[njarboe]

Why are people even interested in peoples' opinions on how other people might fail? Musk has said that he thought SpaceX had a less than 10% chance of even getting a rocket to orbit when he founded it, but trying was worth it anyway. Now that SpaceX has built an orbital booster that comes back to land at the launch site like in the fucking cartoons in the 1950's, why would one spend time thinking about if they will fail instead of how great it would be if they succeed. You can't short SpaceX stock.

[WizardAustralis]

It isnt so much a case of schadenfreude but more a case of seeing what issues still need to be addressed.

Personally I would love nothing more that to see the doubters get shown up by the likes of SpaceX actually going out there and making it all actually happen.

It is when legitimate issues are being brought up but arent being actively addressed by the likes of SpaceX that is when one has to wonder about how the upper ends of the business is skewing the marketing/output of the company.

I am reminded about the slogan of r/realtesla - revolutionary technology, awful company. I fear that, what if a company like SpaceX over promises and under deliv ers and causes more damage to the field long term than if they had not done anything at all?

[njarboe]

"I fear that, what if a company like SpaceX over promises and under delivers and causes more damage to the field long term than if they had not done anything at all?"

Not sure how you think SpaceX could cause more damage than doing nothing. They are the only group for the last two decades, besides Blue Origin, that is trying to advance the technology of heavy lift rockets past what we had with the Saturn V. Just imagine what $30/kg to orbit instead of $10000/kg will open up. They have are half way there with booster recovery and now just need the size of StarShip and the recoverable second stage.

If a company is creating revolutionary technology, why is it an awful company? Under what metrics are you judging it by? Lots of people get "burned out" working at SpaceX, but others also thrive in the environment.

[WizardAustralis]

It can cause more damage than good by making people doubt the entire mission as a whole. Funding will dry up pretty quick if folks think it is just another dead end.

And $30 per Kg would be nice, the last figure for SpaceX is $2,720 per kg. That is a very big difference.

I have nothing against revolutionary technology. The thing is, when it comes to the reusable rockets and near earth orbital stuff - I have never had much doubts that SpaceX would achieve this outside of earth based political issues. I worry that they are pushing an image of what they want rather than what they will achieve.

Look at Blue Origin, I actually don't have a problem with them as they seem to be taking the more cautious approach. It could be a Turtle and the Hare situation going on here.