How did we get humans on the moon in 1969 and are still struggling to get the Starship rocket to launch properly? - eviltoast
  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    SpaceX didn’t need a mockup to present. They had prototypes of the base vehicle

    No they didn’t. They had, a mockup of an empty shell into which they might eventually fit the vehicle. And they still have that.

    And remember, BO is developing a lander. SpaceX is developing a fully reusable super heavy lift rocket, an interplanetary transport craft and a lunar lander as part of the same package.

    NASA isn’t paying SpaceX for the rocket or transport though, they’re paying for a lander and getting it on and off the moon. But I fully agree that SpaceX developing a booster and LEO-transport is exactly why the lander doesn’t exist yet.

    Finish reading my post. SpaceX’s initial bid was 2.94 billion

    I did read your post, but what you’re failing to understand is that this 2.94 billion dollar bid was already AFTER they were informed of the budget changes.

    And sure, BO got the secondary contract for 3.4 billion, after rethinking their entire proposal. So why did they not submit that one in the first place? If they had, they might have gotten a similar call.

    I doubt minimizing corporate loss was Lueder’s motivation there. Presumably neither Steve Cook or Jeff Bezos offered Lueders a large enough bribe job matching her qualifications.

    Ugh, you had me defending the ethical sense of Jeff Bezos. I need to go rinse my mouth now.

    • Bimfred@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      No they didn’t. They had, a mockup of an empty shell into which they might eventually fit the vehicle. And they still have that.

      Blue Origin: “Here’s renders and a papier-mâchė model of what our lander will look like. It’s assembled together in lunar orbit, from an automated cargo ship, our own lander and another Orion.” Note that this isn’t what they won the option b proposal with.

      SpaceX: “Here’s renders of what our lander will look like. We have a full scale prototype out in Boca and we’re blowing it up to see if our math and simulations are right on how much pressure the tanks can take. It’ll require some modifications, such as larger landing legs and dedicated landing engines.” And their HLS proposal isn’t a vehicle carried in the Starship’s cargo bay, it is the Starship.

      what you’re failing to understand is that this 2.94 billion dollar bid was already AFTER they were informed of the budget changes.

      I can find no source for SpaceX’s initial bid being higher, let alone 2x higher (to meet your claim that they bid on the same level as BO, not even gonna consider Dynetics).If you have one, I’d like to see it. And if it is the case that SpaceX was picked because they were willing to slash their bid in half, then I would expect BO’s follow-up litigation to be based around that. Instead, BO focused on the claim that NASA didn’t give their proposal proper evaluation and consideration.

      I doubt minimizing corporate loss was Lueder’s motivation there. Presumably neither Steve Cook or Jeff Bezos offered Lueders a large enough bribe job matching her qualifications.

      That wasn’t my point. The point was that if their proposal had been closer to the budget set aside for the award, as opposed to being double the budget, they might have been contacted to see if they could complete the contract for the lesser amount.

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Blue Origin: “Here’s renders and a papier-mâchė model of what our lander will look like. It’s assembled together in lunar orbit, from an automated cargo ship, our own lander and another Orion.” Note that this isn’t what they won the option b proposal with.

        Tell you what: Here’s the mockup BO delivered to NASA: https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/space/nasa-evaluate-blue-origin-human-lunar-lander-hands

        SpaceX: “Here’s renders of what our lander will look like.

        Wow, renders! They even have renders of Starship on Mars, it must be true!

        We have a full scale prototype out in Boca and we’re blowing it up to see if our math and simulations are right on how much pressure the tanks can take.

        No they don’t. Not of HLS, and also not of “Starship as needed for HLS”. Musk’s latest speech at SpaceX said the IFT-3 version of starship, that is now called “Starship 1”, can only lift 40 tons to LEO. And that makes it incapable of doing Artemis, and thus incapable of being HLS. He promised “Starship 2” will lift the promised 100 tons to LEO, but that hasn’t flown yet. So they don’t even have a full-scale prototype, but they have scale-models that kinda-sort-look-like-it, and one of them even flew half a mission without a single gram of cargo.

        It’ll require some modifications, such as larger landing legs and dedicated landing engines.”

        Look, there’s apparently a major gap in your knowledge. Starship+Superheavy is big cargo truck that can haul a load or cargo into orbit and come back. What NASA paid for is a trailer-RV that will let you camp out in death valley for a couple of months. And what you’re saying is “Well, SpaceX has got an empty trailer and something to pull it, which is basically the same thing as a full house-on-wheels, because they look the same from the outside.”

        I don’t know how to explain that a lunar lander is very much not the same thing as a rocket with an empty shell on top. SpaceX has the latter.