[Igor Antunov]

Pity because it will set their program back a year or more and ruin existing contracts. Elon thought this would be easy but rocket science never is.

[quetzalcoatl]

This particular Space-X rocket will not be reusable. Serves to remind us of the fact that this is rocket science. Blowups will happen with chemical rockets. There is no way in hell even Musk can justify blowing up money on this scale. Private space exploration is a pipe dream - or more accurately, a pipe bomb.

[Atlantis]

Private space exploration is a pipe dream - or more accurately, a pipe bomb.

It's the culmination of hubris in US finance capitalism. All these overpaid executives talk themselves into believing that the sky is the limit. I have heard all that nonsense for nearly 30 years. I can remember how they hyped up the Iridium constellation. Yet, they never seem to be able to learn from failure. Venture money is always looking for new ways to flop. It's greed gone out off control.

[Igor Antunov]

The space X program has been largely funded by NASA, ie the government. Every launch has seen NASA contribute ~$50 million into this company's coffers. Elon is just an astute businessman and is milking tax payers dry, as is the custom of crafty capitalists. At the same time he has the populace on his side, useful idiots that they are, as he expounds the virtues of corporate enterprise through the media he can buy.

[The Sabbaticus]

It blew up a Facebook satellite in the process. There's an upside to every downside.

[Atlantis]

The space X program has been largely funded by NASA, ...

They have run their program with the expectation of government contracts. That is not the same. It is standard practice for all commercial launching systems. The government is always the biggest customer.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

The space X program has been largely funded by NASA, ie the government. Every launch has seen NASA contribute ~$50 million into this company's coffers. Elon is just an astute businessman and is milking tax payers dry, as is the custom of crafty capitalists. At the same time he has the populace on his side, useful idiots that they are, as he expounds the virtues of corporate enterprise through the media he can buy.

It's rather NASA that is milking taxpayers then. Their programs have seen quite spectacular failures too and it seems quite obvious that SpaceX beats them in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Not sure how often people have predicted the failure of any of Elon Musk's ventures. So far he has proven them wrong every time. But even if he ultimately fails with SpaceX, his legacy is still likely to be inspiration and a renewed interest in space exploration and according to himself that's his main goal anyway.

[The Sabbaticus]

The concept of re-usable space rockets is intriguing, but the stresses on the materials involved are significant. How many times would they be able to re-use a single rocket? I suppose this is in principle similar to re-using a jet fighter or a passenger plane, only significantly more complex.

[Atlantis]

The concept of re-usable space rockets is intriguing, but the stresses on the materials involved are significant. How many times would they be able to re-use a single rocket? I suppose this is in principle similar to re-using a jet fighter or a passenger plane, only significantly more complex.

The US decision to develop the space shuttle as a reusable space vehicle nearly 50 years ago was one of the greatest design flops in human history. It allowed the success of expendable launch vehicles like the European Ariane to conquer half of the global market despite a US lead in aerospace technology. Many thanks to American hubris.

[Beren]

It's the culmination of hubris in US finance capitalism.

Sure Atlantis, US finance capitalism must be the greatest failure in history and we should rather take Russia and China as role models.

[Igor Antunov]

Don't get ahead of yourself, it may prove to be a disaster. Stay focused on China in the coming decades. Russia fumbled an opportunity in the late 80's, China didn't. It is buying up western institutions at a geometric rate.

[Atlantis]

Yeah Igor, the Chinese have to buy up our old technology because they can't invent it. They are welcome to have it, because we already have the next generation in the drawers. Looks like Chinese development hit a wall. The 21st century will be the European century. You just wait and see.

[Beren]

Don't get ahead of yourself, it may prove to be a disaster. Stay focused on China in the coming decades. Russia fumbled an opportunity in the late 80's, China didn't. It is buying up western institutions at a geometric rate.

You talk like China does anything special. They do mercantilism and buy up companies and technologies the West doesn't need anymore. Focusing on China means focusing on the past. They still have a lot to do to catch up, and they have to do it within a global framework dominated by the West. They still have to westernise, as they've been doing for more than a century actually.

[Igor Antunov]

They have more money, more educated brains, more connections, more opportunities to siphon western institutions. And a more centralized system to coordinate this in the long term. America, unless isolationist trump is elected, is finished. This can't continue. Space X will be bought eventually by a Chinese company.

[ThirdTerm]

According to BBC News, the world's longest aircraft, the Airlander 10 has crashed during its second test flight. Bruce Dickinson has reportedly invested around £250,000, hoping to one day take the Airlander to the North Pole and the South Pole. I think this kind of space programmes are expensive hobbies for rich individuals with no practical purpose. Sir Richard Branson recently lost the VSS Enterprise during a powered test flight over California's Mojave Desert.

[Beren]

They have more money, more educated brains, more connections, more opportunities to siphon western institutions.

They will need a lot of money to keep their economy going, as their current mercantilist model seems to be running out of steam. They will also have to establish an up-to-date welfare system, which costs a lot as well.

Do you mean they have more money, educated brains, connections, and opportunities than earlier?

And a more centralized system to coordinate this in the long term. America, unless isolationist trump is elected, is finished. This can't continue. Space X will be bought eventually by a Chinese company.

Sure, the more centralised system must be an advantage, as it's always been.

It's the Chinese model that can't continue, because China is getting too big and complex to be run as it's being run. They will have to liberalise sooner rather than later, otherwise they're going to fail as the USSR did.

Space X will be sold to a Chinese company when the amount of capital invested in it could be invested in something more profitable or promising.

[Atlantis]

It's the Chinese model that can't continue, because China is getting too big and complex to be run as it's being run. They will have to liberalise sooner rather than later, otherwise they're going to fail as the USSR did.

Don't underestimate the Chinese. They are becoming leaders in technological innovation by the same methods as the Japanese and Korean before them.

They are investing heavily in new materials, electronics, high speed trains, nuclear energy and even aerospace. The West will lose some of these industries to the Chinese, just like we have lost electronics, ship building, etc., to the Japanese and Koreans.

However, the Chinese cannot liberalize because the monopoly on power of the communist party cannot be questioned, neither by political dissidents nor by the media. The Chinese did incredibly well over the last 20 years, but I think as time goes on they'll hit a wall with their development. The lack of criticism will invariably breed corruption and inefficiency.

Having worked in the Far East, I was pretty pessimistic about Europe's future prospects 10 or 20 years ago. But I think I was wrong. The Japanese have already experienced an end to their business model and the Koreans will get there soon enough.

What will save Europe is robotics. With robotics it will be more convenient to produce in Germany than in a low-wage country. The wage difference will have a negligible impact on product cost. The condition is of course that we regain leadership in technological innovation.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

The concept of re-usable space rockets is intriguing, but the stresses on the materials involved are significant. How many times would they be able to re-use a single rocket? I suppose this is in principle similar to re-using a jet fighter or a passenger plane, only significantly more complex.

Since Atlantis didn't answer the question, but surprisingly chose to take the opportunity to tell you that America will FAIL, Musk thinks it's up to 100 times for most parts. The comparison with planes is one that he has used as well.

Anyway, ThirdTerm wins this thread.

[Beren]

Don't underestimate the Chinese. They are becoming leaders in technological innovation by the same methods as the Japanese and Korean before them.

It's good, because the Japanese and the Koreans failed to make a better or more competitive system too, although they are westernised to the core. Taiwan is the same.

It's not Japanese, Korean, or Taiwanese companies that run the world and determine the future.

[Atlantis]

It's good, because the Japanese and the Koreans failed to make a better or more competitive system too, although they are westernised to the core. Taiwan is the same.

It's not Japanese, Korean, or Taiwanese companies that run the world and determine the future.

I disagree. Both the Japanese and Koreans did succeed. They are the only non-Western countries that beat the West at its own game and they still do have an incredible innovative force. They are not "westernized to the core" either. To succeed you obviously have to adopt modern methods. That is not necessarily being "westernized." In fact, both have kept their own cultural traditions.

Both Japan and Korea are relatively small countries. They cannot produce on their own a global system that'll "run the world." For example, it doesn't matter how advanced Japanese of Korean software is, Western/English software will be the global standard, because the spread of Korean and Japanese culture is just too limited. That will be different with China because China is a world of its own. It's domestic market is potentially big enough to rival Western markets. Chinese companies will be able to use that domestic market (which is still relatively closed to the foreign competition) as a protected base to develop products with which they can conquer world markets. That business model has worked well in Japan for electronic consumer products.

Thus, while China does follow the same pattern of technological innovation as Japan and Korea, it is a completely different cattle of fish because of its size. Western companies have largely ignored the Japanese and Korean markets because the effort of accessing these difficult markets was just not worth it due to their limited size. That is different for China. Western companies cannot ignore the Chinese market.