/sci/ - Science & Math

NASA bitches absolutely BTFO

Can someone post that picture of Elon smiling and Bezos crying? I need it for future shitposting

Fucking great

>>8234522
It's funny because they reused stages will fail mid-flight.

>>8234601
Why would Bezos be crying, exactly? It's possible for more than two companies to exist and compete in the same space.

I know it's hard to imagine, because space launch has been a tiny oligopoly/monopoly for so long, but multiple competitive private enterprises is what the market needs to really thrive. If everyone but Elon gets BTFO, we'll be back at monopoly again.

I really want Elon to succeed. I just also want Blue Origin to succeed, and all the other future companies we haven't heard of yet. Nobody wins if anyone wins; the victory condition for space as a free market is one where many successful companies compete.

(Which does mean we'll need a higher launch demand. Right now, there's not even really enough demand in the market to sustain one launch company without gov't funding. It's a chicken-and-egg problem: Very few people are building a business model based on space because it's too expensive and very few other people are doing it; and the reason that space is expensive is because so few launches are being sold. Even a fully reusable launcher wouldn't be much cheaper at this low demand; reusability saves costs by spreading the extra construction + development costs over many launches, but with the low launch demand to pay it back in a reasonable time would split the cost over few enough launches that it would barely matter. OTOH, even with conventional rockets, higher demand would still drop prices considerably. )

>>8234601
>>8234631
Never mind, found it!
>Why would Bezos be crying, exactly?
i have no idea what the context for these expressions are.

>It's possible for more than two companies to exist and compete in the same space.
Fuck, I hope so. One pushing the other and so on.

>I know it's hard to imagine, because space launch has been a tiny oligopoly/monopoly for so long, but multiple competitive private enterprises is what the market needs to really thrive. If everyone but Elon gets BTFO, we'll be back at monopoly again.

Not sure why its hard to imagine, really. Competition drives innovation.

>I really want Elon to succeed. I just also want Blue Origin to succeed, and all the other future companies we haven't heard of yet. Nobody wins if anyone wins; the victory condition for space as a free market is one where many successful companies compete.

Same here

>
(Which does mean we'll need a higher launch demand. Right now, there's not even really enough demand in the market to sustain one launch company without gov't funding. It's a chicken-and-egg problem: Very few people are building a business model based on space because it's too expensive and very few other people are doing it; and the reason that space is expensive is because so few launches are being sold. Even a fully reusable launcher wouldn't be much cheaper at this low demand; reusability saves costs by spreading the extra construction + development costs over many launches, but with the low launch demand to pay it back in a reasonable time would split the cost over few enough launches that it would barely matter. OTOH, even with conventional rockets, higher demand would still drop prices considerably. )

Hopefully.

One of the few sensible things NASA has done the last years is the COTS and CCDev programs.

>>8234522
His design could be so much better.
If his rocket drew inspiration from nature the landing would be badass and smooth.

Also the landing pad in the water should be covered in a spongie material like dirt or astroturf so that the rocket would slide into place better and stick itself in like a dart.

"Human beings are a virus."
"No, they are bacteriophage!"
"Virus!"
"Bacteriophage!"

Lets find out.
One or Zero.
1010100101011001101010101010101010110101010101001010101010101010

>>8234618
It is funny, because you failed mid-sentence.

>>8234527
NASA is on board their flights and pays them money. Cheaper costs for getting their shit into orbit makes NASA happy.

>>8234764
You don't know what you are talking about.

>>8234631

the victory will coem when satellites become cheaper to build and thus the market is safer to invest in for rocket companies. the important thing here is that there is a bigger demand for space services. it has always been the goal, its what the idiots at nasa should have been doing for the last 40 years

>>8234764
I honestly cant tell of you are trolling or not

>>8234860
MSFC bitches absolutely BTFO.

I consider SpaceX essentially a NASA satellite/faction, like JPL. NASA has always used private contractors to design and build its vehicles, and SpaceX is heavily funded, guided, and evaluated by NASA.

After Apollo, and the demonstration of space technology, it was obvious that the next thing they'd want was to drastically lower launch costs. MSFC did not have the organizational structures and barriers to prevent the shuttle being turned into an absurd pork project that failed utterly in its purpose of reducing costs yet was continued for decades. Similarly, when they finally gave up and just tried to rewind back to Apollo capabilities at minimum cost, that was also turned into pork.

Time to shut down MSFC.

>>8234670
>>8234631
>Why would Bezos be crying, exactly? It's possible for more than two companies to exist and compete in the same space.
Compete is the key word.

Competition is a process that tends to weed companies out that are years behind and orders of magnitude worse.

I'd really like to see them cooperate. SpaceX has made an excellent reusable booster. Blue Origin has made an eminently suitable upper stage engine, and also demonstrated the capability of building a complete propulsive landing stage with it.

I think it would benefit them both for SpaceX to sell suborbital boosts to Blue-Origin-built upper stages, while they each work on their own version of a complete reusable rocket.

>>8234522
Thats a lot of pollution. Rocket tests should be banned they are destorying out atmostphere.