SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
SpaceX has launched an ISS cargo mission focused more on new scientific instruments than resupply. The first stage rocket booster was successfully landed on a ground pad at Cape Canaveral:
SpaceX has launched the first private rocket from the same historic site that saw some of NASA's greatest space missions, then landed a booster nearby in a resounding success. The California-based company's Falcon 9 rocket launched a robotic Dragon cargo capsule toward the International Space Station today (Feb. 19) at 9:39 a.m. EST (1439 GMT) from Launch Complex 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center — the same pad that once hosted Apollo moon missions and space shuttle launches. "Liftoff of the Falcon 9 to the space station on the first commercial launch from Kennedy Space Center's historic Pad 39a!" said NASA commentator George Diller.
[...] Some space station additions are traveling in the unpressurized "trunk" of the spacecraft: SAGE-III, an Earth-monitoring tool that will look for ozone in the atmosphere, and a Space Test Program payload including the Lightning Imaging Sensor, which will track lightning worldwide, and Raven, which will collect data to help future spacecraft rendezvous autonomously.
Also at NYT, USA Today, Spaceflight Insider, and TechCrunch.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @08:54PM
When the government is essentially your organization's only customer, then your organization is not really "private".
That is to say, when the bulk of your funding comes from stealing other people's resources under threat of violence, then you are not really operating in the "private" sector.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:02PM
We call it the Private-er sector :)
It's an important and wholesome part of capitalism with the full backing of the state, until legally proven otherwise :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:24PM
I'm sure the law can be ... interpreted ... in the favor of our corporate overlords?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by charon on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:28PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:41PM
Then, for you, that money is not a tax; it's just a fee that you choose to pay willingly for a service that you want.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Monday February 20 2017, @07:44AM
I agree the system isn't ideal. Who else is actively working to bring launch costs down? Their Blue Sky initiative to lower costs disruptively is showing 'just a matter of time' levels of success.
Given the space & defense contractor ecosystem, SpaceX is behaving with something at least a bit like altruism in comparison. Why the hostility about this particular contractor? They seem to be pulling things in the right direction hard enough to get 'me too' noises from the entrenched players started. (actual results from them though? We'll see...)
(Score: 5, Informative) by martyb on Sunday February 19 2017, @09:34PM
According to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches#Past_launches [wikipedia.org] one can see that SpaceX HAS benefited greatly from government-funded launches, but it is a gross mischaracterization to deem that as: "not really operating in the 'private' sector."
A cursory glance down the list shows at least 13 out of 30 launches were for the private sector: Orbcomm (3), MDA Corp, SES (2), Thaicom (2), AsiaSat (2), Eutelsat, Spacecom, Iridium, and others.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 3, Informative) by compro01 on Sunday February 19 2017, @10:46PM
Actually, over half of their launches have been commercial satellites.
Out of 30 Falcon 9 flights, they have had 14.5 government (one for a non-US government), 15.5 commercial (flight 4 carried both NASA and Orbcomm payloads), and one internal test.
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Monday February 20 2017, @04:33AM
Then it more properly would be called "An American Private Enterprise". Privatize profits, socialize losses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @10:53AM
That $4,000,000,000,000 have to go somewhere. Or are you bitching about a $500,000,000 is soo much? Number from,
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-annual-budget-of-SpaceX [quora.com]
As of December 2013, SpaceX has a total of 50 future launches under contract, two-thirds of them are for commercial customers. In late 2013, space industry media began to comment on the phenomenon that SpaceX prices are undercutting the major competitors in the commercial commsat launch market at which time SpaceX had at least 10 further geostationary orbit flights on its books.
Here's a little "trick" for the you to compare numbers,
500,000,000
--------------------
4,000,000,000,000
cut some of the zeros,
50
----------------------
400,000
What does this mean? It means if your yearly budget for everything was $400,000, you are bitching about $50.
But then this is over 10 years, soooo you are literally bitching about spending $5 A YEAR on something when you are spending $1100+ PER DAY on other things.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:00PM
This is a legitimate comment; just because you disagree does not make it worthy of the label "troll".
------
When the government is essentially your organization's only customer, then your organization is not really "private".
That is to say, when the bulk of your funding comes from stealing other people's resources under threat of violence, then you are not really operating in the "private" sector.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:17PM
I look forward to your upcoming comment: "Just because I'm saying it for the third time doesn't make me -1 Redundant! Waah!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:31PM
I don't care what it's labeled, as long as my comment isn't censored by an abuse of the voting system.
(Score: 1) by charon on Sunday February 19 2017, @11:44PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @03:06AM
I, for one, appreciate your integrity.