Jump to content

Neil deGrasse Tyson thinks SpaceX is delusional about going to Mars


fredinno

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, todofwar said:

I'm sure Lockheed or Boeing or some other giant in the industry is starting to look at their business model and how to usurp it anyway, so I actually don't give SpaceX long. But maybe I'm too much of a pessimist, I didn't think Tesla would survive entry of the big auto manufacterers but they're outselling the competition right now. 

And I still don't understand NASA's own funding model. There seems to be this inherent jump in cost when you go public sector, and try as I might I can never find the reason why. Maybe if Congress just gave carte blanche and said do what you want NASA could bring in some consultants and trim away all of the fat and start making real progress. But that is probably never going to happen.

Musk has the power to create interest in start up projects that Boeing cannot do. It takes Boeing 15 years to redesign/modernize a wide body aircraft. Does anyone know who the CEO of boeing is? Seen him on TV, even cares what his aspirations are.

Musk has the power of personality, the public often feeds off delusions (look at the current body politic). His selling point is talking about going to Mars and waving his hands with plans. He can create a cult of personality and I noticed we have a few followers in this group. Boeing, a stodgy old corporation that has bought up most of its competition and its only remaining competition is Airbus [cough, gasp], which is owned by a bunch of European countries who are at the present trying to undermine each others economics, foreign policies and internal defenses (or simply deciding whether to leave the union) and absolutely paralyzed in dealing with the Syrian crisis. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, PB666 said:

Musk has the power to create interest in start up projects that Boeing cannot do. It takes Boeing 15 years to redesign/modernize a wide body aircraft. Does anyone know who the CEO of boeing is? Seen him on TV, even cares what his aspirations are.

Boeing is a publically traded multinational corporation. Like most big companies, they only move after they have everything covered economically and legally. Why does it take Boeing so long to design an airliner? Probably because they get it right the first time. They have everything modelled and tested, suppliers selected, parts certified, logistics planned, factories laid out years before the first prototype rolls out. You don't see them crashing 2 or 3 planes during test campaigns, using off the shelf parts that aren't aerospace certified, nor do they start building them without enough preorders to make a profit.

One could argue that Boeing has the power to start up projects that SpaceX cannot do either.

 

Edited by Nibb31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Neil deGrasse Tyson would work for private company he would say that only private sector can reach Mars and push space exploration... but he does work for government, so he is saying what lets him keep his job.

(btw I like his Cosmos series as well as original Carl Sagan version)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Darnok said:

If Neil deGrasse Tyson would work for private company he would say that only private sector can reach Mars and push space exploration... but he does work for government, so he is saying what lets him keep his job.

(btw I like his Cosmos series as well as original Carl Sagan version)

I think it's stupid to oppose the private sector and the government.

The government runs a space program with a set of requirements. The public sector makes stuff to those requirements for the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

I think it's stupid to oppose the private sector and the government.

The government runs a space program with a set of requirements. The public sector makes stuff to those requirements for the government.

And main problem is this set of requirements? Because NASA, after Moon missions were over, had shifted into same approach to space exploration as any government "section" has for its job... "we do this, for as long as we can, so we keep our jobs as long as its possible", while private companies are more likely to take larger risk to became top 1 and often fire unnecessary people, to cut costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Private companies take risks, but only if there is some kind of reward. There is no return on investment in exploring the Moon, Mars, or anything else. There is no immediate return on investment in Hubble, Curiosity, or the ISS. None of that would exist if it wasn't for government money. SpaceX, Boeing, or Lockheed wouldn't exist without NASA or the DoD.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Private companies take risks, but only if there is some kind of reward. There is no return on investment in exploring the Moon, Mars, or anything else. There is no immediate return on investment in Hubble, Curiosity, or the ISS.

IF that is true then government wasted those money and people responsible for this should be brought to justice.

 

25 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

None of that would exist if it wasn't for government money. SpaceX, Boeing, or Lockheed wouldn't exist without NASA or the DoD.

Boeing and Lockheed would exist without NASA, making planes and military equipment.
SpaceX would exist if, like you said, there would be reward from space exploration.

Musk wouldn't start his company just to build rocket and few capsules to resupply ISS, which is going to end in 2020(?). He knows something we don't and he is making first steps to be ahead of competition possibly in new branches of industry and transportation, that are going to be created very soon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Darnok said:

And main problem is this set of requirements? Because NASA, after Moon missions were over, had shifted into same approach to space exploration as any government "section" has for its job... "we do this, for as long as we can, so we keep our jobs as long as its possible", while private companies are more likely to take larger risk to became top 1 and often fire unnecessary people, to cut costs.

No, NASA never shifted at all. It was ALWAYS a porkbarrel spending program. Always. It was just the king of pork during the Space Race.

Just now, Darnok said:

IF that is true then government wasted those money and people responsible for this should be brought to justice.

No money was wasted, the purpose of NASA was not space exploration when founded, it was a tool of the Cold War, and a technology jobs program. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, tater said:

No, NASA never shifted at all. It was ALWAYS a porkbarrel spending program. Always. It was just the king of pork during the Space Race.

No money was wasted, the purpose of NASA was not space exploration when founded, it was a tool of the Cold War, and a technology jobs program. 

There was little shift, because Moon landing was risky and could end up with huuuge disaster, while ISS is just a great and safe job.

And it should be closed after Cold War was over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

There was little shift, because Moon landing was risky and could end up with huuuge disaster, while ISS is just a great and safe job.

And it should be closed after Cold War was over.

the ISS required shuttle launches, and the shuttle resulted in two major disasters, whereas no one died in a moon mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Darnok said:

IF that is true then government wasted those money and people responsible for this should be brought to justice.

 

Is there a law that prohibits the government from wasting money ? Incidentally,in the US, the Congress makes the law, and also votes NASA's budget. I don't see them voting a law that makes their own decisions illegal.

40 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Boeing and Lockheed would exist without NASA, making planes and military equipment.

They wouldn't exist without government contracts, or they would just be making commercial airliners (which would be much less competittive without the subsidies from the military branches). There would be zero space industry without DoD and NASA money.

40 minutes ago, Darnok said:

SpaceX would exist if, like you said, there would be reward from space exploration.

But there isn't.

The reality is that without NASA and DoD, wouldn't have developed Falcon 1, Falcon 9, or Dragon, and they would have had to develop a whole new engine from scratch. In fact, without the jump-start from government money and R&D, the whole SpaceX venture simply wouldn't have been possible.

40 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Musk wouldn't start his company just to build rocket and few capsules to resupply ISS, which is going to end in 2020(?). He knows something we don't and he is making first steps to be ahead of competition possibly in new branches of industry and transportation, that are going to be created very soon.

He knows something we don't? So where does he get that from? He has psychic powers? Alien informants? A time machine?

You're just being silly here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Darnok said:

There was little shift, because Moon landing was risky and could end up with huuuge disaster, while ISS is just a great and safe job.

And it should be closed after Cold War was over.

Nope.

ISS was a jobs program---for Russian space people (and NASA, obviously). The whole point of ISS was to occupy people in the former Soviet Union who had the skills to help "Bad People" make ballistic missiles (so they'd work on cool space exploration, instead), and to use the only tool in the NASA toolbox that they were forced to buy---the Space Shuttle---to keep up a decent launch cadence.

NASA continues to have utility as long as we (the taxpayers) think it does. It uses little money, and has some positive returns (plus it's a jobs program, we spend more for far less interesting work in other areas).

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can one of the pro - SpaceX shows plans or papers about something needed for a Mars mission? Like an isru model, some way to mitigate the radiation, some study of growing vegetables in close environments like a Martian habitat? whatever that isn't a capsule or a rocket and you need for anything below low orbit.

Even a linkedin profile with some project about this in their description (you can learn almost everything companies are working in, looking at their employers linkedin and facebook, and trust me this is done, this is not industrial espionage, is technological surveillance, the first is illegal and the second a euphemism :P )

 

I could link papers and even the research centres that are working in that type of aspects. Even mars one has a somewhat detailed plan.

 

Because I'm tired of fanboyism, I want proof of something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Is there a law that prohibits the government from wasting money ?

That is very disturbing or at least should be.

9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

They wouldn't exist without government contracts, or they would just be making commercial airliners (which would be much less competittive without the subsidies from the military branches).

 So they would exist just earn less money.

9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

There would be zero space industry without DoD and NASA money.

What? You said there would be space exploration made in private sector when this exploration would gave chance for reward and now you denying it.

9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:
Quote

SpaceX would exist if, like you said, there would be reward from space exploration.

But there isn't.

The reality is that without NASA and DoD, wouldn't have developed Falcon 1, Falcon 9, or Dragon, and they would have had to develop a whole new engine from scratch. In fact, without the jump-start from government money and R&D, the whole SpaceX venture simply wouldn't have been possible.

 Then maybe its not the time for space exploration? Why we are forcing our selves (and our economy) into something that we do not need right now?
Europe started to looking better sea connections to India when it was profitable, not before that, maybe we should do same thing with space exploration?
 

9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

 

Quote

Musk wouldn't start his company just to build rocket and few capsules to resupply ISS, which is going to end in 2020(?). He knows something we don't and he is making first steps to be ahead of competition possibly in new branches of industry and transportation, that are going to be created very soon.

He knows something we don't? So where does he get that from? He has psychic powers? Alien informants? A time machine?

You're just being silly here.

Professional market, industry, geopolitical data and analysis for nearest future.

 

19 minutes ago, tater said:

Nope.

ISS was a jobs program---for Russian space people. The whole point of ISS was: to occupy people in the former Soviet Union who had the skills to help "Bad People" make ballistic missiles (so they'd work on cool space exploration, instead), and to use the only tool in the NASA toolbox that they were forced to buy, the Space Shuttle to keep up a decent launch cadence.

NASA continues to have utility as long as we (the taxpayers) think it does. It uses little money, and has some positive returns (plus it's a jobs program, we spend more for far less interesting work in other areas).

Ok, this is interesting. I wasn't aware of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Darnok said:

And main problem is this set of requirements? Because NASA, after Moon missions were over, had shifted into same approach to space exploration as any government "section" has for its job... "we do this, for as long as we can, so we keep our jobs as long as its possible", while private companies are more likely to take larger risk to became top 1 and often fire unnecessary people, to cut costs.

Lets talk about the equipiment bay, litium ion batteries and Ethiopian and Japan Airlines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 So they would exist just earn less money.

They would not be operating in the space industry because there would be no space industry without NASA and DoD.

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

What? You said there would be space exploration made in private sector when this exploration would gave chance for reward and now you denying it.

No. Let me make this clear. The private sector would only invest in space exploration if there was a potential for a return on that investment. Currently the only possible reward for developing space technology is to sell that technology to NASA or the DoD. Without government money, there would be no possible return on investment for the space industry.

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Professional market, industry, geopolitical data and analysis for nearest future.

None of that is secret. There are hundreds of experts and analysts and consultancy agencies whose job is to look at the professional market, the industry, geopolitical data and to provide insights for all sorts of decision-makers. These people produce reports and trade studies for the space industry or publish papers in professional journals. Trust me, there is nothing that Musk knows that the rest of the industry doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PB666 said:

Lets talk about the equipiment bay, litium ion batteries and Ethiopian and Japan Airlines. 

I do not know Japanese nor Amharanese (or whatever it is called).

 

2 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

They would not be operating in the space industry because there would be no space industry without NASA and DoD.

No. Let me make this clear. The private sector would only invest in space exploration if there was a potential for a return on that investment. Currently the only possible reward for developing space technology is to sell that technology to NASA or the DoD. Without government money, there would be no possible return on investment for the space industry.

There would be if we would need resources from Moon or asteroids.

2 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

 

None of that is secret. There are hundreds of experts and analysts and consultancy agencies whose job is to look at the professional market, the industry, geopolitical data and to provide insights for all sorts of decision-makers. These people produce reports and trade studies for the space industry or publish papers in professional journals. Trust me, there is nothing that Musk knows that the rest of the industry doesn't.

If you have enough money you can buy reports and analysis only for you ;) And those experts are signing papers that they won't make similar analysis for next year or two for anyone else. It is just like "non-competition clause" for common employees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Darnok said:

There would be if we would need resources from Moon or asteroids.

But we don't. So they wouldn't.

And even if we did, we wouldn't have any idea about the composition of the Moon or the asteroids if governments didn't fund space science.

This discussion is going nowhere.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

But we don't. So they wouldn't.

And even if we did, we wouldn't have any idea about the composition of the Moon or the asteroids if governments didn't fund space science.

This discussion is going nowhere.

 

We wouldn't even knew that both Americas exists, yet someone went there, because he needed to find something :)

If we would need resources from "space" then some company would start first space program and would gather those data.

Edited by Darnok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Darnok said:

That is very disturbing or at least should be.

 So they would exist just earn less money.

What? You said there would be space exploration made in private sector when this exploration would gave chance for reward and now you denying it.

 Then maybe its not the time for space exploration? Why we are forcing our selves (and our economy) into something that we do not need right now?
Europe started to looking better sea connections to India when it was profitable, not before that, maybe we should do same thing with space exploration?
 

Professional market, industry, geopolitical data and analysis for nearest future.

 

Ok, this is interesting. I wasn't aware of that.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet, particularly things written by NASA bashers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's one revenue source I don't think we've considered in any of these threads thus far: memorabilia auctions. This rover went to Mars---and it's still there! Do I hear ten thousand dollars? Twenty? Twenty thousand dollars from the man with the plastic Vulcan ears covering his real ears, do I hear thirty? ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/space/31moon.html

Quote

In an auction at Sotheby’s, Lavochkin Scientific Production Association, the manufacturer, offered the title to Lunokhod 2 and Luna 21, the lander that carried the rover to the surface.

Mr. Garriott bought them with his winning bid. All he received initially was a $68,500 credit card receipt. With some prodding, he subsequently obtained a certificate of title to Lunokhod 2.

29513693.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Darnok said:

T Then maybe its not the time for space exploration? Why we are forcing our selves (and our economy) into something that we do not need right now?
Europe started to looking better sea connections to India when it was profitable, not before that, maybe we should do same thing with space exploration?

_Your_ economy? I'm curious, do you pay US Federal taxes?

43 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

TNo. Let me make this clear. The private sector would only invest in space exploration if there was a potential for a return on that investment. Currently the only possible reward for developing space technology is to sell that technology to NASA or the DoD. Without government money, there would be no possible return on investment for the space industry.

The first sentence is 100% correct, the second two are flatly wrong. There is one market (and only one, lol)  with a return on investment, communications satellites. Those would certainly have been developed at some point even without the government, IMO. It might have taken longer, but it would have happened, just like the 100% private data link between the Chicago markets and Wall Street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Darnok said:

We wouldn't even knew that both Americas exists, yet someone went there, because he needed to find something :)

If we would need resources from "space" then some company would start first space program and would gather those data.

How would we know that we needed resources from space if there was no space program in the first place? Who would invest billions of dollars to start a private space program out of the blue without a proper business model?

There isn't any need for resources from space, so you're just arguing for science fiction. You're not making any sense. 

Edited by Nibb31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

But we don't. So they wouldn't.

And even if we did, we wouldn't have any idea about the composition of the Moon or the asteroids if governments didn't fund space science.

This discussion is going nowhere.

 

Just FYI it can be difficult to convince darnok to change his mind,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tater said:

There is one market (and only one, lol)  with a return on investment, communications satellites. Those would certainly have been developed at some point even without the government, IMO.

That market wouldn't exist if there hadn't been a government-funded launch industry. Sure it might have happened one day, but it wouldn't be very competitive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...