3 ms·
The USG wouldn't nationalize Space X. They would revert to preferring ULA and would throw more money at Starliner. I recall ULA being more diversified across s
by runlevel1 4y ago
The USG wouldn't nationalize Space X. They would revert to preferring ULA and would throw more money at Starliner.
I recall ULA being more diversified across states, so it'd probably make a bunch of legislators happier anyhow.
- jacquesm 4y agoThat's not a fair assessment of the situation, I think. ULA does not have nearly the same cost-to-orbit that SpaceX has.
- runlevel1 4y agoThe point I was trying to make was that politicians would opt for a more conventional, politically expedient move regardless of its cost to the federal budget.
- jacquesm 4y agoAh I see. Ok, but the world has now seen 'reusable rockets with a low cost to orbit', if that advantage gets lost then ultimately someone else will duplicate it and own the market. Customers don't care about politics, they care about costs, and reliability. SpaceX has both of those, right now. Anything recycled or warmed over is not going to satisfy the demand that exists now.
- crote 4y agoThe point that is being made here is that cost-to-orbit is not the primary selection metric being used. Take a look at the Space Launch System, for example. It's not the best and it sure isn't the cheapest, but reusing factories built for Space Shuttle components does get politicians re-elected!