Re: Could Falcon 9 compete with the Stick?


Rand Simberg wrote:
> On 18 Sep 2005 08:47:40 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Ed Kyle"
> <edkyle99@xxxxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
> way as to indicate that:
>
> >> >Please then, Rand, explain to me how the inventors
> >> >and investors from the same land that created and
> >> >made billions off of the Personal Computer, the
> >> >Internet, the Cellular Telephone, the IPod, the
> >> >Pocket Fisherman, the Sport Utility Vehicle, the Big
> >> >Mac, etc and etc, could not after almost 50 years have
> >> >figured out how to launch stuff into low earth orbit
> >> >for Less Than the Going Rate.
> >>
> >> None of those things were ever established as a monopoly of big
> >> government as their initial instantiation.
> >
> >The U.S. government space monopoly ended about 20
> >years ago. An entire generation of innovators have
> >considered the problem since then, but the price
> >curve has refused to budge.
>
> "Considering the problem" isn't "solving the problem." That requires
> actual intelligent investment--something that's been lacking up to
> now.

A few have more than considered the problem, they have
seriously attacked the problem. Orbital Sciences,
SSI, AMROC, Beal, Rotary, Kistler, and SpaceX have
all made substantial forays into the hardware
fabrication phase of the problem. Orbital has managed
to develop more than one launch vehicle. SSI made an
actual space launch attempt. AMROC came close to test
flight. Beal managed to test the highest-thrust
liquid fuel rocket engine built since Apollo days.
Kistler tested the world's largest parachute array,
tested rocket engines, and had large parts of its
vehicle fabricated. We know what SpaceX is up to.

Still, none of these have "solved the problem".

- Ed Kyle

.