It is rather incredible how dominant Falcon 9 is in the current launch market.

  • ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    It should be nationalised. SpaceX is providing critical infrastructure for the US/NATO. Having it run by a private, for-profit entity is a security risk. Musk has already proven this by cutting off Starlink access for Ukrainian offensive operations.

    • Adalast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Musk did a lot worse than that. When he used Starlink to interfere with the operation of the drones directly he committed an act of war. That act is a weaponization of a space-based array to attack a military asset if done by a government would be met with immediate retaliation, but a private citizen somehow amasses the ability to be the most intolerable 60’s Bond villain of all time and what, we are all supposed to be hunky-dory with it?

    • soviettaters@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Oh my goodness no. Private spaceflight is the future because it’s not nationalized. Can you imagine Congress cutting off SpaceX simply because they don’t see its use? I’m a big fan of NASA, but they would’ve been on Mars by now had they not been run by the government.

      • burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        I wonder how it would actually play out. They would probably extend Falcon 9 and Dragon production indefinitely and descope Starship to the minimum needed for HLS? Then I would invest all my hope and prayers into Stoke pulling off full reuse?

      • Gurei@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        An alternate meaning for the red, white and blue could have been US territories on Mars, the Moon, and Earth.

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        You mean “ever return to nationalized”? Since space flight was entirely nationalized until what, a decade ago, decade and a half?

        • vivadanang@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s a really disingenuous way to put it. No private company or conglomerate could bring the economic scientific and manufacturing abilities the US could; fuck, very few countries to this date can. And even then it was still a public private partnership, the same defense companies and ICBM manufacturers built the rockets we rode to the moon.

          Strange take but shrug, whatever.

          • Chriswild@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            I think this is more disingenuous if anything. The US has always relied on contracts with private industry to do much of anything. So to say the US should nationalize something is to say a public private partnership should be made. Even if you completely nationalize SpaceX their suppliers would still be needed and it would still be a partnership.

            Might I also add that you saying “we rode to the moon” while also advocating for private ownership is particularly ironic.

            • vivadanang@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              hey if today were 1969 we’d be groovy baby,

              but time fucking change eh?

              It’s not the days of North American Aviation or Douglas anymore lol - they don’t exist. Technology changes.

              Supposing the only way things could possibly be done in 1950-1970 should be the only way we do them in the future is pretty dim.

              So enjoy your irony, it’s glad you’re finding joy in the world even with such limited faculties.