undefined | Better HN

0 pointssimonh8y ago0 comments

You are quite right that the space launch industry and the technology it uses wouldn't exist without government research and funding. That's perfectly true.

But it's also true that without Musk there would currently be no prospect of significant rocket component reuse for another generation. Rocket launch costs would be double or triple what they currently are. It also seems very likely now that within my lifetime we will see launch costs to orbit close to 100th what they were just a few years ago. Some of us think that's a good thing.

A graph of the improvement in rocket technology from 1945 to now would look like a hockey stick early on, levelling off more or less flat for the last 40 years. Musk has bent that curve back up into a hockey stick shape again.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

sidlls8y ago· 1 in thread

I'd argue that Musk, using the facade of "Private Market Hero", has made government spending on research in this area palatable enough (again) to make progress. Sure, he's a key personality, but it's not like he's accomplishing these things outside of the context of being heavily funded and guided by the government.

simonhOP8y ago

So what? Do none of the achievements of the engineers that drove the US space programme through the last century 'count' because they were government funded? What a bizarre world view.

As it happens none of the re-usability programme (Grasshopper, the drone ships, etc) was actually funded by the government. That came from around a billion dollars of private capital investment. Musk talked about this in a TED talk.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse