Comment by Robotbeat
2 days ago
Having followed SpaceX since the beginning, this is not true at all. People doubted every single step. Industry experts did.
2 days ago
Having followed SpaceX since the beginning, this is not true at all. People doubted every single step. Industry experts did.
People doubt the timelines, not the claims. The timelines are pure fantasy and have been since the start.
> People doubt the timelines, not the claims.
People doubted the claims, too. Particularly landing and re-use.
Concrete example: https://spaceflightnow.com/2015/04/13/ula-plans-to-introduce...
>“When you talk about conventional technologies on a booster like you see other people doing, and being able to recover and reuse that booster 15 times with relatively minimial refurbishmoent costs, that’s pretty darn challenging, and maybe not the right place, in our view, to start on that problem,” Bruno said.
This doesn't really sound like doubting any claim; he's talking about how his organization was approaching it given their limited resources.
12 replies →
Nah, it was everything. Everyone expects aerospace timelines to slip. That wasn’t the issue. I had an aerospace greybeard (guidance and navigation expert… nice guy, btw) from a civilian space agency that you would recognize tell me that booster landing on a droneship was “impossible.”