The free market can't fix it-

>the free market can't fix it-

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/NASA/status/932664356403281929
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

2022? They'll be redesigning the turbopumps again, not flying.
>SLS isn't meant to fly
>It's to burn capital in important districts

I wonder what the rate of succesful test launches for each is...

You think rocket turbopumps are a thing that they would have mastered by 1962 or something.

fpbp
/thread

Say what you will but Elon Musk definitely accomplished his goal of making space and electric vehicles competitive again.

> Another simplified copy of Russian rocket is better than own NASA&"musk"&co piece of shit.
No wonder.

Technology acquired by tax payers money

Plenty of innovation still to be done, plus each rocket type that uses turbopumps requires new designs. It's not off the shelf.

...and?

this, though he may not be the best with keeping his deadlines, he has always delivered on what he promised

> original product vs improvement
Its much cheaper/easier to come up improvements to existing tech than to pioneer new tech.

At 64 tons, it'll cost more than $90 million. That price is for more like 25 tons.

64 tons is for fully-expendable launch, which will be a specially-negotiated service, probably costing in the neighborhood of $150 million. The $90 million price is limited to 8000 kg to GTO (under a third of its advertised maximum of 26,700 kg to GTO), because that's as big as comsats normally get, and also because SpaceX can guarantee they'll provide the launch even if Falcon Heavy never works, by flying Falcon 9 in fully expendable mode.

On the other hand, it's likely that Falcon Heavy performance numbers will be bumped up again with the Block 5 cores, to match SLS performance to LEO. Beyond-LEO numbers will likely continue to favor SLS, due to its hydrogen-fuelled upper stage, but a 5-meter-diameter hydrogen upper stage (such as an adapted DCSS) could be put on top of a Falcon Heavy to achieve the same performance at much lower cost than using SLS.

Falcon Heavy isn't a simplified Energia.

>the ayy market can't fix it-
twitter.com/NASA/status/932664356403281929

>Americans developing rockets
Just let Soyuz and Ariane do the job, your designs are complete garbage.

100 tons payload

You know that we had LH2 engines 20 years before you.

B-but muh Nationalist collectivist ideology...

The USA is so completely Jewed that it's primary goal is not to develop technology but to attack the very existence of the white race. You can't make progress when you kill your golden goose out of jealousy.

>ayylians come to world just to blacked.com us with a gigantic space nigger dildo

And I can see the anus-hurt ESA employees are here. :^)

I too would enjoy a reliability study.

Find out December 29th...

Literally has nothing to do with the free market, retard. NASA just happens to be a fucking huge company with slow process because it's fucking huge. Remove 75% of the useless seat warmers and it will work faster and better.

Well to be somewhat fair, NASA was never meant to be a staple in advancing space technology, It strictly is a Jewish money laundering scheme.

Reminder private rocket companies are welfare queens receiving gibs from the government

If NASA were a business providing services to paying private customers, it would long since have gone out of business and competitors would have taken its place. Because it's a government agency, the funders have simply lowered their expectations.

The free market isn't magic, you can always dig into the details and find specific things to blame government inefficiency on, but that doesn't stop government from consistently turning out to be inefficient.

NASA's primary goal is now to hire as many muslim women as possible and shill global warming. SLS will never fly, they are in deep doodoo and the full realization is going to hit them hard in the coming decades.

The Soviets did though. They did it through destructive testing, which would have probably cost trillions in the capitalist West.

Plain wrong.

What are you, a socialist?

I can't think of another kind of a stupid monkey that doesn't acknowledge the inherently inferior efficiency of government compared to private enterprise.

Jokes aside, much aerospace technical knowledge is intuitive and not written down. A lot of knowledge and lessons learned in the 50s-60s were lost as those guys retired. Their successors had to make a lot of the same mistakes and learn from them.

Several high profile flight failures in the 90s such as the Titan IV and Delta fails in 1997-98 were suggested to have been the result of the old guard from the Apollo era having retired and been replaced by new guys who took a while to get their shit together.

This

The kind of ownership has literally zero impact on the efficiency of a company. I'm not against any private ownership. But what you are saying has literally zero scientific basis. Every company needs a strong and efficient leadership and a clear target. Memeing a meme phrase from a meme ideology doesn't speak for you.

And you went to the moon.

>The kind of ownership has literally zero impact on the efficiency of a company. ... what you are saying has literally zero scientific basis.
So, I can point at history, and show how it conforms to my model, and I can explain why it works that way, in terms of organizational dynamics and human psychology, but you can just decide that it's not true and declare that the lessons of history are not "scientific".

Sure thing, comrade. Communism works. There's no advantage to free enterprise. When government is inefficient, we just have to try harder and be better, not reduce its role.

> The USA is so completely Jewed that it's primary goal is not to develop technology but to attack the very existence of the white race.
QFT


TFW I made the right call turning down a job at NASA a decade ago. I was right that the SLS is overpriced and will never fly.

NASA answers to politicians. Hard to be efficient when you have people without an ounce of knowledge of rocket systems in charge of all your financials

Government running a company does not equal it being communist.
Government run company means unlimited resources.Thats how they invented everything from the nukes to apollo.

NASA is - even for a government agency - completely fucked up and incapable of competing. Their affirmative action hiring practices they introduced almost 2 decades ago turned it into a huge money sink that can't even fly satellites into orbit. It's run by a negro and everyone in the management is some sort of minority. The only whites there are the scientists who have their hands tied because brown people decide about projects and who gets funds. And funds mostly go to some feel good diversity bullshit.
NASA is over. The NASA that landed white people on the moon doesn't exist anymore. And it won't return because the US is over, too.

>unlimited resources
yes, it also means absolute inefficiencies. the solutions such behemoths create may work but they are not economical unless financed by stolen money (taxes).

>original product vs improvement
What the fuck is this post

Yeah,that happens when you let jews in the project who funnel 3/4 of the money away.
The government used to be good at handling nation-sized project,you know.There would be never a moonwalk or a nuke without a government.
Its just shit since jews have the leading poisitions everywhere.
Giving up nation-scale space exploring is a very crazy idea that WILL backfire.
Nobody sane wants google ceo making the first contact with another species,if you know what i mean.

Private business is primarily worried about front end costs. If they are required to spend huge amounts of capital on developing something that might not ever work, they shy away from it.

Name three private businesses that are each seriously working on D-T fusion reactors, TeV+ particle accelerators, Thorium salt reactors, or other wonder projects.

There have been entire reactors and laboratories build that have been built that were obsolete when they were open because science and engineering is developing faster than the lead time to build the next generation of tools; however, once some government funded team gets a working solution, private industry will use that proven method to save of R&D because the work has already been done. It's the reason that EVERY pressurized water reactor follows the same effective design; the US Navy paid for the development for it so now everyone else uses the same proven concept. Just like with a implosion fusion bomb, the US government did the expensive and lengthy work and came up with the U-T staged bomb and that is the format for EVERY nuclear fusion bomb since. SpaceX is an awesome feat of a business but the work was pioneered by government funding to develop the science, technology and engineering to build their rocketry, as well as the telemetry to fly it.

The metallurgy alone took decades of testing to develop and now anyone can order super alloys off the shelf. Inconel didn't exist until War time government spending created it. Now it and other alloys developed the same way are now ubiquitous.

>we have achieved so much, by 2022

so you achieved nothing?

>that's right, goy, be we will, promise, just keep paying

>no spaceplanes yet
>no In-Orbit superstation consisting of living/greenhouse habitats, research labs, (centrifugally) simulated gravity sleeping/washing chambers, asteroid capture and processing facilities and rocket 3D printer
>no moon bases
>no using maglev and solar panels to catapult things into lunar orbit
>no space elevator on mars allowing for easy access to the surface
We've got a lot of work to do, bois

It makes sense that the management is made up of niggers desu. Ranked military officers are given extreme preferential treatment in NASA promotions not because of military competence but because it's a VIP club for people in it.

There's a weird culture of elitism for military personnel and niggers just happen to do well in that environment for one reason or another.

>put up an entire ISS in 3 launches, with 50 tonnes of payload spare
O shit

maybe they should of used that labor to grow food instead of making disposable rockets

>There would be never a moonwalk or a nuke without a government.
1) That's nonsense.
2) The development of nukes is not generally considered a boon to mankind.

Government taking up the quest to put a man on the moon only guaranteed that it would be done inefficiently. The main reason it wasn't undertaken privately is that government controlled rocket technology and spaceflight quite tightly until the early 2000s. Rocket technology was kept under wraps in much the same way nuclear bomb tech was, and for the same reason: WMD antiproliferation.

While what SpaceX is doing wasn't technically illegal after the 80s in the US (private launch was legalized after the Challenger disaster - everything other than the shuttle had been nailed down except national security launches, in order to provide the maximum customers for shuttle launches, which is how Europe became the leader in commercial satellite launch), the FAA bureaucracy was allowed to be as obstructive as it liked and generally nothing was approved except favored contractors, until it was directed specifically to support the development of private spaceflight in the early 2000s, and in the rest of the world, it was generally even more restrictive.

Left to private industry, there would have been an emphasis on rocket reusability from the beginning.

Look at the Wright Flyer vs. the Langley Aerodrome. The history of orbital rocketry is basically what aviation would have looked like if private aircraft development was forbidden, if the Wright Bros were warned off from their experiments under threat of imprisonment, while Langley was just given more funding and time until his catapult-launched expendable aircraft worked.

>There's a weird culture of elitism for military personnel
It's always been that way, it was a big problem during the Civil War and caused the war to drag on much longer than it needed to.

So,where are the private corporations walking on the Moon?
Even the magical spacex is only achieving something because Musk got a bunch of NASA tech bundled together with a bunch of scientists from the government.
Its just wrong to think that government is guaranteed bad.
You may be young,but there was a time when people working in these nation-size project actually took pride in it and did their job the best they could.
Now tell me please,why is a private company better than a government project with people in it who do their job the best they can?
Will private company pay more money and the money suddenly making the workers more competent,or what is your logic here?
Removing the government from nation-size project like space ensures one thing.
It gives the profits not to the nation,but the jew who owns the private company.
So again,why is that better?
Remove the jews from the government and it will suddenly stop being inefficient.

>You may be young,but there was a time when people working in these nation-size project actually took pride in it and did their job the best they could.

Americans in the 1960s were a generation shaped by WWII; they knew how to accomplish large-scale projects like that. This way of thinking doesn't exist anymore.

Really?I think you should remove the jews from your leadership completely,and watch how it returns.
Atleast you could give it a try,yes-no?

>>The main reason it wasn't undertaken privately is that government controlled rocket technology and spaceflight quite tightly until the early 2000s
>So,where are the private corporations walking on the Moon?
They've only been allowed to work on rockets for about fifteen years. The first private moon flyby is scheduled for next year, and moon landings should follow a few years after that, after reusable boosters mature and reusable upper stages are developed.

When private corporations walk on the moon, it won't be some ruinously expensive symbolic flag-planting mission.

>Even the magical spacex is only achieving something because Musk got a bunch of NASA tech bundled together with a bunch of scientists from the government.
That's bullshit. Of course when private industry comes in, they're going to use whatever they can from past experience, wherever it came from. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have got anywhere without the things they found.

If you look for instance at Falcon 1, sure they based their Merlin 1 design on FASTRAC, but they quickly found it was practically unworkable and did a major redesign. In the end the FASTRAC research was maybe a 20% contribution to Merlin 1C, and less than 5% to their mature Merlin 1D.

SpaceX is getting a lot more by scorning the conclusions of government research than by applying it.

>spacex achieving something without NASA tech&scientists
>bullshit
Keep dreaming about the hero Musk.

How do you look at the shitshow NASA projects are, and compare them to the spectacular progress SpaceX is makng, and conclude that SpaceX wouldn't have got anywhere without the meager crumbs of knowledge they salvaged from the NASA trainwreck?

If the Wright Bros were legally prevented from doing their research while the Langley Aerodrome project was expanded and continued for another ten years (let alone fifty), the WB would probably have applied some lessons from the Aerodrome research. Then jackasses would claim forever that the WB would never have achieved flight without the pioneering government effort of the Aerodrome.

When you compare the WB effort to the Langley effort, they were orders of magnitude more efficient. SpaceX is similar compared to NASA. NASA spends a billion dollars developing something that saves SpaceX under a million dollars in development cost.

Reminder that skylab was launched in one go in 1973

Some star shat that log out