4 ms·
He doesn’t need to be a vet to know the difference between a dog and a cat. Retrieving the booster is optional. Boeing, their competitor, can’t even do it.
by billfor 2y ago
He doesn’t need to be a vet to know the difference between a dog and a cat. Retrieving the booster is optional. Boeing, their competitor, can’t even do it.
- Sakos 2y agoSo because Boeing can't do it, we should just forget about safety investigations and let SpaceX do whatever? That logic doesn't fly. Neither does your nonsense analogy. Either we give a shit about safety or we don't. FAA previously grounded the Falcon 9 and cleared it to fly once they determined it was safe. They will do the same here. I feel like you and others are severely misjudging the formalities and expertise required for these things and so you're just armchairing this shit. It's tiring. You're not as smart as you think you are.
- billfor 2y agoYeah because Boeing can't do it and the FAA is OK with it, then SpaceX should be held to THAT same standard and not judged differently otherwise it treates SpaceX differently and contributes to complaints of political double standards. If it's safe enough for a Boeing booster to burn up on entry then the line should be drawn there. If SpaceX managed to land a booster to help recover costs that's a financial benefit to them and has no impact whatsoever on safety.
- extraduder_ire 2y ago> Boeing, their competitor, can’t even do it. I think you mean ULA. Boeing proper doesn't build or launch rockets anymore, but they do own a part of a launch provider.