From: Technotranscendence (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Date: Mon Jul 15 2002 - 04:26:00 MDT
On Monday, July 15, 2002 2:35 AM John K Clark jonkc@att.net wrote:
>> I've been wondering how those who extol the market's
>>unparalleled success in getting things done faster and
>>cheaper and better account for the lack of a free
>>enterprise space flight system superior to NASA's.
>
> It's easy to launch a satellite cheaper than what it cost NASA to do
it,
> just pay China or Russia a few bucks to send it into space for you.
Or Sea Launch: http://www.sea-launch.com/
> Of
> course all three subsidize such launches and have already spent many
> billions of dollars in development costs; there is no way a company
> can make money competing against that.
Much rocket design was actually done in the private sector and the
initial impetus for modern rocketry was private: Goddard and von Braun
were working privately at first. (I don't think Goddard ever got
government money, though I could be wrong. Von Braun certainly did.) Of
course, we can't change history to see how rcoketry would've developed
had not the Nazis, the Soviets, and the American government gotten
involved. (An analogy could be made with aviation, though that would
only be an analogy. I still believe it might give us a clue...)
Of course, that government space agencies continue to exist does put
them at an unfair competitive advantage because of the subsidies for
launches. In Russia's case, however, I'm not sure if current commercial
launches are being directly subsidized. I'm under the impression these
are now profit centers for that agency. (Of course, if one adds in past
development, yes, even current launches are being subsidized by past
developments.)
Cheers!
Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:27 MST