Quote:
Originally Posted by M_Six
I did a 10 week internship at NASA (Johnson Space Center) back in '96. I worked for a "NASA" scientist who was employed by Rockwell, as most of them were. The difference between NASA scientists then and Space-X is that NASA does a shitload of research in many, many areas, whereas Space-X is focused on getting their launch vehicles to work consistently and cheaply enough to turn a profit. Nothing wrong with that, but comparing the two is sort of apples to oranges. And to be honest, when Space-X screws up and blows up a rocket, it's passed off as no big deal. Better luck next time. NASA blows up a rocket and heads are going to roll.
Not saying there isn't waste at NASA, but there is a vastly different approach in how they accomplish a much more varied mission.
|
I have no issue with NASA doing its own thing. My issue is more on the politics/poor management decisions( ie: challenger and Columbia). I wonder what SLS would be if NASA could design a clean sheet rocket vs being told to take Space Shuttle hardware and repackage it by Congress.