3 ms·

Who did NASA commission to launch JamesWebb? And who refused? Yeah right

panick21_ 2y ago
I'm not sure what you think you are referencing with this smart ass comment. Given that you wrote a just a short comment you are likely somebody that knows a little pop history (maybe you learn it during the JamesWebb launch where it was endless repeated by anti-SpaceX people) and instead addressing any of my arguments (because you clearly can't) you vaguely reference some pop history. Europe as part of their contribution to James Webb financed the launch. That's the only relevant reason why Ariane 5 was picked. This is consistent with Europeas policy at the time to drive demand for Ariane 5. NASA accept this as Ariane 5 was known to be quite reliable. You seem to be reflecting the narrative pushed by some unformed people that Ariane 5 was picked because it was somehow 'the best' or 'the safest', this isn't true. Had Europe not offered this contribution to JamesWebb. ULA would have gotten the contract, in fact they were the only other option. The potential rocket options at the time were Atlas 5, Detla 4 and Delta 4 Heavy. Not sure about Atlas 5/Delta 4 had the performance. Delta 4 Heavy had the performance for sure and that would have likely been the launch vehicle picked. All of those rockets had the necessary certification for missions of the JamesWebb class mission. All those rockets have launched both DoD and NASA missions of the highest certification level. ULA would 100% not have 'refused'. So I have no idea where or why you said 'And who refused?'. Nobody refused anything. SpaceX was not at that time an option as they barley existed. The contract was assigned long before SpaceX was a thing in the launch market. Of course when JamesWebb actually launched, Falcon 9 would have had the certification but this is hardly relevant as the launch was picked a decade before that. > Yeah right Congratulations, you played yourself.

I'm not sure what you think you are referencing with this smart ass comment. Given that you wrote a just a short comment you are likely somebody that knows a little pop history (maybe you learn it during the JamesWebb launch where it was endless repeated by anti-SpaceX people) and instead addressing any of my arguments (because you clearly can't) you vaguely reference some pop history. Europe as part of their contribution to James Webb financed the launch. That's the only relevant reason why Ariane 5 was picked. This is consistent with Europeas policy at the time to drive demand for Ariane 5. NASA accept this as Ariane 5 was known to be quite reliable. You seem to be reflecting the narrative pushed by some unformed people that Ariane 5 was picked because it was somehow 'the best' or 'the safest', this isn't true. Had Europe not offered this contribution to JamesWebb. ULA would have gotten the contract, in fact they were the only other option. The potential rocket options at the time were Atlas 5, Detla 4 and Delta 4 Heavy. Not sure about Atlas 5/Delta 4 had the performance. Delta 4 Heavy had the performance for sure and that would have likely been the launch vehicle picked. All of those rockets had the necessary certification for missions of the JamesWebb class mission. All those rockets have launched both DoD and NASA missions of the highest certification level. ULA would 100% not have 'refused'. So I have no idea where or why you said 'And who refused?'. Nobody refused anything. SpaceX was not at that time an option as they barley existed. The contract was assigned long before SpaceX was a thing in the launch market. Of course when JamesWebb actually launched, Falcon 9 would have had the certification but this is hardly relevant as the launch was picked a decade before that. > Yeah right Congratulations, you played yourself.