
Quietly, the new space race between SpaceX and Boeing burns hot - jseliger
http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/11/quietly-the-new-space-race-between-spacex-and-boeing-burns-hot/
======
ChuckMcM
Leaving aside the whole USSR / USA thing, that you can have a couple of
private companies competing for this is a huge step forward. But more
important is that Boeing is not using "cost + plus" pricing. And _that_ small
detail is putting an interesting spin on the contest. Specifically that more
rigorous cost reviews and more creativity is nominally allowed from the
engineering team.

The goal here is to build a thriving, _private_ launch capability which can
serve multiple markets. In the US at least folks have started thinking about a
regulatory structure for how that would work. That is important for a number
of reasons, not the least of which is how do you manage multiple launches
going up into LEO across the country not looking like a preemptive nuclear
strike :-).

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _That is important for a number of reasons, not the least of which is how do
> you manage multiple launches going up into LEO across the country not
> looking like a preemptive nuclear strike :-)._

I suppose that the right way is to inform every party capable of responding
with their own nukes about the launches, the exact trajectories planned and to
update them on any deviation in real-time, 'lest they go to DEFCON 1.

~~~
jksmith
Or misinform.

~~~
TeMPOraL
They can track your launches; if you misinform, you get nuked.

~~~
jacquesm
Sounds like one hell of a joe job waiting to happen.

~~~
TeMPOraL
No, seriously. Even today, you don't go to space without informing the rest of
the world about it.

------
playing_colours
Quote:

 __ _It’s been half a century since the United States finally dusted Russia in
the space race, as NASA’s Gemini program ticked off an unprecedented series of
long-duration flights, spacewalks, and in-space rendezvous to put America
firmly on course to the Moon._ __

It 's very questionable. USSR launched 2 Sputniks first, then the first man.
Regarding Apollo mission: USSR didn't participate in manned lunar mission
race.

Moreover the goal of the space race was not about a manned mission to the
Moon, but about the supremacy in space, so things are more complicated.
Russians had Voskhod programme, US had Gemini. USSR more focused on Venus, US
- on Mars, etc.

~~~
Avshalom
Also seeing as it's the Russians that are still launching humans into space--
with no US spacecraft in sight--Russia seems to have won the space-marathon.

~~~
wil421
The US retiring the Space Shuttle was a cost saving choice. It's cheaper to
pay the Russians for transport while we are developing a replacement that's
meant for longer range manned missions (Mars and the Moon).[1]

[1][http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-05-15...](http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-05-15-space-
shuttle-q-and-a_n.htm)

~~~
Avshalom
Understood but we've been "developing a replacement" for as long as I've been
alive and near as I can tell we're farther from having a replacement than when
we started.

~~~
wil421
That's correct and even the private companies are not as far along as they
predicted in 2011 when the article I linked was published. They said they'd be
ready in 3 years for people. I get the feeling NASA isnt concerned with
getting people in LEO anymore and they are developing something stronger.

>Q: Is there any other way to get into space?

A: Not from U.S. soil once the shuttles retire. NASA could eventually use the
commercial rockets and capsules being developed by private companies. Two
companies predict they could fly astronauts to the space station within three
years. NASA is under orders to build a giant rocket to go beyond Earth orbit.

~~~
mikeash
NASA's concerns aren't really relevant. Their priorities are set by the
geniuses in Congress. Said geniuses think NASA should prioritize using spare
Shuttle parts to build a massive rocket that will cost $2 billion/launch and
fly once every couple of years, so that's what NASA is doing, even though it's
stupid.

~~~
TeMPOraL
And they still try to do everything in their power to sneak in some real
progress in the Senate Launch System project and hide it from changing
political winds. I feel both saddened by this situation and impressed by NASA
engineers.

------
FD3SA
> In September 2014, Boeing won a $4.2 billion award to provide crewed launch
> services, and SpaceX won $2.6 billion. (SpaceX received less because it
> offered to provide lower-cost flights).

Oh, the logic of government contracts. Maybe they should've incentivized
Boeing to try and do it for the same price as SpaceX? I understand the whole
redundancy argument, but by paying Boeing double to do the same thing SpaceX
is doing you are simply incentivizing inefficiency.

This amounts to sheer stupidity in economic terms.

