5 ms·
correct me if im wrong, but those are governments creating those rockets, while elon is just a private citizen. the space program that he created would be unsh
by syense 11y ago
correct me if im wrong, but those are governments creating those rockets, while elon is just a private citizen.
the space program that he created would be unshackled from the states desires, be they good or bad.
- mozumder 11y agoDoesn't matter. Elon still relies on government funding because he's selling to government. It's no different than when Rockwell/North American built the Space Shuttle. The biggest problem is that his ideas are just so boring and uninspiring. How about a new idea for a change? (Hyperloop isn't more exciting than High-Speed rail) Being known for someone that "did something for slightly cheaper" isn't exactly awe-inspiring. Sucks that millennials are stuck with him for inspiration. I want to see new ideas from our tech innovators. The Mars Curiosity lander is an amazing example.
- dba7dba 11y agoDoesn't matter. It DOES matter. :)
- mozumder 11y agoNot at all.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- patcon 11y agoYou're wrong. :)
- mozumder 11y agoI have yet to see any broad visionary ideas from Musk/Space-X. Everything they're doing, and are planning on doing, has already been done.
- dba7dba 11y agoWhat other nation or private entity has come up with a visionary idea in space industry? Let me remind you he first thought about sending a life capsule to Mars on a former ballistic missile. Isn't that visionary enough ya? And how about Tesla?
- ForHackernews 11y ago> What other nation or private entity has come up with a visionary idea in space industry? How about building inflatable space stations? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Commercial_Space_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Commercial_Space_Stati... Or mining asteroids? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_Resources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_Resources For my money, either of those is more "visionary" than "a rocket booster that costs somewhat less than previous rocket boosters". Now granted, they're both a lot less practical, and it's true that making things cheaper is often a crucial first step towards making them better.
- Nadya 11y ago>Everything they're ... planning on doing, has already been done. So landing a rocket after launch to re-use that rocket has already been done? Going to be interesting when they are the first to do so but it's already been done. I'd love to hear how you reason that. Doing things in a more efficient, cheaper manner means innovating new ways of development, testing, and building. More 'affordable' ventures into space can lead to an array of improvements. More research satellites being sent into space, as an example, because instead of costing $12 million to ship into space it costs $4 million [0]. I'm sorry you don't see the value in such things, but rest assured it is there. [0] figures made up, can't be bothered searching for accurate pricing
- senna 11y agoNo, it doesn't. Government money is like 90% of SpaceX revenue. If NASA says "I want a Y in your name", they WILL rename themselves to SpaceY.
- greglindahl 11y agoSpaceX's manifest for this year [1] shows 7 US government launches, 6 commercial launches, and 1 SpaceX-paid R&D launch (Falcon Heavy). Yes the US government is pre-paying for some R&D for Crew Dragon, but no, it doesn't add up to 90% of revenue. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He...