Re:IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink
by peterfirefly on Sunday February 19, 2023 @05:38AM
(#34856317)
Carmack's was very much a part-time venture. It was interesting to read their blog and watch their videos. It was clear that they were very good at certain things (code + welding) and not very good at others (electronics, fire-proofing, planning, testing, finite element analysis, any kind of simulation that Carmack didn't write).
An interesting fact is that they did very well as long as they could conduct cheap tests very often. As their rockets got bigger, they could no longer do that and then they floundered.
Re:IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink
by PartiallyTyped on Sunday February 19, 2023 @05:48AM
(#34856387)
> But no one else tried for more than 50 years.
Was there a good enough reason to go again?
In contrast, there is a good reason to have re-usable rockets and quick deployment now.
Re:IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink
by inglor_cz on Sunday February 19, 2023 @06:00AM
(#34856475)
This is a good argument.
Re:IRIS²: The EU’s Response to Musk’s Starlink
by Vespasian on Sunday February 19, 2023 @05:57AM
(#34856444)
I think it's because the moon has no immediate benefit besides
Star-Link and reusable rockets now have tremendous military uses which are being demonstrated in Ukraine.
Monetary concerns will take a back seat to that.
The barriers to becoming an agile space company are formidable. When looking at SpaceX, we forget how many space startups from that period are now defunct and forgotten. John Carmack founded one, too; it is gone.