- Status
I thought this was the guy that needed no US pork to offer a product. The US is NOT funding Russian development. We're paying them for a product. When the poor little rich boy has a product, we'll probably buy that as well. I guess that divorce must have cost more than he planned.
I say zero public money for his product development. When he has something to sell, we consider his widget along with the other widgets on the market and take the ride which is the best fit for the money.
I say zero public money for his product development. When he has something to sell, we consider his widget along with the other widgets on the market and take the ride which is the best fit for the money.
We are already helping the ULA, Orbital, and Spacex develop commercial alternatives. I say we reduce the ratio of 5:1 to maybe something like 2:1 or 1:1. So that the usa can quickly end its need for foreign launch services.
rcsplinters":1iq8ddjk said:
He has two rockets and an electric car, how many products do you need?
I am asking my member of the House to vote NO on this NASA spending proposal.
Big NASA Corporations-pork barrel or little NASA Corporations-innovation.
In that light, this vote is a rush to forestall competition by corporations who own congressional votes by virtue of the jobs they hold in their districts.
If House vote is successful, this commercial space industry will develop in another nation, hopefully a friendly one.
Big NASA Corporations-pork barrel or little NASA Corporations-innovation.
In that light, this vote is a rush to forestall competition by corporations who own congressional votes by virtue of the jobs they hold in their districts.
If House vote is successful, this commercial space industry will develop in another nation, hopefully a friendly one.
tanstaafl76":hc0ppgvn said:
Just one. A manned rated ride to LEO. He doesn't have that. In this whining plea for political interference, he compares his desire for seed (read pork) money and compares that with an actual product which the Russians are offering.
If he needs development funds, he needs to solicit those from private investors. If he wants to offer a human ride to LEO, then he needs to recoup his money on his unit pricing. There is NO way the Amercian public should have to share his risk while getting into this market. At least he could have the integrity not to compare payment for a service (what we're doing with the Russian) to begging for development capital.
I sorta figured this would happen. The private companies really unwilling or reluctant to enter the human to orbit marketplace without some risk acceptance on the part of the government. This is strong evidence of a weak business model. I expected better from Musk.
rcsplinters":270sh0b2 said:
The Falcon 9 has been built and launched into orbit. A product already exists, what he really needs is demand.
Right now commercial spaceflight has a chicken/egg problem. To get demand for launch vehicles, costs need to come down, but costs won't come down until demand allows mass production of the launch vehicles. Government can step in to provide the demand for a much lower cost service than it could provide on its own while making it more attractive for other players to enter the field. Everyone wins.
The government can act as any other customer, it can create a contract with a company to provide x service or capability, by y date, for z dollars. If the contract is not met, the company doesn't get paid. Therefore, tax dollars are guaranteed to be spent on a good product or not be spent at all.
Re: SpaceX Updates
Letter from Elon Musk looking for our help with Congress:
Your Help Urgently Needed to Save the Future of Human Spaceflight
If you care about the future of American space exploration, your urgent help is necessary. The only hope for the average citizen to one day travel to space is in danger due to the actions of certain members of Congress. SpaceX does not have the enormous lobbying power of the big government contractors to stop them, however with your help the day can still be saved.
NASA’s Authorization bill (H.R. 5781) will be debated on the floor of the US House of Representatives tomorrow. Despite the imminent retirement of the Space Shuttle, H.R. 5781 authorizes over five times as many taxpayer dollars to fly NASA astronauts on the Russian Soyuz than it invests in developing an American commercial alternative, moreover at a time when jobs are sorely needed in the United States. Quite simply, this bill represents the sort of senseless pork politics that has driven our national debt to the point where our economy can barely service it.
The bill is expected to be brought to the House floor this Friday under a special “suspension of the rules,” which is a procedure that limits debate and amendments.
Telephone your Congressional representative right away via the House Switchboard at (202) 225-3121 and ask them to vote NO on H.R. 5781, and instead support the bill unanimously agreed to in the Senate last week.
Your five minutes will make a critical difference, ensuring an exciting and inspiring future in space travel! SpaceX rarely asks you to take action, so you know it really matters when we do.
--Elon--
Love or hate SpaceX, I say we help out here. It would be stupid and and terribly self serving for these slimy congressman to send our taxpayer money to the Russians in an even greater amount then it would take to just fund the development of commercial astronaut transportation right here in the US, just because of pork barrel politics. Not to mention the jobs that will be outsourced because of this foolish effort. I intend to call my congressman today and ask that they put a stop to this BS. I ask that you do the same.
Letter from Elon Musk looking for our help with Congress:
Your Help Urgently Needed to Save the Future of Human Spaceflight
If you care about the future of American space exploration, your urgent help is necessary. The only hope for the average citizen to one day travel to space is in danger due to the actions of certain members of Congress. SpaceX does not have the enormous lobbying power of the big government contractors to stop them, however with your help the day can still be saved.
NASA’s Authorization bill (H.R. 5781) will be debated on the floor of the US House of Representatives tomorrow. Despite the imminent retirement of the Space Shuttle, H.R. 5781 authorizes over five times as many taxpayer dollars to fly NASA astronauts on the Russian Soyuz than it invests in developing an American commercial alternative, moreover at a time when jobs are sorely needed in the United States. Quite simply, this bill represents the sort of senseless pork politics that has driven our national debt to the point where our economy can barely service it.
The bill is expected to be brought to the House floor this Friday under a special “suspension of the rules,” which is a procedure that limits debate and amendments.
Telephone your Congressional representative right away via the House Switchboard at (202) 225-3121 and ask them to vote NO on H.R. 5781, and instead support the bill unanimously agreed to in the Senate last week.
Your five minutes will make a critical difference, ensuring an exciting and inspiring future in space travel! SpaceX rarely asks you to take action, so you know it really matters when we do.
--Elon--
Love or hate SpaceX, I say we help out here. It would be stupid and and terribly self serving for these slimy congressman to send our taxpayer money to the Russians in an even greater amount then it would take to just fund the development of commercial astronaut transportation right here in the US, just because of pork barrel politics. Not to mention the jobs that will be outsourced because of this foolish effort. I intend to call my congressman today and ask that they put a stop to this BS. I ask that you do the same.
Re: SpaceX Updates
20t to ISS is also something Atlas V, Delta IV or H IIB could do, perhaps with an additional booster, and soon Falcon 9H, as it is.
Story that nothing else can bring as much as Shuttle to ISS is myth.
Down-mass is something completely different.
7 Soyuz seats + 1 Proton launch, like those for Zvezda and Zarya. Ariane V can also do 20t to ISS with ATV , or about 7t of supplies without module.vulture4":2e6mn4iw said:James_Bull":2e6mn4iw said:...which is actually incredibly cheaper than each shuttle launch! Oh no... Very simple indeed.frodo1008":2e6mn4iw said:
It would require 2.3 Soyuz plus ten Progress to carry the crew and payload mass of the Shuttle, and many of the modules and large external payloads an only be carried by Shuttle.
20t to ISS is also something Atlas V, Delta IV or H IIB could do, perhaps with an additional booster, and soon Falcon 9H, as it is.
Story that nothing else can bring as much as Shuttle to ISS is myth.
Down-mass is something completely different.
Re: SpaceX Updates
I just did. The call took all of 5 minutes. They connect you right to your congressman's office. They were VERY nice and a real person actually answered the phone.
Ray,Gravity_Ray":m62ogzv7 said:
I just did. The call took all of 5 minutes. They connect you right to your congressman's office. They were VERY nice and a real person actually answered the phone.
robotical":1mkeg1td said:
I think if you look a little closer, Musk isn’t asking for a contract for services he can provide. Let’s get real here. If he was ready to offer that service (human to orbit), all he needs do is let Lori Garver or Bolden know. They’d issue an RFP the next week. They NEED him to step to the plate with an actual product as that would blow the roof off congress right now. The trouble is that he doesn’t have a product and apparently wants the American public to accept the risk for him to develop that product enter the market.
Before you go off on thinking I’m against human LEO commercial services, understand, I think it would be a great thing if they had a sound business model. Musk begging for money from congress does NOT lend confidence to his business model. I can assure you that observation will not be lost on Nelson and the other members of house and senate (and I’ll be doing my part to remind them) who aren’t sold on the viability of this market or product. They are going to wonder why he comes begging for cash if his prospects are so good.
This is so obvious that I wonder what must be on his mind. He’s going to have to compete with the Russians. I wonder if he’s worried about recouping development work (if truly privatized) in his unit cost when the Russians covered their development long ago. There’s almost a comical irony in that thought. We’ve got folks dreaming of amazing innovation springing from commercial human spaceflight when the only successful commercial model seems to depend on mature and well known technologies. I’m guessing that a commercial option will settle on a design and stick with it. Musk apparently agrees if he’s already looking to defray his development cost before he even has his first man rated capsule and booster.
Re: SpaceX Updates
I sent a email. Takes a couple minutes tops if you write a long a$$ letter like i did.
mj1":1rfett03 said:
I sent a email. Takes a couple minutes tops if you write a long a$$ letter like i did.
rcsplinters":65vja26r said:
In reality the US has two options in order to maintain our domestic capability to reach LEO. We can give these commercial launch companies a subsidy to modify their existing rockets for human rated launches, or we can charge NASA and their contractors with building a total new rocket to do the job.
For the commercial side I would say there are two good possibilities. There is the CS-100 by Boeing and there is the Dragon by SpaceX. I know the SpaceX is asking for $300 million to develop the manned Dragon/Falcon 9. I am not sure about what CS-100 is asking for, but I think I heard somewhere it was under a billion. Once the rockets have been developed both companies claim they will be able to deliver to the ISS for prices comparable to the Russian Soyuz. Both companies say they can be ready in 3 years.
The alternative is the Ares I. The Ares I is a completely new and innovative rockets design. Many rockets have used solid fuel as an extender, but Ares I is the only rocket ever designed from my knowledge to use solid fuel exclusively. Ares I was projected to cost $24 billion in 2006 to cost $40 billion in 2009 of which we have already spent $9 billion. The rocket was suppose to be ready by 2014, but is significantly behind schedule and is now estimated to be ready in 2017-19. After that the Augustine Commission believes it will have a incremental launch rate of $1 billion.
There times when the government makes such a bad business decision that it is clear that it is political. The anti-commercial pundits have make this decision into a choice between the two options based on the current economic position of the government when it is not. The asking price for the Ares I rocket is over 40 times the asking price for developing both of the commercial rockets. That puts it into a new class of spending all together. Congress saying that it has money for one or the other, but not both is like saying that you have the money to buy large #1 at burger king or a 22" LED- HDTV at Best Buy. Congress could easily fund the commercial option to the fullest.
It is very clear the intention of many in congress is to kill the Commercial option completely. It makes sense because many congressmen and companies have a great deal to lose. If the commercial companies are able to do what they say they can, and there is little reason to believe they cannot than the $40 billion dollars NASA and the taxpayers save will be a loss to them. There are many companies working off of huge cost-plus contracts, which equates to pure profit and zero risk.
Ultimately what is at stake here is NASA's real purpose. Will NASA be building the rockets and spacecraft needed for going to the Moon and Mars or will NASA simply be building needlessly expensive rockets to LEO.
On the other side you have the Ares I. The
rcsplinters":2tve6wb2 said:
Oh please. He has the product, it just doesn't have enough launches yet to be man-rated, but it will be. Musk invested over $100 million of his own money in the endeavor in 2006, he bore the risk, not the American public. Ironically that was same year that Constellation was started. Here we are four years later, he has two rockets in orbit, Constellation doesn't have crap and is cancelled. You're sweating over the "risk" of not getting Falcon 9 man-rated when we already pissed away 8 BILLION DOLLARS on a space project that was completely unfeasible? Musk has already born most of the risk. Taking an already successful Falcon 9 and getting it man-rated is only going to be a matter of time and money. It was designed to carry people from the start. So I object to your premise that he is asking the American public to take on risk. If he had asked the federal government for money in 2006, that would have been risky. Today, after a Falcon 9 has been proven to be flight worthy? Hardly comparable.
tanstaafl76":ocozzaqh said:
I’m afraid I’ll have to keep my point of view anchored somewhat closer to reality. In truth, he doesn’t have the product. He has a plan to build a product. He has no escape system. He has no life support. I shudder to think how many lines of code (yup, that’s a big issue) will need to be written. All of these are grossly expensive things to develop and implement. You can object all you like, but he’s asking for help. If he was a close as you say (which he is not), then he wouldn’t need the money. Yes, he is asking the American public to take his risk. I say NO!
Another small point. Dragon/Falcon may succeed in replicating Gemini or a bit more. Ares or SD-HLV or Direct will take us to the Moon and beyond. You’d have to be pretty naïve to think that development of those two systems would cost the same.
I know that the lure of new markets and commercialization can be enticing. You have to remember, the vast majority of such ventures fail and many fail late in the game. I’ve personally seen this happen all too often. If Musk succeeds, then good for him and us. However, he needs to recover his investment in unit cost, NOT pass it off through public funding. However, I would agree on one point. If he made every piece of equipment, the capsule, technology, everything available to the entire industry, I’d be ok with that. After all, it would be created with the public’s money. That’s what NASA would do.
Lockheed, Boeing and ATK want dozens of billions to build a product that doesn't exist and has no market. Let them put up their corporate funds to fully finance a flying and tested Orion, Ares I and Ares V, and then try to sell them to the government (or anyone else) at a profit.
We need a NASA that remembers its original mission, that acts as a partner to commercial industry and can help the US regain a share of the commercial market that was squandered under Bush and help our aviation and aerospace industry regain world leadership with customers other than the US government. We need people like Musk and Rutan. We don't need a NASA that will drain billions of our tax dollars without producing anything of practical value.
We need a NASA that remembers its original mission, that acts as a partner to commercial industry and can help the US regain a share of the commercial market that was squandered under Bush and help our aviation and aerospace industry regain world leadership with customers other than the US government. We need people like Musk and Rutan. We don't need a NASA that will drain billions of our tax dollars without producing anything of practical value.
You good sir are ill informed. Spacex has already began the development of the dragon capsule, including life support. They had to have life support even when COTS was supplies and not crew. And the pica heat shield is durable enough to withstand return trajectory from luna or mars.
Anyway this is bigger than Spacex, and NASA has already demonstrated they will pull their funding. IIRC Rocketplane was the name of the company that won the other COTS contract then their funding was pulled because they failed to meet their deadlines.
If you got your objections to the politics of it, start your own thread in the politics section.
rcsplinters":2cewndpd said:
There may be another reason for the "poor little rich boy's" call to arms: competition (or lack there of). If Congress gets Orion and Ares 1 flying, then he can't sell his Dragon capsule to them. Congress, to justify the billions spent on Ares and Orion, won't allow NASA to even consider another alternative.
Crossover_Maniac":2jpssbuc said:
Thats it i give up.
Lets imagine something.
Ares I will be ready by 2016-probably wont happen. Its launch will cost 1 billion dollars per go.
SpaceX will have dragon ready by 2016- if given the nessesary funding, which wont be 8 billion dollars like it will with Ares. It will cost around 25 to 50 million per launch.
Now which is wiser cost wise?
Lets not even go into the needs of maintance and ground prep.
To me it appears many hear are just grasping at mist.
Re: SpaceX Updates
I do not quite understand. I thought that we already had a contract with the Russians for at least the next two years or so. Then why spend ANY more money on that effort, especially if spacex can make Dragon compatible not only with its own Heavy design, but even more importantly (as they are already launching) with the Delta IV and the Atlas V Heavies.
With the Constellation funding now essentially dead, I see absolutely no reason why this could not be done within two years with such funding.
So just why would Congress even consider spending five times as much on Russian flights beyond that time frame?
?????????????????????????? :? :? :? :? :?
I do not quite understand. I thought that we already had a contract with the Russians for at least the next two years or so. Then why spend ANY more money on that effort, especially if spacex can make Dragon compatible not only with its own Heavy design, but even more importantly (as they are already launching) with the Delta IV and the Atlas V Heavies.
With the Constellation funding now essentially dead, I see absolutely no reason why this could not be done within two years with such funding.
So just why would Congress even consider spending five times as much on Russian flights beyond that time frame?
?????????????????????????? :? :? :? :? :?
Valcan":2lfq1yjo said:
"But, but unemployment will go up for a short period of time in my state.....".
I agree completely.
Unfortunately its the same aul story with politans medelling in affairs which dont concern them, and thus putting their own selfish requirements above the greater good (space exploration)
This message is for rcsplinters.
Lets get one thing straight. Elon Musk is a space enthusiast. Whether or not he had ever started SpaceX he would still be rallying as much as he could to oppose this House Bill and support the Senate Bill. Sure, if the Senate Bill does pass and SpaceX does get seed money to human rate their dragon capsule, that's a great bonus and will significantly increase the speed of developement. But even if the bill doesn't pass the Dragon capsule will eventually be man rated to service the half dozen modules sitting in Bigelow's wherehouse waiting to be launched.
SpaceX getting seed money isn't the issue or even Musk's main motivation for this political call to arms.
The real motivation is to stop the drain on our economy that is cost-plus contracts. Constellation and continued Russian purchases will get us nowhere until NASA and Roscosmos merge into one space agency, and we all know thats not gonna happen in our lifetime's. With the Senate Bill we head towards the direction of accomplishing attainable goals and will lay the foundation for the privatization of space and the spread of humanity into the solar system. Those are Musk's true goals. Yes, he wants to make a profit just like every human, but he is a man possessed with and obsessed with the dream of space. And although asking for the full 300 Million developement cost would be the same evil that Boeing, Lockheed, and ATK are, it is a substantially lesser evil just by pure numbers, SpaceX wants 300 Million, ULA wants 40 BILLION to deliver Constellation, 40 BILLION!!!
Musk desperately wants the final frontier to open up to us. Stop knocking him for that dream, and stop defending the black hole that is our current space program and this damning house bill.
Lets get one thing straight. Elon Musk is a space enthusiast. Whether or not he had ever started SpaceX he would still be rallying as much as he could to oppose this House Bill and support the Senate Bill. Sure, if the Senate Bill does pass and SpaceX does get seed money to human rate their dragon capsule, that's a great bonus and will significantly increase the speed of developement. But even if the bill doesn't pass the Dragon capsule will eventually be man rated to service the half dozen modules sitting in Bigelow's wherehouse waiting to be launched.
SpaceX getting seed money isn't the issue or even Musk's main motivation for this political call to arms.
The real motivation is to stop the drain on our economy that is cost-plus contracts. Constellation and continued Russian purchases will get us nowhere until NASA and Roscosmos merge into one space agency, and we all know thats not gonna happen in our lifetime's. With the Senate Bill we head towards the direction of accomplishing attainable goals and will lay the foundation for the privatization of space and the spread of humanity into the solar system. Those are Musk's true goals. Yes, he wants to make a profit just like every human, but he is a man possessed with and obsessed with the dream of space. And although asking for the full 300 Million developement cost would be the same evil that Boeing, Lockheed, and ATK are, it is a substantially lesser evil just by pure numbers, SpaceX wants 300 Million, ULA wants 40 BILLION to deliver Constellation, 40 BILLION!!!
Musk desperately wants the final frontier to open up to us. Stop knocking him for that dream, and stop defending the black hole that is our current space program and this damning house bill.
danhezee":324nplf7 said:
Oh, please. Let’s not be dramatic. My discussion has been centered on the SpaceX business model. Frankly, they don’t have a solid one, obviously, or Musk wouldn’t be panhandling the house for money.
If dragon development is as far along as you say, he doesn’t need the money. That said, Dragon is pressurized. That’s a far cry from lifesupport which involves a bit more than maintaining pressure. I’ve looked on the SpaceX site. They make claims only to have plans to introduce lifesupport to Dragon. It is not implemented. Further, they’ll have to write a bunch of code. That is no small expense. The big gap is an escape system. Bottom line is the guy needs cash to pull this off and clearly he thinks the risk is too great for his company to shoulder. If he had a sound business plan, private investors would be lined up waving cash. But they apparently are not. If private investors aren’t taking the risk, why should the American public?
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft finally phones home after 5 months of no contact
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
Watch China launch 3 astronauts to Tiangong space station today
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Hubble telescope celebrates 34th anniversary with an iridescent Dumbbell Nebula (image)
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 1
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram