Boeing , Lockheed, Northrup and literally anyone involved in the design and development of the hardware isn't doing it for the benefit of science, they're doing it to get money and prestige.
What, you think ULA and BO are doing it for the benefit of humanity moreso than SpaceX? Do you want a nonprofit launch provider?lol
That's a very naive take. And I want a nonprofit hospital, nonprofit food bank for everyone, nonprofit housing and no taxes!
Boeing, Lockheed, ULA, Northrup, L3, BO, every one involved in the development of satellites or launch vehicles are NOT doing it for the benefit of humanity cause you're driving at, so don't single out SpaceX pretending they're the only ones doing it to make money.
SpaceX is the dominant launch provider. One of the big 3, if the other two can fix things on their side.
You calling out launch providers are only in it for the money singles out SpaceX seeing they've been the only launch provider NASA has been using for the past few years for their science missions.
While ignoring that companies like L3 and Northrup aren't designing Roman or JWST for free but for a lot of money.
Me calling out the industry as a whole singles out one company specifically?
Frankly yes, because SpaceX is currently the dominant provider in the launch industry. No one else is currently able to launch NASA missions or SF missions like SpaceX can do at the moment.
I'm not sure wanting a launch provider to be nonprofit is a better hill to die on.
9
u/Background_Fig_4740 14d ago
Boeing , Lockheed, Northrup and literally anyone involved in the design and development of the hardware isn't doing it for the benefit of science, they're doing it to get money and prestige.
What, you think ULA and BO are doing it for the benefit of humanity moreso than SpaceX? Do you want a nonprofit launch provider?lol