pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
No bio...
User ID: 278
What would convince you otherwise? You've already rejected lower prices as evidence in favor of a conspiracy theory about price dumping, and rejected the apparent conclusions of NASA and DOD inspectors who get inside access to the books to verify the business health for government awards eligibility.
It's fairly widely accepted that the most difficult and most experimental parts of what SpaceX is hoping to accomplish are the re-entry and landing of the orbital vehicle, so actually demonstrating the ability to complete those tasks (albeit imperfectly) is a big step forward. Also high up on the difficulty scale is a precision landing of the booster, and while we don't know if it landed with the necessary precision, demonstrating the capability to do the soft landing on the booster is also a big step forward.
ETA: Given this is the second flight to put Starship into a suborbital trajectory with orbital velocity, I would recommend @ArjinFerman get his checkbook ready.
- Prev
- Next
I guess I fundamentally disagree with this view because it's anti-aspirational. The aspirational goal is aircraft-like rapid reuse, and yes, that goal has not been achieved. But the actual accomplishment of slightly-less-rapidly reusable boosters good for at least tens of flights is still way more than anyone else has achieved, worthy of great praise, and should not be diminished! I'd much rather over-praise a company that delivers on 25% of its extremely aspirational goals than one that delivers 90% of unambitious goals.
More options
Context Copy link