4 ms·
But NASA floundered about without even a launch capability for over a decade until private sector not measuring ROI in quarters with a long term vision to reach
by onethought 4y ago
But NASA floundered about without even a launch capability for over a decade until private sector not measuring ROI in quarters with a long term vision to reach mars came along.
Literally your example is the inverse of what has occurred. SpaceX sparked this current era, NASA in fact piggybacked on it, now that the cost of launch is lower NASAs fiddling around the edges is somewhat useful. But everyone is waiting around for SpaceX to solve the hard problems (cheap tonnage to orbit, and multi-planetary landing systems)… because NASA didn’t.
(Admittedly NASA funds are funding a lot of SpaceX)
- ceejayoz 4y ago> But everyone is waiting around for SpaceX to solve the hard problems (cheap tonnage to orbit, and multi-planetary landing systems)… because NASA didn’t. (Admittedly NASA funds are funding a lot of SpaceX) I don't think you're giving NASA enough credit here. The Commercial Crew and Cargo programs were innovative bets that paid off in spades. I hope they do more like it. I tend to blame the floundering period on Congress.
- fallingknife 4y agoThe main reason for the rocket failure is because it wasn't a rocket program. It was a jobs program. NASA actually does extremely well with its science missions, because they are actually science missions, and not jobs programs.