• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    21 days ago

    Why is SpaceX on that I mean I know “musk bad”, but seriously they’re doing well. Just put Boeing on there again this time for Starliner.

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      I first thought it was the Starliner. Then the group would have been “full of technical issues”.

    • whyalone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      21 days ago

      They are not doing well, they take tax payer money and blow them up, literally.

        • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          It is and it isn’t. If NASA sent up rockets like them, blew them up, and said “that’s what we wanted to happen!”, at the same tax dollar spent ratio, there would be congressional hearings and massive outrage.

          • ZMoney@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            20 days ago

            When you build new things they necessarily blow up during the development process. NASA is hobbled by a flat budget so they can’t afford to blow anything up. So they can’t build anything new, which is why SLS is a bunch of old parts scrapped together.

            • Emerald@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              20 days ago

              SLS is a bunch of old parts scrapped together.

              True. But those old parts scrapped together is what makes SLS beautiful. :P

      • EpeeGnome@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        They are paid both taxpayer and private money to put things, including people now, safely into orbit. A thing they do frequently and reliably, without any explosions. Yes, their dramatically destructive development method of launching unproven prototypes and pushing them to the limit does seem wasteful, but it actually has allowed their engineers to very effectively identify the weak points in their systems and remove or compensate for them, resulting in designs that are redundant only where needed, but still reliable. Despite a lot of competition from international and the older American aerospace companies, they remain one of the most cost effective and reliable options for space launches in the game.

        Now, I’m all for some Musk mocking these days after how much of a jackass he’s revealed himself to be, and I am now convinced that Space-X succeeded in spite of him, but it is successful.