Bah. I meant to write "too much potential money". Blue Origin, had they been more successful, could have had a lot more money form Bezos. I think this was part of the selling line: "If you do well, you don't have to worry about getting revenue".
Ariane, Rocosmos, the Chinese - they will get funding solely on grounds of national interest. But if they can't compete commercially, they'll just become more expensive due to low flight volume.
Yu Menglun, a rocket scientist and academician at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, told Beijing News that China's Long March rockets are able to maintain a fixed region for the dropping of wreckage."Normally we select the scarcely populated areas. The scope of the region is in general 50 to 70 kilometers long and 30 km wide," he said.Meanwhile, the country is also researching the possibility of recoverable rockets, he said."They're like airplanes that could deliver space shuttles into orbit and then come back. There is no wreckage in the process and thus could provide a solution to the problem," he added.
Quote from: meekGee on 12/12/2013 05:11 amBah. I meant to write "too much potential money". Blue Origin, had they been more successful, could have had a lot more money form Bezos. I think this was part of the selling line: "If you do well, you don't have to worry about getting revenue".Yes, that's exactly the kind of thinking that I'm saying is a total myth.If Bezos was serious enough to spend serious money he'd be spending serious money. He's not, therefore he isn't.
I don't think so. He put in enough to hire a top notch team and give them funds for development. He'd be unwise to pour in more (i.e. for operations) before he sees how its going. BUT - if they had gotten the vehicle built, they'd have had a much stronger financial foundation than SpaceX did before COTS came up.Partly as a result of this difference, SpaceX went through trial by fire, through F1 and M1C. This is when the company was forged. It proved very beneficial for F9 and onwards.
Quote from: meekGee on 12/12/2013 04:27 amAriane, Rocosmos, the Chinese - they will get funding solely on grounds of national interest. But if they can't compete commercially, they'll just become more expensive due to low flight volume.Ariane has long been working on upping their launch rate, between three different operational vehicles out of Guiana now. They are aiming for 2-3 weeks between launches. They have no lack of payloads for immediate future, and quite a bit of room to streamline their operations further ( IIRC they are still bringing in about 250 russian specialists for every Soyuz launch )
Quote from: meekGee on 12/12/2013 05:35 amI don't think so. He put in enough to hire a top notch team and give them funds for development. He'd be unwise to pour in more (i.e. for operations) before he sees how its going. BUT - if they had gotten the vehicle built, they'd have had a much stronger financial foundation than SpaceX did before COTS came up.Partly as a result of this difference, SpaceX went through trial by fire, through F1 and M1C. This is when the company was forged. It proved very beneficial for F9 and onwards.Basically what you're saying here is that Elon was "unwise" to commit himself fully to his startup where Bezos was wise to starve his startup and waste 10 years.That makes perfect sense
I'm not reading it that way. I'm reading it that Musk was not less wise, just more committed. And took risks that paid off.Bezos can afford not to take those risks.
EDIT - and of course, I don't know how much money Bezos put in BO. I only estimate it's similar to what Elon and Friends put into SpaceX for F1 development.
Quote from: meekGee on 12/12/2013 05:50 amEDIT - and of course, I don't know how much money Bezos put in BO. I only estimate it's similar to what Elon and Friends put into SpaceX for F1 development.Wasn't it like 35 Million Dollar a year?
Quote from: guckyfan on 12/12/2013 05:57 amWasn't it like 35 Million Dollar a year?No. More like 5 million a year. Less in the start.
Wasn't it like 35 Million Dollar a year?
Quote from: guckyfan on 12/12/2013 05:57 amQuote from: meekGee on 12/12/2013 05:50 amEDIT - and of course, I don't know how much money Bezos put in BO. I only estimate it's similar to what Elon and Friends put into SpaceX for F1 development.Wasn't it like 35 Million Dollar a year?No. More like 5 million a year. Less in the start.
So about 50-60M to date? (It that published or rumored?)
Musk thought that it would take $50 million to get his first trip to Mars. He was $200 million in and had "spent all of his money between that and Tesla and he went into personal debt" by 2008
Quote from: yg1968 on 12/12/2013 12:04 amBlue Origin is already planning a reusable orbital first stage. They are suppose to start orbital flights in 2018.You'd think there's be a "second mover advantage", but look at the field.Blue Origin, founded 3 years before SpaceX, is an example of how too much money and not enough Darwinian pressure results in lack of focus. Or maybe just lack of a fully-committed visionary and engineer at the head of the stack. Either way, the most enticing thing about them to date is their secrecy.LMCO and Boeing can build an F9 equivalent, no problem. But it will be expensive, and they need to get started ASAP. Can they get funding? Will they self-fund the development?Ariane, Rocosmos, the Chinese - they will get funding solely on grounds of national interest. But if they can't compete commercially, they'll just become more expensive due to low flight volume.So overall I think it's safe to say though that nobody will catch up with SpaceX in the next 3-5 years. SpaceX's biggest potential enemy is SpaceX.And since Elon hasn't stopped with F9R, the question is - can any of the aforementioned catch up with where SpaceX will be in 5 years?
Blue Origin is already planning a reusable orbital first stage. They are suppose to start orbital flights in 2018.
I think SpaceX won't catch up to where the others are now in the next 3-5 years. I feel like you're a little overconfident in their ability to capture the GTO market so fast. It's going to be at least 2 years before FH even starts commercial operations and F9R can't get most current sats to GTO.
F9R can't get most current sats to GTO.
Quote from: M129K on 12/12/2013 07:19 amF9R can't get most current sats to GTO.Not directly to GTO. But it can get them to LEO. If F9R really can fly very cheaply, it might close the business case for a SEP tug business between LEO and GEO. F9R could launch the SEP tugs and could replenish their propellant supplies, in addition to getting the satellites to LEO.