Could SpaceX actually use a lot more money? Apart from giving it the ability to wait out more halts due to government interference that is?
Cost on missile vs. cost on a truck - they're completely different designs with different requirements. A missile is intended for one trip with very extreme conditions. A truck is intended to last a long time under much less extreme conditions. I do agree that making missiles (much) cheaper would be good, although the simplest way to do that would be not to stop and start production and change orders depending on this quarter's budget.
Protect Musk? Agree there. It would be nice if we had more like him. Branson got out, Bezos is still playing with former NASA personnel and it shows. I'm unfamiliar with others, but they're not at that scale.
For the primary missions of Starlink and Starship, I kind of agree that SpaceX likely doesn't need a lot more money. But more money might be necessary to SpaceX to scale and to customize the upper stage and payload vehicle for military missions both in space and terrestrial. Additionally, money will be needed for Starship basing in likely 10+ places around the world. Starship in it's design is a multipurpose vehicle. Space package delivery, earth to earth military freight delivery, and as a space and ballistic missile / bomb delivery vehicle. The sooner Starship finishes development and gets deployed, the more dramatic the USA advantage will be. Imagine the range of military activities that a reusable rocket that can carry 50 tons to 150 tons can engage in. Especially if a launch is less than $10MM and with high cadence.
But likely more important is to clear the regulatory path of obstacles to rapid development. We need to treat some projects are important to national security and SpaceX is one of them. We saw Starship lose one 2023 launch from unnecessary regulatory constraint. If this happens every year, then in the next decade Starship could be delayed 2 to 4 years. It is not necessary and these regulatory delays put this country at risk.
Finally, I've come to realize that Musk is a force of nature ... it is his decisiveness and will that have caused SpaceX and Tesla to achieve great things years before any competitor. He is different from all the others .... he has an intensity that drives his organizations to speed and technology performance. His 'sudden disappearance' would dramatically and inevitability slow the rate of progress. And if I were a Russian or Chinese leader.....
B-21 is cool tech but a waste of money. From the perspective of the 2030s, Starship will perform the mission of the B-21 more easily, at less cost and with more 'uptime'.
Additionally, in a real peer to peer war, it would likely take years to ramp up B-21 production to even a one plane per week level. Complex product and complex supply chain. Starship could be scaled to a few ships per day in less than a year. Raptor engines are already produced in multiples per week and the rocket itself is extraordinarily simple. Probably the cost of one B-21 ($750MM) equals the cost of 20+ Starships.
In a war, quantity is a quality. Starship is the rare case of a better solution at lower cost and lower operational complexity.
Could SpaceX actually use a lot more money? Apart from giving it the ability to wait out more halts due to government interference that is?
Cost on missile vs. cost on a truck - they're completely different designs with different requirements. A missile is intended for one trip with very extreme conditions. A truck is intended to last a long time under much less extreme conditions. I do agree that making missiles (much) cheaper would be good, although the simplest way to do that would be not to stop and start production and change orders depending on this quarter's budget.
Protect Musk? Agree there. It would be nice if we had more like him. Branson got out, Bezos is still playing with former NASA personnel and it shows. I'm unfamiliar with others, but they're not at that scale.
For the primary missions of Starlink and Starship, I kind of agree that SpaceX likely doesn't need a lot more money. But more money might be necessary to SpaceX to scale and to customize the upper stage and payload vehicle for military missions both in space and terrestrial. Additionally, money will be needed for Starship basing in likely 10+ places around the world. Starship in it's design is a multipurpose vehicle. Space package delivery, earth to earth military freight delivery, and as a space and ballistic missile / bomb delivery vehicle. The sooner Starship finishes development and gets deployed, the more dramatic the USA advantage will be. Imagine the range of military activities that a reusable rocket that can carry 50 tons to 150 tons can engage in. Especially if a launch is less than $10MM and with high cadence.
But likely more important is to clear the regulatory path of obstacles to rapid development. We need to treat some projects are important to national security and SpaceX is one of them. We saw Starship lose one 2023 launch from unnecessary regulatory constraint. If this happens every year, then in the next decade Starship could be delayed 2 to 4 years. It is not necessary and these regulatory delays put this country at risk.
Finally, I've come to realize that Musk is a force of nature ... it is his decisiveness and will that have caused SpaceX and Tesla to achieve great things years before any competitor. He is different from all the others .... he has an intensity that drives his organizations to speed and technology performance. His 'sudden disappearance' would dramatically and inevitability slow the rate of progress. And if I were a Russian or Chinese leader.....
Modest disagreement on the B-21, but otherwise spot on.
B-21 is cool tech but a waste of money. From the perspective of the 2030s, Starship will perform the mission of the B-21 more easily, at less cost and with more 'uptime'.
Additionally, in a real peer to peer war, it would likely take years to ramp up B-21 production to even a one plane per week level. Complex product and complex supply chain. Starship could be scaled to a few ships per day in less than a year. Raptor engines are already produced in multiples per week and the rocket itself is extraordinarily simple. Probably the cost of one B-21 ($750MM) equals the cost of 20+ Starships.
In a war, quantity is a quality. Starship is the rare case of a better solution at lower cost and lower operational complexity.