[panick21_]

I think its not really aspirational so much as it is long term planning. If you 20 years ago had told people the launch rates SpaceX is achieving now people would have laughed you out of the room. And this is not from SpaceX private launch site, but a government owned launch site. SpaceX has really been the driving force behind advancing the nations launch infrastructure and launch practices.

I don't see any reason why SpaceX should not continue to plan in such an agressive fashion, as there isn't really a clear reason that anybody can point out to about how its fundamentally impossible.

Its mostly competitors and activists trying to slow down SpaceX and post like this are trying to tell people 'look these are what we are planning and it will benefit everybody'.

[jltsiren]

The USSR averaged >1.5 launches/week from 1967 to 1989. SpaceX has exceeded that, but not by a huge margin. Once they start doing daily launches, it will be something people would not have believed 20 years ago. But we are not there yet.

[panick21_]

It is a huge margin when you take into account the size of the rocket. Also, the area where SpaceX launches has so much more distractions and other users that it is more impressive.

[jltsiren]

The other way around. SpaceX benefits from modern technology and modern manufacturing capacity, which make scaling things much easier than during the Cold War. Overall production has grown greatly in most fields, and top companies often rival superpowers of the past in their field.

[panick21_]

Labor cost have gone up not down. Rocket manufactre is still incredible labor intensive. The Soviet Union had very low labor cost. The only way SpaceX could do it is by innovating into renewables.

The Soviets did it mostly be mass manufacture of 1960 technology and most launches still today use the same tech.

[parineum]

I don't think the comment is just about cadence but also that it's not being achieved by a nation state, at least that's my interpretation.