Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Is there any well-established rule of 'controversial topic of mild significance (because there are legitimate arguments on both sides) gets far more attention than uncontroversial disaster of much greater significance which is somehow considered a faux pas to talk about'. I guess it might just be a simple extension of the power media has to determine the discourse. Constant dysfunction is boring vs exciting rocket explosions and dynamic personalities like Musk or Trump.
There is for example a well-established discourse here and elsewhere about whether or not Starship is overhyped, about Elon Musk being too optimistic in his projections. Elsewhere there's a perception that Musk is a scammer who just takes credit for work that his engineers do and somehow bewitches investors into giving him all this money. I'm fairly sympathetic to Musk, building a whole new class of super heavy rocket is difficult, doing things for the first time is difficult, especially in space. Starship is mostly funded by SpaceX too, so it's not like its a big deal if there are delays.
But the non-Musk US spaceflight program seems to be non-controversially a dumpster fire, a complete clownshow, a world-historical money-shredding operation, grifter central. Orion alone (just the capsule) took 19 years and $30 billion. The rocket it's supposed to go with can't actually reach the Moon, it's not technically possible because Orion is too heavy. They unironically proposed building a space station near the moon to make up for this, make the moon mission even more complicated and expensive.
https://idlewords.com/2024/5/the_lunacy_of_artemis.htm
https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2025/10/31/nasas-orion-space-capsule-is-flaming-garbage/
Lockheed had the temerity to charge 2.5 billion for the luxury of adding docking capabilities to their capsule! All the money for this garbage comes from the US public.
NASA and the established spaceflight players like Lockheed or Boeing should be ruthlessly purged IMO, how can you get away with stealing all this money? Find the decisionmakers and bankrupt them, jail them, teach them a lesson. Take a lesson from China's purges, you can't just have important national capabilities turned into slush funds for lazy cabals of contractors and bureaucrats. Only during the Boeing Starliner fiasco where astronauts were left stranded was there much public attention given to the dire state of procurement and even then people mostly seemed to go 'Boeing is a shit company' rather than look at things more broadly.
Losing the Space Race Boogaloo to China seems like a fairly big deal.
Not a very good argument in terms of "non-Musk space companies being a dumpster fire", as he unironically proposed having a dozen or two of orbital refuellings in order to send a single rocket to the moon, which they don't even know if they can do. Using Starship as a lander doesn't strike me as particularly sane either.
There are definitely people too invested in painting him as a clown, and I will further say they're almost certainly doing so for political reasons, but he's also definitely overhyped.
SpaceX is the only group capable of competing with China in space though? If it weren't for them, China would be ahead in orbital launch and cost-efficiency... If anyone's to blame for losing the Space Race it should be Lockheed and NASA who've blundered billions and billions on rockets that don't work properly. If SpaceX had been given that money they probably would've done a much better job with it.
Most of his launches are in-house for Starlink, and it's not clear Starlink's model is sustainable. His competition is slowly catching up to him, and much like with Tesla, his ideas to stay ahead are not panning out, to put it mildly. I'm pretty sure the trajectory of the two companies will be the same.
Also, you're shifting the goalposts. Your original argument was that it's not a big deal that Starship is delayed, and I gave an argument for why it is. Looping back to "but look at all the cool things that they did with Falcon" is irrelevant. This is the typical cycle of the conversations about Elon: use hype about the future to claim he's amazing, then claim the past should already be enough for you, when someone questions the claims about the future.
I still maintain that it's not a big deal if Starship is delayed, since firstly they're trying something new (reusable superheavy rocket) so there should be allowances for inherent difficulty. Also they're doing it with their own money instead of asking for gazillions from the US govt and then producing something worse than what came out in the 1960s.
I was responding to your point where 'Losing the Space Race Boogaloo to China seems like a fairly big deal.' but I don't see how this could be SpaceX's fault, even if Starship fails, the US is only ahead in space because of SpaceX. My 'goalpost-shifting' is a response to that.
Oh, they're still asking for and getting billions from the US govt; the differences between them (and Blue Origin) vs Boeing or Lockheed are that they're spending way fewer billions (probably over $10B for the whole Starship program R&D before SpaceX is done, but SLS and Orion are over $50B now), a minority of that spending is from the government (SpaceX's two HLS contracts total a bit over $4B, Blue Origin's one a bit under), and the spending disbursement is tied to milestones rather than to "here you go; if stuff's not working come back and ask for more" (though the milestones are way too front-loaded; these are very stringent contracts by NASA R&D standards but they're weak by any non-R&D standard).
SpaceX bidding "Elon time" estimates rather than realistic schedule estimates might have been part of how they beat Blue Origin for the original HLS award, and this delayed Blue Origin's award by a couple years of legal/policy wrangling. If SpaceX's delays are more than a few years' worse than China's, and Blue Origin's are less than a couple years' worse, and there aren't any "Artemis II heat shield failure" or "Axiom discovers a huge flaw in its suits" level problems from others, then China will put astronauts on the moon before we return astronauts to the moon and it'll be in part because of that bid+award. Fingers crossed for Blue Origin, though; the New Glenn was supposed to first launch in 2020 and eventually got pushed back to 2025. Fingers crossed for Artemis II, too; it feels insane to launch humans in a reentry vehicle where we haven't yet done an unmanned test of our planned fixes for its chunks-were-breaking-off-the-heat-shield problem.
I disagree that China beating us here is a big deal, because "put a few men on the moon for the first time at $4B+ a pop marginal" (inflation adjusted) was a bad goal in the first place, and changing the goal to "for the seventh time" doesn't make it any better, whereas "plant ISS-scale skyscrapers on the moon for a fraction of the price" (or even "plant 20 tons a pop on the moon via commercial rocket flights") actually has some interesting long-term possibilities.
On the other hand, even my autist-adjacent heart sees some symbolic value to lapping China in the flags-and-footprints race, because: China has just beaten us in the Barbecue-In-Space Race! I reiterate: taikonauts are now enjoying steaks and bone-in wings fresh out of the oven! At least Sputnik had the decency to limit itself to a culturally-neutral "beep beep beep"; China's is driving a stake of shame into the very heart of America!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link