You do realize these guys have already delivered three or four payloads to the ISS< right? And if we ever hope to actually make space a place where we can expand, it needs to be done commercially, right?
Just curious why you think it must be done commercially?
Much of the risky, into the unknown, exploration throughout history was financed through governments.
Losing a spacecraft hurts, to a business that hurt is much more profound than to a government.
Because only places that are economically viable will allow for expansion. I'm not talking exploration, let NASA head out to Mars and beyond. But let commercial folks handle orbital stuff, still risky, hell aviation or shipping are still dangerous. But donr commercially.
Because only places that are economically viable will allow for expansion. I'm not talking exploration, let NASA head out to Mars and beyond. But let commercial folks handle orbital stuff, still risky, hell aviation or shipping are still dangerous. But donr commercially.
The only difference between SpaceX and the Shuttle is who owns the vehicle. Private industry built the shuttle, built the Apollo program etc with government money.
Yep, they built those things for NASA, to accomplish NASA stuff. My point was that for expansion to take place, and it needs to, the resources of this tiny ball wont last forever, nor can we support the ever increasing population here. And as we all know, it's great for the govt to trailblaze, and do the basic stuff, but most innovation happens when private citizens are turned loose on a thing. B233, I think you're wrong, the solar system is a big place, with almost infinite resources, people will go, and live, and expand humanities envelope. It's just what we do.
Spock, although your thoughts make no economic sense, they are logical. But until private industry foots their bill and accepts all the associated costs and losses, NASA has, and will do a better job. Simply because if NASA is paying the employees, they will accumulate many of the brightest just because they can. Many of the brightest are just starting out, and pride and decent pay can influence minds.
I am a private enterprise person, if they can do it without tax payer dollars.
Makes no sense until we actually start developing ways to make money in space. Instead of making money helping the gov get there. Might that be in products only possible to produce in space? Or in giving the elderly wealthy someplace they can live a bit longer. Hard to say. How much treasure was poured into North America, both private and govt, before money was made? But you can be pretty sure the companies in the game now will be the ones leading the pack comes that time. As for the taxpayers dollars, well, the govt still has a need to be up there, and if we can support that, and give our commercial entities a leg up, I'm good with that.
Not arguing with you. If tax payer money is used (which it is) to enable a private enterprise to turn a profit (which they must in order to satisfy stockholders), then the US treasury needs to be compensated an appropriate % of the profits commiserate to our investment. Hopefully, the enterprise will be able to wean itself off the public teet and go it on it's own.
The aspect you are not touching on is that while taxpayer dollars are being used to fund for profits, that's because they are providing a service. No different than say Southwest flying civil servants around the country. We are being compensated, by getting the support the ISS needs. Good read here.....
http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/why-the-sky-isnt-falling-on-spacex-after-yesterdays-roc-1714596758
The first comment is interesting. Someone has complied a list of launch failures per rocket program. Gives some great perspective.
. Hopefully, the enterprise will be able to wean itself off the public teet and go it on it's own.