3 ms·

I am skeptical of SpaceX its future endeavours. They proved they are on par with government subsidized space programmes, but haven't done anything astonishing y

I am skeptical of SpaceX its future endeavours. They proved they are on par with government subsidized space programmes, but haven't done anything astonishing yet. I mean, they probably bought a majority of the tech from NASA or the Soviets and just made it work. Not that it isn't impressive, just that an actual own in-house rocket would have been more ground breaking.

lutorm 13y ago
an actual own in-house rocket would have been more ground breaking Huh? As Wikipedia says: "In order to control quality and costs, SpaceX designs, tests and fabricates the majority of its components in-house ..."
bane 13y ago
Their rocket designs are in house -- unlike competitors (like Orbital or Lockheed Martin who use refurbed Soviet Era engines). The vast majority of SpaceX's equipment is designed, built and tested all in house.
- avmich 13y ago
  RD-180 was designed in 1990-s, after break-up of USSR, and you can't just saw in half RD-170 to get RD-180. "Refurbished" usually applies to something used for some time already - not to the rocket engines, certainly not to RD-180 and NK-33, which apart from being fire-tested weren't used in flight.
  - bane 13y ago
    You're right about the RD-180, I think those are still produced? I think Orbital also has used the NK-33 and NK-43, which were all built in the 60s and 70s. Refurbished can also just mean "something that was sitting around for a long time and needed to maintenance to get up to working". Anything that sits around for 40 years is going to need some kind of work done on it before it's put in service. Either way, SpaceX doesn't use them.
ghshephard 13y ago
In all sincerity, it would probably be worth 15-20 minutes of your day to go review: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(rocket_family) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(rocket_family) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(rocket_engine) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(rocket_engine) What SpaceX and their sub contractors have accomplished in the last 12 years is nothing short of amazing.
lnanek2 13y ago
The designs are all quite different. They use additive manufacturing for example.
mikeash 13y ago
They just demonstrated all of the steps required to recover a first stage for near-immediate reuse. Nothing close has ever been done before. How can you say that they "haven't done anything astonishing yet"?

lutorm 13y ago

an actual own in-house rocket would have been more ground breaking Huh? As Wikipedia says: "In order to control quality and costs, SpaceX designs, tests and fabricates the majority of its components in-house ..."

bane 13y ago

Their rocket designs are in house -- unlike competitors (like Orbital or Lockheed Martin who use refurbed Soviet Era engines). The vast majority of SpaceX's equipment is designed, built and tested all in house.

avmich 13y ago
RD-180 was designed in 1990-s, after break-up of USSR, and you can't just saw in half RD-170 to get RD-180. "Refurbished" usually applies to something used for some time already - not to the rocket engines, certainly not to RD-180 and NK-33, which apart from being fire-tested weren't used in flight.
- bane 13y ago
  You're right about the RD-180, I think those are still produced? I think Orbital also has used the NK-33 and NK-43, which were all built in the 60s and 70s. Refurbished can also just mean "something that was sitting around for a long time and needed to maintenance to get up to working". Anything that sits around for 40 years is going to need some kind of work done on it before it's put in service. Either way, SpaceX doesn't use them.

ghshephard 13y ago

In all sincerity, it would probably be worth 15-20 minutes of your day to go review: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(rocket_family) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(rocket_family) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(rocket_engine) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlin_(rocket_engine) What SpaceX and their sub contractors have accomplished in the last 12 years is nothing short of amazing.

lnanek2 13y ago

The designs are all quite different. They use additive manufacturing for example.

mikeash 13y ago

They just demonstrated all of the steps required to recover a first stage for near-immediate reuse. Nothing close has ever been done before. How can you say that they "haven't done anything astonishing yet"?