3 ms·

So, the alternative is what? Start lobbying to force Euorpean, an other, governments to exclusively use SpaceX because they are so cool? And I don't know, mayb

by hef19898 3y ago

So, the alternative is what? Start lobbying to force Euorpean, an other, governments to exclusively use SpaceX because they are so cool? And I don't know, maybe we should wait until Ariane 6 had its first launches, while also cutting them the same slack for failed early launches SpaceX gets?

pfdietz 3y ago
Actually, the coercion would have to be forcing the European governments to use the expensive European launcher, when they could save a great deal of money just launching on SpaceX. SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement.
- pyrale 3y ago
  > SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement. Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts?
  - signatoremo 3y ago
    > Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts? They did not. All SpaceX contracts with NASA are fixed price, not cost plus, paid when they can deliver. What is entitlement about them? Did you know that Boeing lost a substantial amount of money for Starliner with a similar contract? Despite being paid much more?
    - pyrale 3y ago
      Is SpaceX profit margin on these contracts similar to that of their private contracts? Did SpaceX secure these contracts before having an actual product ready? Were these contracts available for any actor, or just American actors? Did NASA offer these contracts to the best offer, or to multiple companies? The answer is, pretty obviously, that NASA's contracts aim in part to secure a well-fed American space companies, and that they alone are enough to pay for SpaceX development costs, as they would for Ariane. I do think NASA funding is a good thing, but pretending SpaceX doesn't tap that manna is disingenuous.
panick21_ 3y ago
> So, the alternative is what? Glad you asked. First you have to ask, for what does Europe need independent access. Then you have to ask, how likely is that this capability is actually needed. And then, what can we do to achieve this goal with the effective use of resources. For Europe to build a huge Ariane 6 while also having Vega, Vega C and also working on small launchers makes no sense. One Sozuy sized rocket and some basic refueling tech could do everything Europe needs. So if it really was about independent access, then making a plan that focuses on that would make mare sense.

pfdietz 3y ago

Actually, the coercion would have to be forcing the European governments to use the expensive European launcher, when they could save a great deal of money just launching on SpaceX. SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement.

pyrale 3y ago
> SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement. Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts?
- signatoremo 3y ago
  > Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts? They did not. All SpaceX contracts with NASA are fixed price, not cost plus, paid when they can deliver. What is entitlement about them? Did you know that Boeing lost a substantial amount of money for Starliner with a similar contract? Despite being paid much more?
  - pyrale 3y ago
    Is SpaceX profit margin on these contracts similar to that of their private contracts? Did SpaceX secure these contracts before having an actual product ready? Were these contracts available for any actor, or just American actors? Did NASA offer these contracts to the best offer, or to multiple companies? The answer is, pretty obviously, that NASA's contracts aim in part to secure a well-fed American space companies, and that they alone are enough to pay for SpaceX development costs, as they would for Ariane. I do think NASA funding is a good thing, but pretending SpaceX doesn't tap that manna is disingenuous.

panick21_ 3y ago

> So, the alternative is what? Glad you asked. First you have to ask, for what does Europe need independent access. Then you have to ask, how likely is that this capability is actually needed. And then, what can we do to achieve this goal with the effective use of resources. For Europe to build a huge Ariane 6 while also having Vega, Vega C and also working on small launchers makes no sense. One Sozuy sized rocket and some basic refueling tech could do everything Europe needs. So if it really was about independent access, then making a plan that focuses on that would make mare sense.