/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9606214
>>9606262

Neither of you actually refuted my point. Putting all of this into a new vehicle isn't easy, but again I'm not saying it's impossible. It does require a lot of capital though, a thing a private company is always going to have issues justifying to investors or creditors. Past performance does not guarantee future results, especially when someone is trying to build the largest rocket ever. Hughes built the H-4 but it only flew for about 26 seconds.

>>9606270
>>9606272

It isn't a "solved problem" until it's built and not blowing up on the launch pad. Look at how NASA manage to screw up Ares I, whose cancellation created the market SpaceX now inhabits. Technological development isn't just ticking off a list, as new vehicles are built they have to be experimented and tested with even if they are hobbled together with existing parts.

Again I'm not saying it's impossible, but it takes a lot of effort and labor (time) to make it all function. It's success is not guaranteed until it actually flies.