• Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    My big worry about throwing all the missions at SpaceX is that SpaceX relies very strongly on venture capital and on StarLink (which itself relies strongly on subsidies and venture capital). Putting all your eggs into a single fragile basket doesn’t seem like the wisest move

    • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      True, but right now it’s the only option. There are things coming but they’re definitely not here yet and will likely be delayed, as is common in the industry. Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy are proven workhorses, and they work now. I’m sure NASA and Space Force wish this wasn’t the case but it’s all they have right now.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Why? Let’s say they go bankrupt. Just nationalize it at a very reasonable price and move on. It’s not like the technology simply disappears.

    • Nighed@sffa.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Does throwing missions at them not make them less reliant on it though? The more they are used, the more financially sound they are likely to be.

      The opposite is probably true - by using spacex loads it means that their competitors are less able to fund their replacements. (Even if the encubants are all really bad)

    • Beemoe@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Who should we throw them at?

      Think China will let us use a long march? Will Russia let us use a Proton?