Comments on: Witnesses for Senate commercial space hearing

By: googaw

googaw — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 01:24:30 +0000

though NASA funding would accelerate this, Iâ€™m sure theyâ€™ll do it eventually.

Ain’t it sweet, faith-based politics.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:33:55 +0000

I donâ€™t see how this blind faith contract is even possible, bar some hard contigencies written in. Of course it's a contingent contract. Who said it wasn't? Nonetheless, it is a contract.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:32:18 +0000

I fear that Muskâ€™s ideology will trump his business sense and Commercial Crew will end up ruining his real commercial business.

What “ideology” is that?

By: googaw

googaw — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:24:46 +0000

Shotwell said in testimony Thursday that they are “about ready to sign another ten or so” Falcon orders, in response to concern that SpaceX is too dependent on NASA and would fail if the CRS contracts had to be canceled. My guess is she is referring to prospects that told her they are waiting for a successful Falcon 9 launch. It was a spontaneous statement not in the written testimony.

SpaceX is substantially underbidding Falcon 9 competitors’ launch prices. This could be for a variety of reasons, not mutually exclusive: among these

(1) Other Falcon 9 orders raise NASA’s confidence with respect to Commercial Crew and thus increase SpaceX’s probability of winning CC, thus making them more money (from the taxpayers) in the long run and thus worth losing money on in the short run.

(2) Genuinely lower costs, which is certainly what we are hoping for.

(3) Even without NASA they have deep enough pockets to sell loss leaders to make up for the risk to customers of signing a Falcon 9 contract at this early date.

I am very happy to see them get more non-NASA business, as they are indeed far too dependent on NASA and will be even moreso if they win Commercial Crew. Even so, I fear that Musk’s ideology will trump his business sense and Commercial Crew will end up ruining his real commercial business. “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.”

By: danwithaplan

danwithaplan — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:24:12 +0000

10 more flights signed on, before even the maiden launch of a rocket? Unlikely. This is real commerce, not HSF. Firms care about their payload investements (since most of them are on loaned money to begin with)

The birds that Comm launchers deliver are very expensive to manufacture and keep station for over a decade, and actually produce real revenue, I don’t see how this blind faith contract is even possible, bar some hard contigencies written in.

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:56:14 +0000

Robert, 10 more flights, referring to Loral I expect.

Poorboy, what are you on about?

By: Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:29:55 +0000

I did not hear the hearings…did GS of SpaceX say that they were about to announce 10 more Falcon 9 customers? (sorry Doctors appointment with wife, flying, and duck birthing area!)

Robert G. Oler

By: Poorboy

Poorboy — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:54:24 +0000

Somebody also seems to be confusing $30 million with $130 million.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:11:59 +0000

ISS vet: you canâ€™t buy an Atlas V launch now for less than $160M, so why would the price drop $30M for some future crew launch capability? Kinda sounds like they just made up a number to be $10M less than SpaceX.

First, you may be confusing cost with price, and second, the cost is highly dependent on flight rate. If the rate goes up, the price could come down in the future. I’ll bet their marginal cost is below a hundred million.

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:20:38 +0000

ISS vet: you can’t buy an Atlas V launch now for less than $160M, so why would the price drop $30M for some future crew launch capability? Kinda sounds like they just made up a number to be $10M less than SpaceX.