Successful US unmanned landing on the moon.

[PeterNSteinmetz]

An American Spacecraft Successfully Lands on the Moon for the First Time Since 1972

After a tense touchdown process with last-minute changes, U.S.-based company Intuitive Machines received a signal from its uncrewed Odysseus lunar lander on Thursday evening

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Oops, not so perfect.

Private US spacecraft is on its side on the moon with some antennas covered up, the company says

Intuitive Machines initially believed its six-footed private lunar lander, was upright after Thursday’s touchdown. But CEO Steve Altemus said Friday the craft “caught a foot in the surface,” falling onto its side and, quite possibly, leaning against a rock.

apnews.com

 

[Winthrop]

Wonder if it is designed to radiate heat at any angle

 

[Nemo]

This failure by private industry goes to show that this is one thing the government can do better. Space exploration should be done for all humankind and not for profit. When shareholders get involved this kind of thing happens.

 

[rotorwrench]

This failure by private industry goes to show that this is one thing the government can do better.

Not really. Musk and SpaceX have done more in the last 3 years than NASA has done in the past 20 years. In the case of space exploration if you add up the failures of all government programs and their costs and compared it to current private venture space exploration across the board you'll find the private side has a better track record at the moment. And if you think governments are not in it for "profit" as well then you may want to check your facts. The private side simply knows how to accomplish the mission with better margins.

 

[Nemo]

Not really. Musk and SpaceX have done more in the last 3 years than NASA has done in the past 20 years. In the case of space exploration if you add up the failures of all government programs and their costs and compared it to current private venture space exploration across the board you'll find the private side has a better track record at the moment. And if you think governments are not in it for "profit" as well then you may want to check your facts. The private side simply knows how to accomplish the mission with better margins.

These companies are only free-riding on what NASA has already done. The reality is that the government has better things to do with taxpayer money now than spend it on doing what we did fifty years ago.

 

[rotorwrench]

These companies are only free-riding on what NASA has already done.

Specifically, which parts of NASA is SpaceX or others "free-riding on today or the last 10 years?

And if this was true, why is NASA "free-riding" on SpaceX to get their next "high-tech" project Artemis to the moon?

 

[Bob Noel]

Apparently people don't realize that NASA had a mandate that everything they developed was available to the public... at least it's my understanding that was the case up through the Apollo missions.

 

[rotorwrench]

Apparently people don't realize that NASA had a mandate that everything they developed was available to the public... at least it's my understanding that was the case up through the Apollo missions.

That is true. And entities like the United Space Alliance and United Launch Alliance took advantage of those NASA developed technologies.

However, SpaceX and a couple others did not and developed their own engines, control systems, etc.. They wanted products that were expandable and reuseable which outside of the Shuttle were not a priority at the NASA.

So while the United Launch Alliance had to eventually buy engines from Russia to power their Atlas rockets, SpaceX with their new products left them is the dust literally.

And NASA's decision to use SpaceX to service the ISS and be the initial launch platform for Artemis speaks volumes on the subject IMHO.

 

[Winthrop]

I should note this before Peter does:

" . . . if we do continue down the road of a mixed economy, then let them pour all the millions and billions they can into the space program. If the United States is to commit suicide, let it not be for the sake and support of the worst human elements, the parasites-on-principle at home and abroad. Let it not be its only epitaph that it died paying its enemies for its own destruction. Let some of its lifeblood go to the support of achievement and the progress of science. The American flag on the moon — or on Mars, or on Jupiter — will at least be a worthy monument to what had once been a great country."

-Ayn Rand

To the point now, if some company uses that research now is that not a good thing?