@space_stations@_abbie_watson_ There's always a product or service, and if it's a real business then there is at least one customer. The problem has been that that customer for space products and survices has mostly been the government.
Success is having lots of customers who are willing to pay you + cost.
They're talking about how there's been no word from the "admins" about further mobilization.
We have undeniable proof that NGOs are calling the shots from top-down.
We know they were responsible for BLM and Summer of Love v1 too. These NGOs and their funders need to be sued for every bit of property damage over the years.
Some LC-36 updates. Now that we’ve had access to the pad and integration facility we can share a bit of good news. The propellant farm, oxygen, liquid hydrogen and LNG tanks are all in good shape. This is good luck because these are very long lead items. The water tower is also good. The big support tower is damaged, but it can be repaired in place rather than torn down and replaced. The booster “Never Tell Me The Odds” and the three GS-2s that were onsite in the integration facility also look good.
I’ve seen some speculation that we might move directly to the 9x4 configuration, but we won’t do that. Rate manufacturing of 7x2 is going well, and we’re going to continue that at pace as planned and store the stages for use. In addition, we had already been working for some time on eliminating our transporter-erector in favor of an alternative vertical conop, and we’ll now go directly to that; so we don’t need a new transporter-erector.
We will fly again before the end of this year. Gradatim Ferociter.
This seems relevant again.
For non-nerds, Blue Origin took NASA's design approach, careful (and slow) design, with extensive reviews, to produce a rocket that works the first time with no embarrassing explosions.
It just exploded and destroyed their only launchpad.
The SpaceX approach is, "Build a prototype, smash it on the concrete until it breaks, then reinforce the part that broke and do it again."
In my opinion, 20 iterations of the SpaceX approach might produce a design that can reasonably be called "robust."
The NASA approach never did. Let's hope Blue Origin has better luck.
@JeffGreason@Lori_Garver@NASA Garver was a NASA shill and sabotaged earlier commercial space efforts as NSS chair.
Only after I publicly called her out at ISDC in mid '90s, did she pivot to suck up to Clinton Administration.