[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.