Commercial rocket will fly to the space station

[Moonglow]

"Space exploration" is a pipe dream. Outside of the slim chance that commercial enterprises could make a buck by offering vacations in space there is no other way to make the incredible cost of a manned space flight pay for itself much less make a profit.

Wow. Myopia personified.

yes, little does he know of gas pockets in space as large as our moon.

 

[MuadDib]

It just launched.

 

[nitroz]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz3-I7qouYE]SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket lifts off - 5/22/12 - YouTube[/ame]

Footage of the rocket that I got.

 

[Conservative]

In case any of you missed it, this rocked is UNMANNED. That's very trivial compared to sending people into space.

you really are a moron, aren't you.

First go test flights... then cargo flights, and THEN, once they feel it's SAFE, manned flights.

 

[ShackledNation]

What's the sense of NASA pouring money into a private company to do what they used to do best?

SpaceX does it cheaper and more efficiently. But it is still imperfect. It would be better to have no NASA at all.

 

[ShackledNation]

"Space exploration" is a pipe dream. Outside of the slim chance that commercial enterprises could make a buck by offering vacations in space there is no other way to make the incredible cost of a manned space flight pay for itself much less make a profit.

Profit doesn't have to be monetary. Some people are willing to spend a ton of money for the sake of increasing knowledge. The wealthy are willing to pay for manned space flight. It just takes time for technology to advance to the point where it is more affordable. The same is true for virtually every new prodcut, from the radio to the car to the television to the refridgerator. New technologies often start as luxuries before they can be mass produced.

 

[ShackledNation]

The Space Shuttle program is terminated so those scientists up there in that hunk of junk in the sky have to be concerned about food and water and garbage and how the hell they would get back to earth. The so-called "international partnership" is mostly funded by the US and we are stuck with the responsibility. NASA 's mission is still the same but the administration decided to play a little game with funding and propaganda. NASA has always relied on outside agencies for manufacture technological goodies so the contracts will continue with taxpayer money but the administration will announce that the unmanned flight to supply the space station is ...shazaam ...a civilian operation while it continues to be business as usual.

Although I agree it is imperfect, it is a step in the right direction.

 

[Ramen]

Dragon docked at the ISS today! I think we're at the beginning of an adventure where free enterprise starts to conquer space as it did with the American frontier.

 

[Old Rocks]

What's the sense of NASA pouring money into a private company to do what they used to do best?

It's called Capitalism. I suppose the answer to "What's the sense..." depends on one's outlook. Public private collaboration has always been the most productive means for large scale success, IMO.

The left has a peculiar idea of capitalism. Pouring taxpayer money into a quasi-private enterprise operating under government regulations and with government equipment and personnel is ...well...the Russian brand of socialism. It's all smoke and mirrors.

You dumb fuck. How do you think that the TransContinental Railroad was built?

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Nothing-Like-World-Transcontinental-1863-1869/dp/0684846098]Amazon.com: Nothing Like It in the World: The Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad, 1863-1869 (9780684846095): Stephen E. Ambrose: Books[/ame]

 

[Old Rocks]

What's the sense of NASA pouring money into a private company to do what they used to do best?

SpaceX does it cheaper and more efficiently. But it is still imperfect. It would be better to have no NASA at all.

Bullshit. NASA does the things that private enterprise finds no profit in, like initial exploration.

 

[ShackledNation]

What's the sense of NASA pouring money into a private company to do what they used to do best?

SpaceX does it cheaper and more efficiently. But it is still imperfect. It would be better to have no NASA at all.

Bullshit. NASA does the things that private enterprise finds no profit in, like initial exploration.

Actually, no, not bullshit. SpaceX was able to launch its rocket and supplies at a third of the cost of NASA's old rockets (which makes sense, because NASA virtually hasn't updated the technology much for decades).

Furthermore, private enterprise does find profit in initial exploration. In fact, initial exploration is most profitable because if you succeed you will be the first and without any competition. Have you heard of the company Planetary Resources? It is a company that plans to mine asteroids for resources for use in space, because it is cheaper and takes far less energy to leave an asteroid than to leave earth's orbit. There is no guarantee it will ever be profitable, yet people are doing this with their own money voluntarily for the sake of reaching scientific milestones and achievements.

Throughout history, prizes have been awarded to people breaking scientific grounds, often in contest format. These prizes are privatley funded not by people necessarily wanting to make a monetary profit, but by people wanting to see scientific goals accomplished. Henri Deutsch de la Meurthe funded aviation prizes, such as the Grand Prix d'Aviation and the Deutsch de la Meurthe prize. These prizes led to the first plane that was able to fly 1 kilometer at once. The X Prize Foundation is a modern day example of this. They are currently funding a variety of different causes, including research to help cure disease, with prizes in the millions.

The idea that the only way to explore space is to force people to give their money to government is absolutely absurd. There are enough people out there that want to make it happen. NASA is just so engrained in American culture as a beacon of patriotism, when in reality is a wasteful monopolistic bureacracy.