Lessons Learned: Rockets in the 1980s and 1990s and now

[Danderman]

I started this topic to look at the parallels between the earlier generations of NewSpace companies and today.

About 1997-98, there was peak enthusiasm for NewSpace, with investment funds flowing into new companies, and it looked like we were on our way. There were some obviously unworkable concepts for offer, but also a diverse array of interesting start-up launch firms. Ultimately, they all failed. The dot-com crash killed off most of those who lasted until 2000.

Despite the lack of actual rockets lifting into the sky, there were some useful spin-offs from all of this activity:

AMROC failed to launch, but their hybrid technology lives on with Virgin Galactic.

Beal Aerospace failed to launch, but their former test facility is quite busy.

The industry promoted the passage of the Commercial Space Act of 1998, which reinforced the Launch Services Purchase Act of 1990, which enabled the commercial launch industry. SpaceX was one result.

Plus, a lot of people learned that Space is Hard.

[Robotical]

I've come to the view space exploration/utilization couldn't have happened much faster than it actually has (Apollo was well ahead of its time). Governments were never going to do much more than they have without pressure from a real space industry and such a thing wasn't possible until recently. Even after the 1984 Commercial Space Act, there were few new entrants in the industry. The reality is, the necessary technology and economic base simply didn't exist for a dynamic private space industry until maybe the late 90's. That period is when the first wave of commercial space ventures happened.
Not coincidentally, this happened with the advent of widespread computational and information technology which both greatly reduced the costs of designing a rocket and allowed for the widespread dissemination of information. The other key to this first wave was the dotcom boom, which made a massive amount of investment capital available. Virtually all of the 90's ventures collapsed during the subsequent bust, but the more successful second wave that emerged in the early 2000's was driven by those who were able to ride out the bust and fund their companies using fortunes made during the boom. Of course, these more successful companies also benefitted from the expertise and knowledge left by their predecessors.
So, perhaps the biggest lesson from the 80's and 90's rocket ventures is they came too early, but their ashes fertilized the fruit grown by later ventures.  Sometimes, it's better to be second than first!

[HMXHMX]

I've come to the view space exploration/utilization couldn't have happened much faster than it actually has (Apollo was well ahead of its time). Governments were never going to do much more than they have without pressure from a real space industry and such a thing wasn't possible until recently. Even after the 1984 Commercial Space Act, there were few new entrants in the industry. The reality is, the necessary technology and economic base simply didn't exist for a dynamic private space industry until maybe the late 90's. That period is when the first wave of commercial space ventures happened.
Not coincidentally, this happened with the advent of widespread computational and information technology which both greatly reduced the costs of designing a rocket and allowed for the widespread dissemination of information. The other key to this first wave was the dotcom boom, which made a massive amount of investment capital available. Virtually all of the 90's ventures collapsed during the subsequent bust, but the more successful second wave that emerged in the early 2000's was driven by those who were able to ride out the bust and fund their companies using fortunes made during the boom. Of course, these more successful companies also benefitted from the expertise and knowledge left by their predecessors.
So, perhaps the biggest lesson from the 80's and 90's rocket ventures is they came too early, but their ashes fertilized the fruit grown by later ventures.  Sometimes, it's better to be second than first!

Having been first or close to first, I can agree that it'd have been much better to be ten years later...  But we had the tech in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s,  we just didn't have the money (or the hype/momentum) that is available now.

[Zed_Noir]

....

Having been first or close to first, I can agree that it'd have been much better to be ten years later...  But we had the tech in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s,  we just didn't have the money (or the hype/momentum) that is available now.

Or some nameless eccentric Billionaire who wants to retired to Arcadia Planitia or Hellas Basin. 

[Robotical]

I've come to the view space exploration/utilization couldn't have happened much faster than it actually has (Apollo was well ahead of its time). Governments were never going to do much more than they have without pressure from a real space industry and such a thing wasn't possible until recently. Even after the 1984 Commercial Space Act, there were few new entrants in the industry. The reality is, the necessary technology and economic base simply didn't exist for a dynamic private space industry until maybe the late 90's. That period is when the first wave of commercial space ventures happened.
Not coincidentally, this happened with the advent of widespread computational and information technology which both greatly reduced the costs of designing a rocket and allowed for the widespread dissemination of information. The other key to this first wave was the dotcom boom, which made a massive amount of investment capital available. Virtually all of the 90's ventures collapsed during the subsequent bust, but the more successful second wave that emerged in the early 2000's was driven by those who were able to ride out the bust and fund their companies using fortunes made during the boom. Of course, these more successful companies also benefitted from the expertise and knowledge left by their predecessors.
So, perhaps the biggest lesson from the 80's and 90's rocket ventures is they came too early, but their ashes fertilized the fruit grown by later ventures.  Sometimes, it's better to be second than first!

Having been first or close to first, I can agree that it'd have been much better to be ten years later...  But we had the tech in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s,  we just didn't have the money (or the hype/momentum) that is available now.

Ah, but did you have the technology to cheaply and quickly do detailed designs and test them before cutting metal? How about the ability to readily share such designs, iterate on them and communicate lessons learned? What about cheap sensors, high bandwidth communications or data processing allowing for rapidly pinpointing what led to a failure during testing (or operation)? The technical solutions might have been possible in those decades, but good luck economically finding and implementing them!
On the other side of the coin, there are far more economic resources available now because the overall economic base is much bigger (US GDP is double what it was in 2000)!

[HMXHMX]

I've come to the view space exploration/utilization couldn't have happened much faster than it actually has (Apollo was well ahead of its time). Governments were never going to do much more than they have without pressure from a real space industry and such a thing wasn't possible until recently. Even after the 1984 Commercial Space Act, there were few new entrants in the industry. The reality is, the necessary technology and economic base simply didn't exist for a dynamic private space industry until maybe the late 90's. That period is when the first wave of commercial space ventures happened.
Not coincidentally, this happened with the advent of widespread computational and information technology which both greatly reduced the costs of designing a rocket and allowed for the widespread dissemination of information. The other key to this first wave was the dotcom boom, which made a massive amount of investment capital available. Virtually all of the 90's ventures collapsed during the subsequent bust, but the more successful second wave that emerged in the early 2000's was driven by those who were able to ride out the bust and fund their companies using fortunes made during the boom. Of course, these more successful companies also benefitted from the expertise and knowledge left by their predecessors.
So, perhaps the biggest lesson from the 80's and 90's rocket ventures is they came too early, but their ashes fertilized the fruit grown by later ventures.  Sometimes, it's better to be second than first!

Having been first or close to first, I can agree that it'd have been much better to be ten years later...  But we had the tech in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s,  we just didn't have the money (or the hype/momentum) that is available now.

Ah, but did you have the technology to cheaply and quickly do detailed designs and test them before cutting metal? How about the ability to readily share such designs, iterate on them and communicate lessons learned? What about cheap sensors, high bandwidth communications or data processing allowing for rapidly pinpointing what led to a failure during testing (or operation)? The technical solutions might have been possible in those decades, but good luck economically finding and implementing them!
On the other side of the coin, there are far more economic resources available now because the overall economic base is much bigger (US GDP is double what it was in 2000)!

Well, it is true we had to make our own ink and cut quills for pens, and it was a nuisance herding sheep to have the raw material for vellum…

But yeah, we did OK.  Even with fax machines and desk phones. 🤗