Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 14 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Tuesday October 17 2017, @05:28PM   Printer-friendly
from the spread-the-word-to-the-SLS dept.

The head of the U.S. Air Force Space Command is "completely committed" to launching future missions using reused SpaceX rockets, following certification of the reused boosters for military use:

The head of U.S. Air Force Space Command said he's "completely committed" to launching future missions with recycled rockets like those championed by SpaceX's Elon Musk as the military looks to drive down costs. It would be "absolutely foolish" not to begin using pre-flown rockets, which bring such significant savings that they'll soon be commonplace for the entire industry, General John W. "Jay" Raymond said in an interview Monday at Bloomberg headquarters in New York. "The market's going to go that way. We'd be dumb not to," he said. "What we have to do is make sure we do it smartly."

[...] The Air Force won't be able to use the recycled boosters until they're certified for military use, a process that Raymond suggested may already be in the works. "The folks out at Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles that work for me would be in those dialogues," he said, declining to specify when certification could take place. "I don't know how far down the road we've gotten, but I am completely committed to launching on a reused rocket, a previously flown rocket, and making sure that we have the processes in place to be able to make sure that we can do that safely."

SpaceX's has just added a secretive "Zuma" mission no earlier than November 10th.

Here is a recent Reddit AmA about SpaceX's "BFR" (writeup and another one).


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jimtheowl on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:18PM (1 child)

    by jimtheowl (5929) on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:18PM (#583606)
    Are you indeed considering the resources he had? He could have stuck with , Kimbal, X.com or PayPal but he built on them to forge ahead to do what he believed in instead of milking the proverbial cash cow.

    That said, I mostly agree with the rest of your post.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:49PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:49PM (#583620)

    Are you indeed considering the resources he had? He could have stuck with , Kimbal, X.com or PayPal

    Yes.

    Consider the industry sector. Aerospace Engineering. Developing a new air plane to production is in the billions generally. Just look at the Bombardier story. Or A380. Or F35. And this is flying in the air. This is where economics are well knows and backers are available.

    Now consider the space sector. Here billions can mean nothing. Literally. And Elon only had few hundred million. His competition in comparison has infinite deep pockets -- they tell governments what they need and they get it appropriated. Space X either managed to get that NASA contract or not. And frankly, they got lucky, more than once to get that contract. He did the right move, at the right time, and lucky it worked for him.