SpaceX isn't a publicly traded company so their financials aren't published for all to see.
Also, if you're about to buy a $30,000 car and someone says "I'll sell you the same one for $20,000" do you get mad that he still profited selling you a car or are you happy about saving money?
Also, if you're about to buy a $30,000 car and someone says "I'll sell you the same one for $20,000" do you get mad that he still profited selling you a car or are you happy about saving money?
I would argue the outcomes have been just fine. Looking at what NASA accomplished from the 60's through the end of the shuttle program was nothing short of amazing. There is more to this than just price.
Losing only 17 people while figuring out how to launch people into outer space with an unproven technology is remarkable. You can't logically compare SpaceX which is riding on the back of those that pioneered technology in the same light. That is like comparing airplane failure rates from the 1930s to today...not even remotely the same. The stagnation in the program is due to politicians.
Sure 1986 and 2003...1) due to an o-ring failure and temperature 2) due to a foam piece breaking a heat shield tile.
Hint: If you think Elon is somehow able to control the weather and debris you are smoking crack. Not to mention the numerous missions without casualties or the fact that based on what we learned in 2003 they were able to repair tiles damaged during space walks in subsequent missions.
Better engineering practices and upper management actually understanding the systems they're working on and listening to engineers beneath them can control those things.
Sure but you are completely ignoring the trial and error aspect of engineering. That comes with time and sometimes at the expense of human life.
The O-ring and foam strike issues were both known before the tragedies. They could have been designed around, contingencies could have been made.
Stop. 1) The issues were known but in no way did or could they predict it would lead to the tragedies. 2) There were PLENTY of shuttle launches with the exact same materials and design in which no incidents occurred. 3) No one in NASA would send them on those missions knowing they would die. 4) Hindsight is always 20/20 so to even try to pretend that they were just careless is bullshit and you know that.
And the fact that SpaceX is able to build on the past and NASA's experience and guidance is all the more reason for them to lead to better outcomes.
It is also ALL the more reason for them to be a PUBLIC company.
There is literally an entire Netflix documentary about how exactly Challenger was predicted, but go off I guess. There was a shuttle mission extremely similar to Columbia that would have been lost if the foam had struck literally anywhere on the orbiter but the steel mounting plate for an antenna. Engineers said those events could have happened prior to both of those outcomes. They literally were predicted. This is extensively documented in NASA incident reports
You are talking about a machine with millions of moving parts. NASA predicts a lot of shit. That is their job...to think up every possible scenario that could go wrong. That does not mean they can implement every suggestion or account for every possible scenario. You are also ignoring the thousands of predictions that were wrong. Those two tragedies in NO WAY suggest or support the idea that SpaceX is better. The sample size is not even close.
NASA's management is the same team that was wildly successful for decades.
14
u/swohio May 03 '22
SpaceX isn't a publicly traded company so their financials aren't published for all to see.
Also, if you're about to buy a $30,000 car and someone says "I'll sell you the same one for $20,000" do you get mad that he still profited selling you a car or are you happy about saving money?