3 ms·
> And their competitors laughed at the idea. ULA doubted SpaceX's resuability prospects as recently as 2020 Well take that matter up with them. I wasn't amon
by MichaelCollins 4y ago
> And their competitors laughed at the idea. ULA doubted SpaceX's resuability prospects as recently as 2020
Well take that matter up with them. I wasn't among those laughing at their plan to develop reusable boosters. Reusable boosters have clear commercial application. Everything SpaceX has actually put serious money behind is something that has near-term commercial value.
> Nor were they investing in lunar landers or mission equipment, until NASA bought a ride on Starship for Artemis.
SpaceX won a contract. How much have they actually spent in developing lunar-specific equipment? I doubt they even expected to win that contract.
> So? Mars colonization is a centuries/milennia sort of thing.
A serious Mars colonization effort a century from now obviously won't be using Starship, unless rocket development severely stagnates between now and then. So if you're conceding that sort of timeline, let me reiterate my point: Starship will never bring a colony to Mars. There is presently no serious effort underway to colonize Mars.
- starik36 4y agoThey are investing heavily in Starship. A spacecraft capable of getting to Mars. > won't be using Starship I wouldn't be so sure. Practically every non-SpaceX workhorse spacecraft in use today has roots in rockets developed in 1960s. That's 60+ years ago. Some are even earlier: Delta is the latest version of Thor from 1950s. Soyuz rockets were designed in 1960s. RD-180x series were built for Buran and is based on the NK-33 from 1960s. It's not so difficult to imagine that 60 years from now, in the year 2082 we might be able to get people to Mars, perhaps using Starship. > Starship will never bring a colony to Mars Obviously. It will start with a small crew. Probably after we mastered getting to the moon.