3 ms·

Going from expendable to reusable rockets will be a transition similar to the transition from silent movies to sound movies. Many of the old stars of the field

Going from expendable to reusable rockets will be a transition similar to the transition from silent movies to sound movies. Many of the old stars of the field won't survive the change.

dylan604 3y ago
That's a creative comparison I would never have come up with. Boeing has been beaten up here for their planes, rightly so, but that mess has made itself know with Starliner as well. Since it hasn't killed anyone or gotten off the ground with people at all, it's pretty much a joke. Any time I hear of another delay, my response is "of course it is". At least they are not forcing the issues and putting astronaut lives on the line. About the only good thing I can say about that program
- dralley 3y ago
  > Boeing has been beaten up here for their planes, rightly so, but that mess has made itself know with Starliner as well. And the Air Force One contract, and the KC-46 contract, and...
  - dylan604 3y ago
    Last I checked, those were all planes
    - lupusreal 3y ago
      Another way of viewing it is that Boeing is messing up both their routine business and the special projects that they could/should be giving particular attention too, putting their elite talent on those jobs, etc.
- bumby 3y ago
  >At least they are not forcing the issues and putting astronaut lives on the line. Which "they" do you think is driving this choice? NASA or Boeing? I suspect it's the former, so I don't know how much credit should go to Boeing.
lupusreal 3y ago
If Starship succeeds, the window of opportunity for small launch providers might be closed since there is no way they could compete. Commercial launch providers without a similar capability could all be pushed out of business. For any new company to challenge SpaceX would basically be impossible. Old companies with deep wallets might still be in the running.
- zie 3y ago
  The US govt will force into existence a competitor OR keep one of the old ones around on life support. They have made their position clear and have been backing it up with money. All governments probably want their own space program, but only some can afford it. Those that can all force into existence a local space program because they need to be able to launch their own stuff for national security and defence purposes. Countries with their own space program: EU, India, China, Russia, etc. None of them are cheaper than Falcon 9 and none of them will be able to compete with Starship anytime soon, but they will all continue to exist even if Starship becomes a runaway success.
  - cjbgkagh 3y ago
    I worry that corporations have gotten better at the art of siphoning money from such programs without delivering on the intent, making more money from repeated failures. I worry that there is no longer the political ability to punish big companies for their failures. At such of a point it becomes impossible to will such projects into existence. I wonder if China, in essence, has more of an ability to punish corporations due to the power concentration at the top and if this paradoxically allows for better competition between corporations that are less powerful than the politicians. Perhaps at a certain point of corruption the leadership in effect already owns everything so the agency costs from such corruption is greatly reduced.
    - zie 3y ago
      That's a separate concern, but it's definitely a concern. I agree China could potentially punish easier, but they can also bribe/allow grifting easier.

Going from expendable to reusable rockets will be a transition similar to the transition from silent movies to sound movies. Many of the old stars of the field won't survive the change.

dylan604 3y ago

That's a creative comparison I would never have come up with. Boeing has been beaten up here for their planes, rightly so, but that mess has made itself know with Starliner as well. Since it hasn't killed anyone or gotten off the ground with people at all, it's pretty much a joke. Any time I hear of another delay, my response is "of course it is". At least they are not forcing the issues and putting astronaut lives on the line. About the only good thing I can say about that program

dralley 3y ago
> Boeing has been beaten up here for their planes, rightly so, but that mess has made itself know with Starliner as well. And the Air Force One contract, and the KC-46 contract, and...
- dylan604 3y ago
  Last I checked, those were all planes
  - lupusreal 3y ago
    Another way of viewing it is that Boeing is messing up both their routine business and the special projects that they could/should be giving particular attention too, putting their elite talent on those jobs, etc.
bumby 3y ago
>At least they are not forcing the issues and putting astronaut lives on the line. Which "they" do you think is driving this choice? NASA or Boeing? I suspect it's the former, so I don't know how much credit should go to Boeing.

lupusreal 3y ago

If Starship succeeds, the window of opportunity for small launch providers might be closed since there is no way they could compete. Commercial launch providers without a similar capability could all be pushed out of business. For any new company to challenge SpaceX would basically be impossible. Old companies with deep wallets might still be in the running.

zie 3y ago
The US govt will force into existence a competitor OR keep one of the old ones around on life support. They have made their position clear and have been backing it up with money. All governments probably want their own space program, but only some can afford it. Those that can all force into existence a local space program because they need to be able to launch their own stuff for national security and defence purposes. Countries with their own space program: EU, India, China, Russia, etc. None of them are cheaper than Falcon 9 and none of them will be able to compete with Starship anytime soon, but they will all continue to exist even if Starship becomes a runaway success.
- cjbgkagh 3y ago
  I worry that corporations have gotten better at the art of siphoning money from such programs without delivering on the intent, making more money from repeated failures. I worry that there is no longer the political ability to punish big companies for their failures. At such of a point it becomes impossible to will such projects into existence. I wonder if China, in essence, has more of an ability to punish corporations due to the power concentration at the top and if this paradoxically allows for better competition between corporations that are less powerful than the politicians. Perhaps at a certain point of corruption the leadership in effect already owns everything so the agency costs from such corruption is greatly reduced.
  - zie 3y ago
    That's a separate concern, but it's definitely a concern. I agree China could potentially punish easier, but they can also bribe/allow grifting easier.