NASA funding is dependent on public opinion (well it was until recently). Blowing up rockets gets people really upset when they think it’s their tax dollars.
Somehow SpaceX has convinced people it’s a private company and not funded by government contracts and taxes.
Blowing up rockets gets people really upset when they think it’s their tax dollars.
I love spaceflight and what the Artemis II accomplished, but it came with an absolutely staggering price tag. It cost a bit more than $50 Billion to design including both the rocket and the Orion capsule. It costs $1Billion each time it launches too. We only bought enough parts for 4 flights of the rocket, and we’ve now used 2 of those.
I’m not commenting on the cost, just that people get cranky when rockets blow up that they think are funded by their tax dollars.
SpaceX gets away with it and I honestly don’t know why bcz their contracts have been all government until pretty recently. But Elon Musk managed to convince people it was privately funded.
SpaceX gets away with it and I honestly don’t know why
For the same reason all private spaceflight companies (like Firefly, Rocketlab, and Blue Origin) “get away with it”. Blown up rockets aren’t paid for by tax dollars. Private spaceflight customers, and yes, the government, only pays for successful launches.
bcz their contracts have been all government until pretty recently.
The contracts are for successful flights. If a SpaceX rocket blows up that was paid for by the government, the government (taxpayers) don’t pay for that launch.
Commercial spaceflight launches are much MUCH better finanical deal for taxpayers than the traditional NASA “cost-plus” contracts, SLS being the most recent example.
Yeah they were saved early on by NASA’s private commercial development programs. Are you saying NASA should not have implemented these programs? Do you prefer cost plus contracts?
I was simply commenting on the fact that people think SpaceX is a private company. It may be a private company on paper, but it’s first contract was an ISS contract funded by tax payer dollars. To me, that’s not a private company, that’s all.
Are you saying that any company that takes government contracts initially should not be considered a private company? Wouldn’t this apply to all launch providers? Why is SpaceX singled out?
Probably would’ve been cheaper, faster, and better engineered if they did though. The reason NASA doesn’t do it is PR.
NASA funding is dependent on public opinion (well it was until recently). Blowing up rockets gets people really upset when they think it’s their tax dollars.
Somehow SpaceX has convinced people it’s a private company and not funded by government contracts and taxes.
I love spaceflight and what the Artemis II accomplished, but it came with an absolutely staggering price tag. It cost a bit more than $50 Billion to design including both the rocket and the Orion capsule. It costs $1Billion each time it launches too. We only bought enough parts for 4 flights of the rocket, and we’ve now used 2 of those.
I’m not commenting on the cost, just that people get cranky when rockets blow up that they think are funded by their tax dollars.
SpaceX gets away with it and I honestly don’t know why bcz their contracts have been all government until pretty recently. But Elon Musk managed to convince people it was privately funded.
For the same reason all private spaceflight companies (like Firefly, Rocketlab, and Blue Origin) “get away with it”. Blown up rockets aren’t paid for by tax dollars. Private spaceflight customers, and yes, the government, only pays for successful launches.
The contracts are for successful flights. If a SpaceX rocket blows up that was paid for by the government, the government (taxpayers) don’t pay for that launch.
Commercial spaceflight launches are much MUCH better finanical deal for taxpayers than the traditional NASA “cost-plus” contracts, SLS being the most recent example.
Because it’s not…? They get the contracts because they’re the cheapest option, and these days they make more money through Starlink anyways.
And who else should CRS have gone to? Lockheed Martin and Boeing?
When SpaceX was founded literally all of their contracts were government contracts.
Yeah they were saved early on by NASA’s private commercial development programs. Are you saying NASA should not have implemented these programs? Do you prefer cost plus contracts?
I was simply commenting on the fact that people think SpaceX is a private company. It may be a private company on paper, but it’s first contract was an ISS contract funded by tax payer dollars. To me, that’s not a private company, that’s all.
Are you saying that any company that takes government contracts initially should not be considered a private company? Wouldn’t this apply to all launch providers? Why is SpaceX singled out?
Because it’s a post about SpaceX…
Isn’t it also about Artemis (Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, and Rocketdyne)?