https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/breitbart-other-conservative-outlets-escalate-anti-spacex-campaign/
Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 11/01/2017 06:53 pmhttps://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/breitbart-other-conservative-outlets-escalate-anti-spacex-campaign/This is a really good article that goes into lots of details... I would recommend people actually read it, all of it, not just the headline or the lede.
I’ve read it and yes it isn’t a bad article but loses a lot of points for the awful clickbait headline.
Quote from: QuantumG on 11/01/2017 09:59 pmQuote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 11/01/2017 06:53 pmhttps://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/breitbart-other-conservative-outlets-escalate-anti-spacex-campaign/This is a really good article that goes into lots of details... I would recommend people actually read it, all of it, not just the headline or the lede.I’ve read it and yes it isn’t a bad article but loses a lot of points for the awful clickbait headline.
I do find it humorous that sites that publish these Anti-SpaceX articles are finding the articles torn apart in the Comments section by their own readers.
Quote from: QuantumG on 11/01/2017 09:59 pmQuote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 11/01/2017 06:53 pmhttps://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/breitbart-other-conservative-outlets-escalate-anti-spacex-campaign/This is a really good article that goes into lots of details... I would recommend people actually read it, all of it, not just the headline or the lede.I find it very interesting especially the part that McCain had nothing to do with Section 1615. I do find it humorous that sites that publish these Anti-SpaceX articles are finding the articles torn apart in the Comments section by their own readers.
Regardless of politics, this article still confuses me:1) If section 1615 still allows funding of the development of new rocket engines, why is Blue Origin grouped with the losers? Their engine is still under development as well...
Quote from: high road on 11/02/2017 05:31 amRegardless of politics, this article still confuses me:1) If section 1615 still allows funding of the development of new rocket engines, why is Blue Origin grouped with the losers? Their engine is still under development as well...Because their engine isn't a slot-in replacement for the RD-180 where's Aerojet claims theirs is... explained in the article.
Rogers doesn't believe ULA needs a new rocket, just a new engine, and Aerojet is backing him up on it. ULA says they're doomed without a new rocket, and they want the government to pay for it.
Quote from: QuantumG on 11/02/2017 05:54 amRogers doesn't believe ULA needs a new rocket, just a new engine, and Aerojet is backing him up on it. ULA says they're doomed without a new rocket, and they want the government to pay for it.In this instance I actually agree with ULA. Long term it makes more sense to have one launch vehicle family, that could be made partially reusable, with commonality than to have two with very little commonality that can't really be changed any further. I actually would not have any problem with Vulcan being subsidized. It is still a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the ridiculous amount of money wasted on CXP and now SLS.