[AR] Re: irrational gushing enthusiasm (was Re: Future Exploration...)
- From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:27:09 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, John Stoffel wrote:
But wouldn't this be considered a radical change because from a US
perspective, you now have much much much less ITAR headaches than if
you tried to launch on a Proton...
Those headaches, although non-trivial, can be overcome -- US-built
payloads have flown on Proton with some frequency. A useful reduction of
cost and hassle, yes, but I don't think it reasonably qualifies as radical
change.
Gah! I'm not making my point well here. I suspect that integrating a
US built sat, designed in English and EST to PST timezones, is easier
when working with a launcher provider who is also based +- a few
timezones from you...
Like, say, ULA, which also sells Delta/Atlas launches (with interplanetary
capability) commercially, and has for quite a few years now? Admittedly
their commercial-sales operation has been kind of off-and-on, since much
of their business is government, but if you came offering money, I don't
think they'd argue...
As you note, there is an issue with bureaucracy when dealing with a
supplier who mostly sells to the government. But this, again, is a
quantitative issue of cost and hassle, rather than something deep and
fundamental whose removal would make a huge difference. And by the way, a
large fraction of SpaceX's order book is government these days -- doesn't
look that big if you count launches, but by dollar amount it's a lot
larger -- so don't assume that they are immune to this.
Henry
Other related posts: