/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9224901
You don't hear about them because they're not actually doing anything.

>>9224949
Then what's the point of a billion dollar company doing billion dollar test launches and R@D for nothing?

Bump.

Tell me about Virign Galactic.

Either SpaceX, Blue Origin or Virgin Galactic is getting us into spece first.

they recently finished building the factory to build the rockets in. they already have multiple customers. Bezos had billions to throw around. They have an engine already.


BO is a big player, so what if they haven't built anything yet - they can't poop out rockets instantly

Sounds like Blue Origin is aiming for sub-orbital passenger flights in 2019, which is boring.

They're a long way from having a orbital delivery rocket that lands the first stage.

>>9225071
>>9225083
Is it time for ULA to fail already? They still rely on Russian rockets that Congress will soon stop them from getting, and they haven't done any development into making a reusable rocket that can slash prices the way BO and SpaceX have.
Fuck ULA, and fuck them wasting taxpayer money on their ancient rocket tech.

>>9225083
>They're a long way from having a orbital delivery rocket that lands the first stage.
They're still saying New Glenn in 2020

Reminder that Virgin is going to get to Mars before any of the others do.

Yep

>>9224901
When are Doc Johnson and Hitachi going to make rockets?

We already have Space sex, Blew O-ring, and Virgin Orgasmic.

>>9225071
They don't have an engine"Already". The word you're looking for is "finally". BO has been at it longer than SpaceX and so far they've got an Engine and a suborbital testcraft. SpaceX is competing with established defense giants for commercial, DoD and NASA contracts. BO has a hell of a lot of catching up to do.

>>9225724
And did BO ever tell us what happened to that test stand they lost?

>>9225118
This
Fuck ULA so much

>>9225052
virgin galactic is a meme

>>9225490
very funny. air launch pretty much restricts you to small sats in low earth orbit, and they don't currently have any plans for a bigger launcher.

>>9225118
they do have some advanced designs on the drawing board, but the company as a whole lacks urgency, since they have a yearly $1B subsidy as a military launcher.

* ACES: a more advanced version of the Centaur upper stage. It is a really neat design for using otherwise wasted LH2 boiloff for extra power.
* Vulcan: not reusable, but using methane fuel. It should be much cheaper to build and operate than Delta IV and Delta Heavy (liquid hydrogen is a bitch to work with).

I'm not really counting their plans for "distributed launch" (refueling in orbit) as it is such an obvious marketing reaction to SpaceX's stage reuse.

>>9224901
They are pretty far along. You don't hear from them much because it is entirely privately funded by Mr Bezos who is much richer than Musk ever was. Although their working rocket is just for sub-orbital hops, it functions as at test-bed for all their tech, just like SpaceX's Falcon 1 did at the beginning.

Honestly I don't care who takes us to space first, I just want ULA to crash and burn miserably.
I hate them so goddamn much.

>>9225052
VG has no plan or strategy of going to space at ALL
their sub orbital meme shit was also a disaster and will never work

>>9226580
They are stilll years away from an orbital launch
Falcon 1 at least used a Merlin

>>9224973
government bux
while shitposters like to whine about how SpaceX is the welfare whore company, they've never actually taken a single dime of subsidy, all government cash they've gotten thus far is from NASA purchasing launches

the ULA however have gotten fucktons of free money, and have not done a single thing with that money other than stuff it in their pockets

>>9226662
they never will
Once SpaceX gets the BFR up and running, there will be absolutely no reason for ULA to continue getting subsidy because they'd be outclassed on every single front by a much cheaper competitor
the only reason they still would even after the BFR comes up is run of the mill corruption, which the US has in droves

>>9227326
the excuse is that there has to always be a second choice because of redundancibility. so yeah... you will never get rid of corrupt old aerospace

>>9225052

>The Virgin Galactic
>Can't even further than LEO
>Too afraid of girls to plan Mars Base
>Headed up by a beta ginger

>The Chad SpaceX
>Bangs Johnny Depps GF
>Reuses his rockets and his condoms to save money
>Only allows the hottest pussy onto his mars missions

>>9224901
New Glenn will be a better rocket than Falcon9 but it will come to the market a year or 2 before BFR and this will crush everything ever designed,Think 1000$/kg to LEO for New Glenn and Falcon and 10$ or less for BFR

>>9228706
Also remember how long it took Spacex to consistently land the Falcon 9 1st stage; know imagine a company with much less experience trying to land something considerably larger than the F9, the fireworks are gonna be fun.

>>9228716
*now

>>9226534
stuff that probably won't fly

if Blue Origin gets New Glenn flying or even close to flying, Lockheed and Boeing will pull the plug on ULA and leave it to fulfill remaining contracts

that would leave spacex and blue origin as competitors which would make the us gov happy. ula was created because boeing and lockheed said their launch businesses couldn't survive

SLS survives as long as senator shelby survives

hell northrop grumman has a launcher now (they bought OATK)

>>9227316
>government bux
No, B.O. is a bunch of workers fleecing Bezos, not Bezos fleecing the government. Bezos is a little lost lamb in the field of rocketry, where hopeless space cadets have been eating investors for breakfast since before he earned his first dollar.

>while shitposters like to whine about how SpaceX is the welfare whore company, they've never actually taken a single dime of subsidy, all government cash they've gotten thus far is from NASA purchasing launches
Not true. A lot of the SpaceX funding has been for development. The government pays SpaceX to develop Falcon and Dragon (and government employees do a lot of the work at NASA, validating and advising), and SpaceX gets to own the design.

The really key thing SpaceX did, that sets them apart from other rocket startups, is that they developed Falcon 1 on their own, a complete orbital launch vehicle, including its two rocket engines, a $90 million investment paid out of Musk's own pocket. Significantly, both the Merlin 1C and the construction techniques applied to Falcon 1 were suitable for Falcon 9, making this next step quick and inexpensive.

However, as soon as SpaceX had done so, the government backed up the money truck for them, with several times Musk's investment in subsidies, followed by billions of dollars in sweetheart contracts and more development subsidies.

>>9228623
>reuses his condoms to save money
Fucking keked

>>9225853
No and they never will.

BO is like the DPRK of rocket companies

Given Bezos' reputation at amazon, probably in more ways than one.

>>9224901
I wish for all space companies to do very well.

Unless they are working for or have anything to do with China's space program. Then they can burn in hell. China in space is the worst thing that can happen to the rest of the world.

>>9229209
don't worry, china is on the brink of collapse
it's too rotten to support it's own weight and will implode in the next decade or so as a result, just as it has done 82 times previously

>>9229209
>China in space is bad
source?
The US military are the ones obsessed with... militarizing space. Not China.

>>9229275
You really want the Chinese taking up residences in space? Everything else from India to Russia to the USA is far better than having China up there.

>source

History.

>>9229275
These false equivalencies were tedious during the Cold War, and they're just as tiresome now.

China's a bad country run by bad people, like North Korea but less extreme. America has its flaws, but they're not comparably bad.

Basically, the same kind of people are still in charge in China as those who were responsible for the Great Leap Forward. They're not a creative force. They advance in technology by stealing. They advance their economy by renting out their population as slaves and their countryside as a pollution toilet.

They're going to try and use their irrelevant half-a-century-behind copycat space program as a pretext to impede, extort, and tax real space development and colonization.

As we leave mankind's cradle and pursue our grand destiny, all the garbage of Earth who contributed nothing to the achievement are going to demand to be taken along so the problems they make can be perpetuated, and we need to say, "No!"

>>9229197
He's also a pedophile now apparently, I hope he gets arrested or his investors pull out; he's a physical embodiment of everything that's wrong with modern capitalism (I'm not a commie btw)

This kills the thread.

>>9229701
>believing the most common personal attack in existence with no evidence

>>9229261
delusional
US is on the brink of death due to 50% white

>>9229798
Retarded on multiple levels

>>9228945
>The really key thing SpaceX did, that sets them apart from other rocket startups, is that they developed Falcon 1 on their own, a complete orbital launch vehicle, including its two rocket engines, a $90 million investment paid out of Musk's own pocket.

Not just that, but Musk personally made a LOT of the decisions involved, and they were mostly good decisions
Bezos instead wasted years going off on tangents or that suborbital tourism meme.

>>9229902
Musk really knows when to push his engineers. Like when they were developing the merlin, and they were discussing whether to do it a simple proven way that was more detrimental long term, or a more experimental way that had theoretical benefits (or was this raptor?)

either way, because that one engineer told musk that there was a better way, he then forced everyone to design it so. Lots of similar examples of that sort of thing

>>9229389

china's working on a super tiny falcon 9. 150kg payload, grid fins, cheap to use. They've done a lot of tests:

http://www.linkspace.com.cn/show/?id=45&page=1&siteid=1

bump

>>9229983
Fuck China. Literally everything the do is shit

>>9224901
How the fuck are we still using rockets, this is not a spacecraft that should be taking us anywhere.
I feel this tech has been stagnated on purpose over the decades before Space X came along.
We should have more futuristic shit already

>>9231708
If you have an alternative idea in mind please let us know.
Because so far rockets are the only thing that can get us out of the atmosphere

>>9228623
Please someone make one of these for ULA and SpaceX.

>>9231708
>I feel this tech has been stagnated on purpose

You are 110% correct. Only that's because there's literally nothing better in terms of efficiency and cost.

Since the other spacex thread is dead

On the last 2 launches was there a fairing recovery, I can't seem to find any info on it for the most recent launches

>>9228572
you can all see the photoshop job that's coming, don't tell me you can't

>>9231902
Why though? Why recover the fairing?

Why do we have to go FAST to exit the atmosphere?

Seems like we need rockets to go fast; if we don't need to then we can look at other modes of travel

>>9232032
I think its' more about having the speed to get up there

>>9232053
As long as something is going up faster than the speed of gravity, it will eventually reach space, right?

>>9232057
Honestly I don't know, but those kinda questions are why I'm studying aerospace engineering and gonna take physics classes.

I just like Musk personally and think he is involved in cool shit. The media doesn't do him any favors building him up like Iron Man. But if you look at what he actually accomplishes and is involved in he is a very impressive guy.

>>9231708
We should be using atomic bombs but muh world peace.

All of you fucking RETARDS have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Take it from someone with an ear to the fucking industry, a little drunk on a Friday night but my superiors don't have a bug on this computer. Blue Origin is in a tangle because they have an incredible engine that's gonna power Vulcan, that's not even a contest. Aerojet Rocketdyne is fucking dead in the water minus refurbing engines for SLS (fucking kek). But fielding New Glenn puts them in direct competition with ULA, the bedfellow of the USAF. Because the USAF is a bunch of cucks with an eye on their wallet, they're gonna pussy out and lead both the ULA and Blue Origin along. ULA is banking hard on them being the old standby, while BO is banking hard on being the new upstart private company that can kind sorta compete with SpaceX for satellite launches. Both aren't gonna make their revenue marks to justify their respective ventures, and that's gonna leave them dead and SpaceX is gonna keep scooping up commercial venture launches, leading to a virtual monopoly for Elon Musky Vagina. You heard it here first you fuckwads.

>>9232090
Dang, does your dad work at Nintendo?

>>9225118
ULA is a dinosaur of oldspace, pork barrel mentality. The current rocket they're maybe going ot be testing in like 4 or 5 years will cost around 2 billion dollars per launch. That's like....20 current Falcon 9 launches. It absurd. It will be a miracle if it isn't massively retooled for reusability in the next few years.

Even if spacex fails, and they easily could, Bezos is an ace in the hole. The man is worth like 80 billion dollars. He could fund all of NASA out of pocket for 3 years and still be richer than 3 Trumps. His idea of space tourism is sound and could be huge in a decade or two if launch costs fall sharply and safety improves, especially if they start doing longer orbital sojurns. A whole fuckload of colleges would leap at the chance to send aerospace students into space for reaserch and prestige-"Join MIT Aerospace, we will SEND YOU TO SPACE MOTHERFUCKER" would put asses in seats and get money rolling in from boomers for whom the moon landing was a life highlight.

The p2p thing spacex wants to do would be better off focusing on tourism and reaserch jaunts into leo early on and not transport. Baby steps.

>>9232104
>>9232090
Where are you going to school and how did you learn all this?
Do you work for ULA or BO?

>>9232090
BO is funded by a man who is essentially a big walking boner for space. I don't think you understand how little Bezos cares about making money off of this. He's probably be okay losing money for ANOTHER 20 years on it, which is what he's done since the company has been going since like 2000. Dropping a billion a year on this has no effect on his bottom line at this point. He could give up, but I don't see it happening soon.

>>9232114
SpaceX on Mars and BO on the Moon right?

>>9232112
I'm not an expert by any means and you should take everything I say skeptically. There's some good information out there about all of this, this article really helps illustrate the nature of oldspace programs and the costs associated with them in the context of the SLS-
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/03/new-report-nasa-spends-72-cents-of-every-sls-dollar-on-overhead-costs/

BO info is not too hard to find, Bezos is very open about how much he's pouring in and its clear from his net worth that its not even close to being taxing for his finances. He's made little effort to rush out a product because he knows he has the resources to take his time and, hopefully, have a better earlier record than Spacex has had. I like Spacex but god damn they've had some rough times using such new tech to do commercial work.
It would appear I may have gotten the launch cost of SLS wrong. It actually might be more around 5 to 17 billion dollars per launch. It is uniquely surreal to see that my earlier thoughts on the profligacy of the program were so conservative. Whatever it's final cost, it is staggering in scope the amount of money and the distribution of funds inherent in this system.

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2013/07/nasa_defends_space_launch_syst.html

It's all fun and games to dick-ride Elon and I do think he's got to get a fuckload of credit for the things he's done, but it's painfully obvious that the BFR earthly tranport system is going ot be a nightmare to get going as a serious way to transport people around at anything like a decent price. I think they honestly fucked up announcing it like they did.

Just getting nations to agree to let these things fly around is hard, building the off-shore infrastructure for them, setting it all up, testing it, actually getting to a very very very high for a rocket level of failure of say, one in one hundred thousand, it's going to be incredibly hard. they would be much better off NOT doing civilian launches as short distance jaunts,at least initially. Musk seems a little leery of space tourism, amd I know why-he likes to do things that are practical, and it colors everything he does.

Imagine if instead they'd showed off a system where, in the next decade or so,maybe a little after sending people to mars and iterating on the tech, you could book a multi-day vacation in orbit in a BFR modified to be a grand luxury hotel/resort, with zero-g sports and guided spacewalks, emceed by famous scientists. All for a few million dollars a head for the first few dozen runs. Musk's wealthy fans (and he has a shitload in Silicon valley) would have had celebratory coke parties that would make Escobar blush and thrown down a cool few hundred million to grab the early seats, the same way tens of thousands threw down years in advance on model 3.

>>9232032
>>
>>9232053
>>9232057
>>9232063

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity

How old are you people?

>>9232032
Well anon you see, you don't just float above the earth in space, you have to enter an orbit and that involves balancing your speed with the rate at which earth's gravity tries to reach out and draw you back down. It's a very high speed indeed-the ISS orbits the earth many times per day for instance. Trying to do that sort of thing slowly is,at least for now, impossible-their are thrusters that use fuel very efficiently that you can run for much longer than chemical rockets, but they produce far too little energy to get you off the ground on earth and arem ore for maneuvering and accelerating in space.

>>9225724
SpaceX has gotten far more funding than Blue Origin.

>>9232203
Because their rockets are working and are reliable.
BO hasn't done dick

>>9232214
SpaceX had more funding in 2008, after just one tiny rocket launch, than Blue Origin has had throughout its entire history.

>>9232220
Results matter

>>9231975
The fairings cost a couple million, and all they need for a safe reentry is a parachute and some stabilizing thursters. They attempted recovery from some launches that were in the news but I can't find info on this launch

>>9229701

you are an idiot btw, and a commie on top

Bezos is investing billions in cutting edge reusable rockets and if that is an example of capitalism being wrong then I dont want to be right

>>9233044
Cutting edge, reusable rockets to launch rich customers and satellites into space for his own financial gain, that's the problem it's not like he's planning to send astronauts or cargo to the ISS or is pushing the limits of space exploration unlike SpaceX which is doing all three. What's the point of BO? It's rockets are going to be either too big or small to be competitive and there not going to be able to do anything special or new that hasn't been done before.

>>9233097
BO has more customers for NG than SpaceX has for FH
I'd say there's plenty of point of BO

>>9232057
>speed of gravity

FRESHMEN GET OUT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Fuck Bezos.

Hate him almost as much as I hate ULA

>>9224901
You can't compare these vehicle. New Glenn is significantly more powerful than FH and has a very powerful engine, the BE-4, which is also a very large engine.

New glenn lies between FH and BFR, it would be on the very very low end of BFR preformance but quite a bit more than FH.

This is probably one of the reasons why FH is not going to have a very long service life before being phased out for BFR, and another motivating factor for doing BFR the way they are doing.

>>9233181
FH is bigger than New Glenn stupid

>>9233103
BO is years away from a launch

>>9233173
New Glenn has higher reusable payload and higher TLI payload.

>>9233213
SpaceX is a decade away from launching bfr

>>9233231
SpaceX is aiming for BFR launches in 2022

Neither FH nor New Glenn have finalized payload numbers, and incorrect, FH has higher payload

>>9233246
>SpaceX is aiming for BFR launches in 2022
they were aiming for FH launches in 2010

>>9233246
>FH has higher payload
can you read?

>>9233265
FH is not the BFR and the BFR will not be delayed for the reasons the FH was

>>9233269
45k kg
vs
64k kg

>>9233282
what part of "reusable payload" do you not understand?

>BFR will not be delayed for the reasons the FH was
you're right, it will be delayed for different but more numerous and challenging reasons

>>9228623
> Chad
> Uses condoms
pick one

>>9233246
>in 2022
Are you naive enough to believe in that timeline?

BFR is thiqq

>>9228623
>the virgin galactic
can't stop laughing

>>9229798

No

It'll only be useful once it's in space where you don't need massive thrust and the lack of needing to carry propellant/fuel around is a massive boost.

What did he mean by this?

>>9224901

sage.

I'm ashamed of this board.

>>9233322
and why not? They shrunk the thing so they can build it at hawthorne
Thats still 4 years away

>>9231708
>How the fuck are we still using rockets
Because this is real life in 2017, and not some sci-fi story where you just imagine the perfect thing and it works like magic.

You might as well ask, "Where is my flying car?", "Why the fuck are we still using firearms and not phasers?", and "What is the point of using lithium ion batteries instead of miniaturized cold fusion reactors?"

Rockets are what work, according to physics as we know it. Other than that, you need some exotic megastructure, which is certainly far more challenging and costly than developing very good rockets. Chemical rockets work well enough, and nuclear rockets are difficult, expensive, likely to make an unacceptable mess, and could very well fail to outperform chemical rockets in practice.

>>9233713
the lack of flying cars is because its illegal to fly ultra lights over cities

>>9233713
>Where is my flying car?

Because Helicopters.

>Why the fuck are we still using firearms and not phasers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_energy_projectile

>What is the point of using lithium ion batteries instead of miniaturized cold fusion reactors?

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/149090-nasas-cold-fusion-tech-could-put-a-nuclear-reactor-in-every-home-car-and-plane

Maybe one day. Oh, and just posting info, nothing more.

>>9233714
Helicopters

>>9233714
There are so many other problems with "flying cars" that it's hard to know where to start.

There's noise, downdraft, energy efficiency, maneuverability, safety, etc. There's just nothing that flies that's straightforwardly equivalent to a car. We need the magic antigravity fantasy to have "flying cars".

>>9233732
Bullshit, flying is fucking easy, there would absolutely be personal flying vehicles all over cities/subburbs if it wasn't banned by law.
You don't need magic anything.

Meanwhile tens of thousands of people die a year in traffic accidents, and noone bats an eye

>>9233742
>there would absolutely be personal flying vehicles all over cities/subburbs if it wasn't banned by law.
It's a big world with lots of countries, so why isn't there one where it's legal and it has played out like you say?

Anyway, there's no flying vehicle we know how to make that's like a "flying car", and I just pointed out some of the ways they're different.

>>9233732
>>9233742
>>9233746
Helicopters.

Not many people use them. Because flying is difficult and those who try to fly who are not up to snuff get killed.

>>9233769
how stable is it? wouldn't even a moderate wind fuck that thing up?

>>9233775
The smaller/lighter you get with flying vehicles the more prone they are to wind problems. That's just how it is.

>>9233777
Yolocopter!

>>9233769
Helicopters do not fit the bill, they are not safe, a power loss results in a fatality, that rotating prop is a giant safety hazard.
Stuff like paramotors on the other hand..

Flying is no more difficult than driving a car. Yea you gotta know some shit, yea there is ass tons of unnecessary regulation that makes it more complicated, yea the government will harass you... but its not difficult.

Not sure why people focus on meme vtol aircraft when we live in a society where there are runways literally everywhere.(called roads)

>>9233777
Then that mosquito thing might not be feasible as a personal aircraft even though it looks super fun

>>9233780
>Power loss results in a fatality

You don't know how helicopters work do you?

>>9233787
>muh auto rotation controlled crash

Without the ability to land safely after a power loss, its unsafe
Man was not meant to fly in a rotary wing aircraft

>>9233785
They are super fun.

>>9233780
Flying is always more difficult than driving. There's a lot more you must know and remember to even be allowed to fly. Compound that with needing to be away of 720 degrees instead of only 360 degrees in a city makes flying a lot more difficult.

>>9233799
>away

*aware

>>9233799
>There's a lot more you must know and remember to even be allowed to fly
Thats regulations not the reality

Same shit with cars, you'd have lanes, speed limits, proper altitudes to fly at.
If you were allowed to say, park one of these planes in your garage, then fly it to work, people would do it.

>>9233807
Have you ever flown before? All that shit is so you don't clog up those "lanes" in the air and have crashes. You don't need to do that on the road because you can see the road and see all the signs directing you everywhere. Christ there's a laundry list of stuff that makes driving and flying so different. It isn't just about you up there when you fly. Which is why there's so many regulations and procedures. Hell, just a preflight check is beyond people when they don't even check their car's oil once a month at least.

>>9233814
And today we have fucking GPS/altimeters so yes you can have "signs" in the sky as well.

The problem with people who fly is that they start shitting their pants when they see another plane 2 miles away
Buncha fucking pussies

>>9233814
Very much seems like you are confusing government imposed rules as some law of physics too.

>>9233824
>>9233851
Sure thing, kid.

>>9233914
Meanwhile cars pass each other at 100 kmph with just feet to spare

But 1000+ feet between aircraft going the same speed is dangerously close
Autistic retards like you are the reason flying cars won't happen.

>>9233924
Sure thing, kid.

>>9233928
Guess retards like you will continue to claim flying cars are impossible while they remain fucking banned.

>>9233949
Sure thing, kid.

>>9233958
Flying takes less training than driving a car, you don't need to learn how to parallel park or any other semi-tricky thing

It's more like driving a boat around, lots of room around, never any blind corners or hidden traffic, slow speeds, try not to hit anything.

>>9233995
Sure thing, kid.

>>9233780
>prop
RRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>9224901
Fuck both of them because they both didn't hire me how about that?

>>9228623
kek'd

>>9224901
i dont kno why Elon is wasting his time on projects that provide very little utility in the grand scheme of things like re-usable rockets and flying rich people to mars.

It would be near the bottom of the list of things I would explore if i had the resources.

For instance, why doesn't he invest heavily in advancing batteries? We're still facing the same inherent chemical difficulties which is why energy densities/power/rechargeability remain extremely shit.

>>9225071
I saw the construction plans for their own launch pad. Cool stuff

>>9235994
You applied to each?
What are your credentials? School? Degree?

I really want to work for SpaceX when I'm done with school. I couldn't care less about Blue Origin since it's just Bezos's little toy, he doesn't actually give a shit about Mars or anything. ULA is pure trash and government corruption, I would never work for them and hope they fail as a company soon.