Attached: 1 image
The Hyperloop was never meant to be built. Elon Musk admitted it was all about fueling opposition to California’s high-speed rail project so it would get canceled.
He never planned to improve transportation; he just wants to keep people trapped in cars.
https://newrepublic.com/article/174089/big-tech-watching-drive
#tech #transport #elonmusk #transportation #hyperloop #trains
Then I don’t understand why you mentioned that a reusable launch vehicle was inconceivable before. Anyway.
This whole story isn’t as one-sided as you described it. Even though the program was cost-effective, it was eventually discontinued due to budget constraints and an accident. At that time, understandably, ISS was the priority, since unlike SpaceX, space agencies are not transportation companies. This is why the growing market demand for low-Earth orbit transportation in the 2000s was beneficial, and NASA got involved in the Falcon 9 project early on in the 2000s, providing engineers and funding for development. It was/is mutually beneficial, since the costs were lower for both NASA and SpaceX.
Therefore, NASA didn’t fail to develop its own reusable launch vehicle, but joined a similar project shortly after the end of the DC-X(A).
The vertical takeoff and landing concept isn’t as groundbreaking after the aforementioned proof of concept as some people make it out to be. Apart from a few years after DC-X, the concept went through a steady development to practical use.
I might have been lacking coffee when I wrote my first comment 🙂 I re-wrote it in a later comment.
SpaceX and the other big space companies wouldn’t exist without NASA and/or the military. NASA have sent quite some money towards SpaceX - I think NASA is quite satisfied with their investement.
Then I don’t understand why you mentioned that a reusable launch vehicle was inconceivable before. Anyway. This whole story isn’t as one-sided as you described it. Even though the program was cost-effective, it was eventually discontinued due to budget constraints and an accident. At that time, understandably, ISS was the priority, since unlike SpaceX, space agencies are not transportation companies. This is why the growing market demand for low-Earth orbit transportation in the 2000s was beneficial, and NASA got involved in the Falcon 9 project early on in the 2000s, providing engineers and funding for development. It was/is mutually beneficial, since the costs were lower for both NASA and SpaceX. Therefore, NASA didn’t fail to develop its own reusable launch vehicle, but joined a similar project shortly after the end of the DC-X(A). The vertical takeoff and landing concept isn’t as groundbreaking after the aforementioned proof of concept as some people make it out to be. Apart from a few years after DC-X, the concept went through a steady development to practical use.
Edit: typo
I might have been lacking coffee when I wrote my first comment 🙂 I re-wrote it in a later comment.
SpaceX and the other big space companies wouldn’t exist without NASA and/or the military. NASA have sent quite some money towards SpaceX - I think NASA is quite satisfied with their investement.