Starlink's Disruption of the Space Industry

Re:Starlink's Disruption of the Space Industry by JumpCrisscross on Thursday May 30, 2024 @03:16PM (#40527583)

Sorry, I should have said any launch vehicle development would. Every launch vehicle developed since 2003, including Atlas, technically advances SDI’s agenda. SpaceX does it best because they’ve done launch best. But it’s ahistoric to link the cause of that effect to SDI.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starlink's Disruption of the Space Industry by lupusreal on Thursday May 30, 2024 @03:50PM (#40527880)

Rockets like Vulcan do not materially advance an SDI agenda because building a plausible SDI project with such rockets isn't possible.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starlink's Disruption of the Space Industry by JumpCrisscross on Thursday May 30, 2024 @04:26PM (#40528230)

> Rockets like Vulcan do not materially advance an SDI agenda

Rockets like Vulcan are similarly capable for SDI purposes as the Falcon 1 was.

I'm open to being corrected by anyone else who was involved with SpaceX in its early days. But the SDI connection to Falcon reusable, much less Starlink, is an expert exercise in retconning.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Starlink's Disruption of the Space Industry by lupusreal on Friday May 31, 2024 @04:27AM (#40532650)

Falcon 1 doesn't move the needle on SDI either, except insofar as it was intended as a developmental stepping stone towards a reusable rocket (which it was publicly claimed to be.) Vulcan isn't, SLS isn't... Blue Origin's work is.

Now, you said that even Atlas rockets developed after 2003 are technically advancing an SDI agenda. I don't know which Atlas rocket you're talking about (Atlas V Heavy development?), but it definitely isn't true. There was never any pretext of the Atlas rocket family being a step towards reusability, and therefore it has nothing to do with any serious SDI proposal.

[ Parent | on HN ]