/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12392342
That anon does bring up an interesting point though. How much should spaceflight be held accountable for environmental protection? How much is "too much" for environmental regulations for spaceflight? Does spaceflight as a whole even have a significant impact on the environment?

>>11987009
No? SpaceX is more like 50 years ahead of NASA in terms of launch vehicles, because they have a semi-reusable vehicle that actually works.

>>11926521
>As younger people come in and the Old Guard retires, and starship becomes a competitor for Gov't payloads, you'll see full reuse embraced by ULA.
I can't wait for this to happen. Not just for ULA but for all companies/agencies. It's getting ridiculous for others to ignore the results of reusability, or in Roscosmos' case, claim that it's fake. Imagine the scramble to getting reusable rockets putting pressure on SpaceX to innovate harder.

>>11813660
He's contributing to society in a positive way. Not only has he started companies which give many people jobs, but he has also funded ground-breaking and market-distributing technology which have improved their respective markets. For example, SpaceX has not only driven the cost of accessing space by a tremendous amount AND sent people back to space from American soil, but they did it in a way that encouraged other competitors to adapt so they can compete resulting in a better overall launch market.

>>11492555
Because we haven't found a way to do it even as a proof of concept of a proof of concept. Also, we have other ways of dealing with gravity that are much easier and cheaper. Like in >>11492561.

>>11335150
>The hardware and design however quickly become obsolete.
I hope so. I want to see reusable rockets across the world.