Post An2197US6gTAe2moN6 by jmcrookston@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by jmcrookston@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AmyEALlR2mOLyZo6Mq by VE2UWY@mastodon.radio
2024-10-13T17:22:16Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@joshuafoust Leaving aside all the mElon trash, I am annoyed by the people that think SpaceTwitter is "better" than NASA because NASA never caught its own boosters.Well, no - that wasn't a mission objective. The objective was "beat Soviets to Moon". Designing a reusable booster to do that would have distracted from that goal.
(DIR) Post #An1I2a0hAxKl8MNJcO by econads@mendeddrum.org
2024-10-14T05:57:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VE2UWY @Jorsh @joshuafoust saw a comment from them that said the first time they had a rocket blow up on the launchpad they would have been shut down, whereas spscex just carries on.
(DIR) Post #An1I2b2rKOeuLMOYd6 by VE2UWY@mastodon.radio
2024-10-14T13:33:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@econads @Jorsh @joshuafoust Lolhttps://youtu.be/g79K-R7xTFo?feature=shared
(DIR) Post #An1zVMpDZZNmfSyoKW by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-13T19:34:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VE2UWY @joshuafoust > that wasn't a mission objective. The objective was "beat Soviets to Moon".and then they did it, and moved on from the Apollo Program to the Shuttle Program, which did have reusability as one of its (arguably too many) goals.So arguably Starship is what Shuttle should've been, although Starship has benefit of hindsight, so it's probably not a fair comparison either.1/
(DIR) Post #An1zVOJO2t6pHK6Pzc by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-13T19:43:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@VE2UWY @joshuafoust Ok, so what about SpaceX vs post-shuttle NASA?You could argue NASA was bad at getting people to the ISS and SpaceX did it better... but NASA did it by contracting SpaceX, so SpaceX's success is a NASA success here.You could also compare Starship to SLS - they have different goals, but one could argue SpaceX is more effective at achieving its goals here than NASA - this argument has a chance IMO.2/
(DIR) Post #An1zVPQrsYggkobuIC by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-13T19:45:29Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@VE2UWY @joshuafoust But in the big picture, I think the main reason people were frustrated by NASA and get excited by SpaceX, is that after the end of the Shuttle program, NASA didn't seem to have ambitious goals anymore.And SpaceX has those.
(DIR) Post #An1zaTs0o4yPxvj1CC by jrredho@mastodon.world
2024-10-13T19:48:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl Maybe their less ambitious goals were tied to the Congress' less ambitious funding levels?Prior contracting with SpaceX for things, NASA had a long, long history of hiring on-site contractors to do their work.@VE2UWY @joshuafoust
(DIR) Post #An1zaVKlMfZ8VOBUeG by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-13T20:03:41Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@jrredho @VE2UWY @joshuafoust I agree that at least half of it is Congress's fault, including the time when they told NASA to make a nonsensical rocket just so that big defense contractors have something to do.But funding-wise, SpaceX seems to be able to do much more for the same amount of money.How much of that is legit being more efficient vs ignoring law (as alleged by OP) - I don't know.
(DIR) Post #An1zmGB3XfxayOFXEG by jmcrookston@mastodon.social
2024-10-14T20:27:27Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl @VE2UWY @joshuafoust Well and don't forget SpaceX got a huge amount of NASA help and funding. So all kudos to the engineers. Separately, I refuse to give Elon any credit as all I've ever read is that people tend to keep him out of all decision making if they can.
(DIR) Post #An2196IMY9CkwG7dtA by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T20:38:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston @VE2UWY @joshuafoust I wonder, is there any list that summarizes all NASA's grants and payments to SpaceX?I don't doubt it's a huge part of SpaceX's... revenue (?) but I think it'd be interesting to compare it to how much other rockets and spacecraft cost.1/
(DIR) Post #An2197US6gTAe2moN6 by jmcrookston@mastodon.social
2024-10-14T20:45:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl I don't know if this article breaks SpaceX grants out but I do remember seeing it before.https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html
(DIR) Post #An2198BhVt42oB1Lma by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T21:08:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston hmm so 4.9 bln USD across Tesla, SolarCity, and SpaceX.On one hand, that's only worth about as much as 2 years of running the SLS program.OTOH, that was in 2015, before SpaceX flew Commercial Crew, and before it won the NASA contract for a lander for Artemis.I'm guessing they got even more money after that article was written.
(DIR) Post #An2198TmQfWfiFTmxk by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T20:43:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston @VE2UWY @joshuafoust As for Elon, I too heard that people at SpaceX are mostly working to keep him out of decisions.But I also heard he is pushing forward in situations where a public company would've cut the losses....and that if something ends up not being on time, he descends on the company and starts removing whole processes and teams.....so people who want to keep him from interfering have to try to not miss the deadlines.Which sounds fucked up but seems to work :/
(DIR) Post #An2198iJYd9URKHOcK by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T22:15:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston found something newer:https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/IG-18-016.pdfon page 10, there's a nice graph that shows the total money NASA awarded under Commercial Crew & Cargo programs that was paid out until 2017 for activities until 2024.It says SpaceX got 7.7bln USD total.COTS was awarded in 2006 but that was only 280mln for SpaceX, so let's say the start date is 2008 with CRS-1.So 7.7bln over 10 years - that's ~770mln a year, or ~30% of SLS.Is that much? idk
(DIR) Post #An2199Qctsb6el0mga by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T22:33:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston ok I found a more up-to-date figure for SLS:page 5 of https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/fy-2024-spend-plan-june-2024.pdf?emrc=670d9456d3b95Orion + SLS + launch platform = 4.8bln/yr in 2024so it's 6x more expensive per year, but it's going to the moon, but it only flew once so far...tbh based on all the rumors, I expected SLS to be more cost-inefficient
(DIR) Post #An2199zinOfcPbQoO8 by jmcrookston@mastodon.social
2024-10-14T22:39:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl We'd have to also unwind if they are fulfilling contracts then it's not a grant or technical assistance. I was originally curious if they outright received money. Value will be tougher to assess.If I were NASA though I wouldn't be stingy as I fostered the development of private space launches in the USA.
(DIR) Post #An219AtjR9TPDJdXgu by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-14T22:44:24Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@jmcrookston the question I'm trying to answer is "is SpaceX more cost-effective than Old Space for the same kind of rocket" but there's no direct comparison... :/
(DIR) Post #An21Ru9ptvCWnT6ITo by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T05:55:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl @VE2UWY @joshuafoust We shouldn't compare SpaceX with NASA, but with other space companies like Boeing or ULA. Compared with SpaceX, Boeing fails completely.NASA is a government organization, which makes contracts with companies.
(DIR) Post #An21Rv9ADuG1rfnH4S by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T06:58:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels @VE2UWY @joshuafoust Boeing doesn't have its own space exploration goals. It doesn't do "we want to go to planet X, therefore we need capabilities A, B, C, and to enable them we need rocket Y and spacecraft Z", which is something NASA and SpaceX do.But yes, we can compare SpaceX with Boeing in terms of Commercial Crew Program and SpaceX delivers a more reliable vehicle, quicker, for less money. But everyone knew that already.
(DIR) Post #An21RwJ7uLoxSrSkEq by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T07:30:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl @VE2UWY @joshuafoust NASA is not a company and has no commercial interests. It would not have created Starlink, which is the main contributor to make reusability meaningful.
(DIR) Post #An21Rx9EmbVM4TqMSm by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T08:07:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels @VE2UWY @joshuafoust so you're saying that because of the incentive structure NASA has, it's unfair to expect it to develop the same space transportation capabilities that SpaceX has developed?
(DIR) Post #An21Rxu1ycw2PbjjOq by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T08:33:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl @VE2UWY @joshuafoust NASA is not a company. It must rely on companies to execute the requested work.I guess, Boeing wouldn't have been able to develop something like Falcon 9, or at least in the same timeframe and the dame costs.Building SLS from already known technologies to save money seems logical. But the executing companies screwed it all up.
(DIR) Post #An21RynKf1AfB7btb6 by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T08:45:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels @VE2UWY @joshuafoust NASA not being a company does not prevent it from hiring employees to complete work.The congress may prevent it from doing that to some extent, idk.But AFAIU with the old-space way of rocket development with cost-plus contracts, NASA is in control of all the design *and* shoulders all the risk, so I count it as "NASA doing things" from the high-level perspective.
(DIR) Post #An21RzvsQjbGhucEYS by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T08:48:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels also, whether SLS does or doesn't make sense is another story, but we can talk about it if you want
(DIR) Post #An21S0Xo9hwQbYMWg4 by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T08:59:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl no. Not too deep.Only one thing: SpaceX is an extraordinary company, which does not compare with any other space company. Without SpaceX, things wouldn't be possible like that.Before SpaceX, Ariane 5 was a very competitive rocket. Also ESA underestimated SpaceX. Otherwise, Ariane 6 would look different.
(DIR) Post #An21S1R6q6B3N4EgsK by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T09:44:10Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels agreed.I just wonder whether SpaceX is extraordinary because it's more efficient, has better incentive structure etc. Or because it's externalizing more costs and capturing more government money / doing other things one could consider exploitative or unfair.
(DIR) Post #An21aNwD3wqDTWlqGe by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T10:06:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl it always got less money than its competitors.It's the boss, who has an excellent technical understanding and takes clear decisions.(No comment about social competences.)The difference between Apollo and Artemis is, that Kennedy set a clear goal, while Artemis was started with half power, unclear objectives and no timeframe.
(DIR) Post #An21aOqDhhe0HEyZZQ by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T10:27:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels it's got less money in initial CRS and Commercial Crew awards, but I couldn't find public numbers on how much it got for the conteact extension for more flights.Also AFAIU a large part of what SpaceX does is paid for by Starlink revenue, and idk how much subsidies Starlink got.Also I haven't looked into its HLS contract for Artemis yet.And we'll probably never know how much money Elon himself invested in SpaceX.
(DIR) Post #An21aQ7yv9RiGcIGtU by werdenfels@troet.cafe
2024-10-15T10:39:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl it is his money and his company. He went in with full risk.NASA in contrary depends on goverment money. And they cannot start an extra project, just to create money.Elon combined all his engagements to get most out of all.Starlink makes reusability more usefull.Starlink creates money for Starship.Starlink without Falcon 9 would be too expensive.SpaceX helps Tesla when driving astronauts to the lauchpad.Cybertruck makes Starship's stainless steel cheaper.
(DIR) Post #An21aRSZy3W4OmwEdc by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T11:06:02Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels If a rich youtuber one day uploaded a video saying "here's how to make a sick gaming PC with $500 and some old parts from the attic" but the "old parts from the attic" (which he genuinely had in his attic from his previous computers) were worth more than most viewers' *current* computer, and he also got a GPU for free from the video's sponsor - would you consider him good at making computers for cheap?
(DIR) Post #An21aSO0WXSBGto69Q by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2024-10-15T11:09:13Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@werdenfels in other words, I'm not saying it's wrong for SpaceX to use all forms of funding it can find.But when evaluating the cost of developing a rocket, one should include all the money that went into the development, no matter where it came from.
(DIR) Post #An3udccAdldMV4ui6y by vincib@mamot.fr
2024-10-15T06:24:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@joshuafoust also, recently discovered the aluminum oxyde issue with satellites, and this made me worry a LOT MORE about starlink's thousands of little climate bombs up there...https://www.independent.co.uk/space/elon-musk-spacex-starlink-internet-b2567423.html