Given the forthcoming availability of larger diameter rocket fairings, I think we'll see a number launched that will make JWST obsolete at the end of 20 years, but who knows!
also the irony here is that the only the only client this company has now is itself to launch his telecom satellite swarm, which in turn will have a negative effect on ground observations, both in VIS and RF bands. astronomers heavily rely on ground based observations, because on the contrary to space telescope the can modify their instruments easily.
you can do a lot with other technologies, for instance diffractive lenses, chronographs as a separate spaceship, etc, etc... the best for a telescope is not always to have the biggest single piece mirror.
i know i know, i'll get heavily downvoted for the above, i just don't like that the said company test their stuff in a middle of a natural reservation.
I read Musk's statements regarding this towards his workforce as a pure power play to put pressure on them working even harder on ongoing issues like you mentioned.
That being said - if you can produce n amount of engines per time frame, I am positive that they manage to achieve n*x amount of engines per the same time frame as well.
Wasn't that a bit of over-inflation from dodgily-backed NIMBYs, especially in a state where petrochemical industries have abused a lot more natural environments?
Also, sure you can have more complex methods to get to the stage where it's analogous to a single large mirror, but that's why it took 25 years to make JWST (amongst policical reasons too, but still).
If constellations are so bad to astronomy, why do ESA want one?
Finally, I think you'll find KSC in Florida is slap bang in the middle of a huge nature reserve, as it has been for the past 50+ years
I don't think they realistically stand a chance to outcompete SpaceX within the next ten years on any dimension, after all, SpaceX is a fast moving target itself. But that's just my opinion, so we'll have to wait to see how it plays out.
It would be great to have a real competitor to SpaceX, that can't come soon enough, I do give them better chances than Bezos and his toy factory.
Please, just watch the interview. It might change your opinion by listening to the plan, I know I felt much more optimistic about more serious players in the field.
I'm not aware of any reusable vehicles by ULA and all the current flights are fully booked, they're sold out of their current block. There were only a handful of launches last year, I think Electron actually flew more. For the new, they're waiting for engines from Blue Origin but they'll probably end up using RS as it doesn't look like BO will deliver.
The Russians (and Chinese) are basically copying anything SpaceX in terms of reusable heavy lift, which might be a good plan in the long-term but it's not that innovative.
I think long term if Ariane Space and ULA don't adapt that they'll die unless they keep being subsidized. But if SpaceX manages to reduce cost even further then that will make no sense, it is already very hard to justify.
I guess you must really hate NASA then.
> Visitors to Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex are often surprised to discover that they are just as likely to be greeted by an alligator or dolphin. This is because Kennedy Space Center sits in the middle of the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge adjacent to Canaveral National Seashore, one of the largest and most diverse wildlife preserves in Florida. In fact, the refuge supports one of the highest numbers of threatened and endangered species anywhere in the nation.
https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/blog/07/the-wild-side-of-...
Much of it was built before the EPA existed, so routine was routine. But, it is still being expanded, lately on behalf of SpaceX. Scheduling in lots of studies and meetings just amount to delaying, if they can't actually affect whether the paving happens. No amount of public hand-wringing gives a turtle back the nesting site its ancestors have returned to for a million years, or a hundred million.
If they've built on 5% of the land in 50 years, then we should have another 950 years of expansion, at that extrapolation.
You are aware there is a conservation programme running too?
If the supposed conservation programme doesn't actually block paving, then it is what they call a formality. Business-as-usual is routine.
The US space program was practically moribund for those 50 years. The paving was done quickly at the start. With space activity ramping up, paving will too, as we see starting already. What are you demanding as a definition of "routine" beyond paving where they like, when they like?
You say they are routinely abusing the area and all I'm getting from that is that they've paved over areas, 5% of the area. How is this routinely abusing the area?
Could you post an journal article explaining how this has routinely abused the area and put the ecosystem at risk?