missile defense.