6 ms·
> “The Russians and the French are not going to abandon their rockets and entrust their nuclear deterrent and early warning system to SpaceX.” The United State
by Reason077 2y ago
> “The Russians and the French are not going to abandon their rockets and entrust their nuclear deterrent and early warning system to SpaceX.”
The United States is certainly happy to (launch military payloads with SpaceX). Having access to far more launch capacity, far more cheaply, is surely a significant strategic advantage.
Edit: Added text in parentheses for clarity.
- pmezard 2y agoAre the US sending military payloads with non-US rockets?
- Reason077 2y agoThe US is sending military payloads with private, low-cost commercial launch provider SpaceX. The success of this model hasn’t gone unnoticed by China, who are funding several private rocket companies (such as Space Pioneer) to develop reusable launch platforms in competition with the state-owned contractor CASC. They are making rapid progress!
- p_l 2y agoThe USA has been sending military payloads with private vendors since 1970s. In some cases blocking contractually those vendors from providing civilian launch capability, even. SpaceX is absolutely nothing new in the process, other than having been funded by explicit military program to prop up new space launch vendors.
- GuB-42 2y agoThe US is sending their military payloads with a US company they have invested in, and most likely have special, undisclosed deals with. It is not just "a commercial launch provider". I don't expect the US to launch their military payloads with Chinese rockets, private or not, in the same way I don't expect China to use SpaceX for their own military payloads. Same thing for the EU, they prefer to send their military payloads with their own rockets, that is Ariane. Ariane is private too, it is also a commercial launch provider. It is heavily subsidized by the EU member states and not as competitive as SpaceX, but from a national security perspective, the situation is similar.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- inglor_cz 2y agoThat is the problem, right? EU countries, not having a reusable rocket at their disposal, will have to pay through the nose for every launch, discarding the entire expensive rocket in the process. Of course, that will limit their ability to launch satellites into space: the cost of discarding a rocket is high (let's not even start about fairing dimensions and subsequent limits on payload size). Wrecking a sophisticated machine after each use is uneconomical. Meanwhile, the US is galloping towards much cheaper launchers. This means that by 2030 or so, they will be able to put orders of magnitude more tonnage onto orbit. China noticed - and it is trying their darndest to close the gap.
- TheLoafOfBread 2y agoSo EU having Arianne 6 is actually a good thing.
- inglor_cz 2y agoIt is better than not having it. In the same sense that it is better having a steam-powered railway than no railway capacity at all. But spending on development of new steam engines when the competition already has electric ones is pretty backward.
- perihelions 2y agoYes: one of the US national security launch vehicles, Atlas V, uses imported Russian main engines. US defense access to space was dependent on Russia for much of the 21st century (after the retirement of the Titan rockets). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-180 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-180 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Space_Launch#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Space_Launch... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30542226 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30542226 ("Russia halts deliveries of rocket engines to the U.S. (reuters.com)") (It's not a national security payload, but the Starliner ISS astronauts also went up on this Russian engine).
- The_Colonel 2y agoA huge strategic weakness is depending on a foreign country (perhaps even worse - one moody individual) for your launches.
- Reason077 2y agoSpaceX is a 100% American company. Moody individual notwithstanding, they are no less American than Boeing or ULA or anyone else.
- The_Colonel 2y agoI don't get what your point is. I didn't question if it's an American company or not. Edit: ok, got it now. This is about a European rocket serving European strategic needs, why would I be talking about USA?
- Beretta_Vexee 2y ago> SpaceX is a 100% American company. It's a huge fucking problem if you're not American. If you don't want to be subject to American law. If you don't want your technology inspected or tampered with by Americans. If you don't want the transaction to be in dollars (extra-territoriality of US law on all dollar transactions). If you don't want to deal with the problem of American citizens and companies subject to FISA, who could face severe repercussions in the US if they don't spy or facilitate spying on their non-American clients.
- Dalewyn 2y ago[flagged]
- piva00 2y agoBecause the USA needs NATO and other shit to have soft power and keep its hegemony. Shit like what you said truly makes me wonder about the state of education in the USA when you don't understand a basic geopolitical principle your country has enacted for 80+ years, with massive benefits.