Recent Results
Washington Post: "Over the years, Musk and his businesses have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits"
So, apparently <strong>SpaceX</strong> was the biggest beneficiary of this sum all thanks to <strong>SpaceX</strong> doing the work of NASA albeit for far less so Musk saved taxpayers billions.
Looks like OUR very own government including NASA hired and paid Musk to do the job for less than what the inept and bloated government agencies would ...
I think for space stocks LUNR is a good consideration, with a couple of potential catalysts for positive news in their near future. Also LDO are worth a look for medium-long term (as for most/all space stocks this is expected anyway) - as they've recently announced a planned European rival to <strong>SpaceX</strong> in partnership with AIR and HO
<strong>SpaceX</strong> ruining the night sky
>NASA does not profit.
<strong>Space</strong> <strong>X</strong>, Boeing and Blue Origin
>profits from the general populace knowing that the earth is a sphere.
>what would be the benefit of lying about a spherical earth if it meant science and technology are held back so severely? Who would benefit from that scenario?
The people who sell us energy and raw earth minerals
>Where is this hidden land?
Beyond the ice wall that surrounds the known continents
>how does a globe earth model ...
You need to know then that their satellites are made super fast and cheap. They would not be able to stand the conditions over there. <strong>SpaceX</strong> strategy was to get the market fast. And when some satellites die, they just launch more since they are cheap to make.
Refference: I did work on testing parts for them
And can we add <strong>spacex</strong> is only for him? lol
I’m not arguing that crew launches won’t be more expensive. I’m contesting your $1.5B per cargo only missions to Mars.
First, Starship has up to 100 tons of payload capacity to the surface of mars. That would lead to a price for buying the payload capacity an entire ship of close to $10B, but I don’t think that will happen.
First, the <strong>SpaceX</strong> cost for landing a cargo starship on mars will likely be about $250M. That’s based on $20M build costs, and 12 tanker flights at just und...
<strong>SpaceX</strong>, Tesla, Neuralink?
Yea, program development isn't faster than Falcon, both were engine first, and required their engines to pass basic test stand pathfinding before real work could begin on the vehicles themselves.
Saying that with the caveat that it isn't a fair comparison, as Starship didn't share any (other than the CTO), staff between Falcon 9 program or engine heritage. Even the Starship pad design team shared no one between the Falcon 9 pad rats and the ones in Boca Chica, per the head of <strong>spaceX</s...
Except a gargantuan deposit and a timeline that is not realistic.
Man I love space, and I love the engineering from <strong>SpaceX</strong> too, but too many people buy into their snakeoil timelines. Any timeline Elon, <strong>SpaceX</strong> or Tesla give is usually off by at least 50%.
Starship was going to be landing on Mars in 2024 "at the latest". Elon has a lot of power, but he does not overwhelm the finances of his companies, the most profitable route is usually not the fastest, and he ...
Best guess is that <strong>SpaceX</strong> has realised how quickly the liquid oxygen and methane will boil off and don’t have the money to develop cryo-cooler technology like Blue Origin so they want tax payers money to cover their issue in the form of a giant sun shield on Gateway.
Why so many startup ideas in this sub are so low quality?
I don’t expect to have a pitch for a <strong>SpaceX</strong> competitor but I finding startup ideas are just replicas with low effort and poor validation.
If it is a hobby it is fine but it is really hard to find compelling value proposition that solves a critical need
>What do you mean "sell the ball earth model"?
I mean make you believe it
>No one profits off of people knowing that the earth is a sphere.
A lot of people do actually. NASA has a 68 million dollar per day budget. They buy rockets from <strong>Space</strong> <strong>X</strong> and Boeing.
Then there is the Space Force, which is part of the DoD budget.
Then there are private contracts, like Blue Origin and other companies have.
>What energy sources and land would suddenly be availabl...
And currently <strong>spacex</strong> is testing of the answer is still yes with more and more tiles being removed
Currently we have had a proppelant tank breach with a successfull landing
I must state how insane it is that it was able to survive all of that despite haveing quite litteraly NO protection (some of the places with out tiles also didnt have ablative material)
You think Tesla would be worth the current price without the <strong>SpaceX</strong> connection?
True however "profit at all costs" typically ends up with much more efficiently used products. <strong>SpaceX</strong> learned to land rockets because it cuts costs in half. Its now the most used private space company by our federal government for contracting.
You see why that's not the point though, right? If Tesla kicks Elon out, it wouldn't make sense for Trump to punish <strong>SpaceX</strong>, which he still is involved with.
Ok i agree but it's different if you are running a company. <strong>Spacex</strong> didn't want DONATED starlinks to be used in drones that could kill civilians.
Again - for the 100th time the argument is about donated starlinks. The US gov bought and paid for millions worth now that Elon doesn't control and nobody talks about that.
The entire hysteria was focused on donated starlinks by <strong>spacex</strong> and what Ukraine could do with them. It is not unreasonable to say they can't be ...
I think we agree on certain things, leave the transportation in this case rocket to the transportation companies: <strong>spacex</strong>, ula, rocketlab, arianespace etc and leave the actual science like the mars rovers, telescopes like james webb and many more to nasa.
The sls is just very expensive and cuts into the already small budget nasa has and could be better used for other things. This is exactly why it was a good idea to move europa clipper from sls to falcon heavy
Bugger... Pay the fucker the money so you can really screw up tesla and finally shut the business down... And then give <strong>SpaceX</strong> his special "love".........
The best deal is lose the man at this point - as his reputation is now toxic to Tesla. That’s thanks to his political shenanigans, and especially his ‘gesturing’ which shows particularly poor forsight and a poor set of values.
I would still support his work at <strong>SpaceX</strong> as no one else is doing this highly valuable development.
Goverments get to take your land. Private companies don't. Except by lobbying the government to do it for them (and even then that's become illegal in most states, after the backlash to Kelo vs. New London). [This includes Texas](https://ij.org/issues/private-property/eminent-domain/texas-eminent-domain-laws/). So <strong>SpaceX</strong> can't really do much about it.
(Though the minute the feds want to build a wall, they'll trivially be able to use eminent domain).
<strong>SpaceX</strong>, History or 80s rock music
Yeah, after all <strong>SpaceX</strong> is a transportation company that gets paid to put things into orbit. Even NASA pays them money to make thinks. Of they were to compete with NASA's output (including the research, the most important part) with the same budget whilst operating on the current corporate private structure, do you think they would ever be able to catch up? Now it's upto you if think space version of FedEx as a more efficient 'Space Agency' or not.
The big bet is FSD, but they'll be second to market after Mercedes. Same with robotaxi, late to the party after waymo. Robotics, that faces stiff competition from Chinese firms and Boston dynamics. AI, well Groks not really the enhanced productivity type, its meme hype. <strong>SpaceX</strong>, profitable but no transparency and valuation inflated by Musk buying into it with his other companies. Its a tangled mess of bullshit and circular spending.
That's a window of about 14 years. Considering <strong>SpaceX</strong> went from Falcon 1 getting to orbit, to launching and landing Falcon Heavy in 10 years, I think you'll be wrong.
Much better EVs to get at the Tesla price point now, tho. Tesla absolutely fucked off their first to make an advantage and have also kneecapped their charging infrastructure. They are cooked, full stop. Especially if BYD is ever let into the US, Musk knows it; all he can do is try to roll XAI, Tesla, and <strong>SpaceX</strong> into one giant company. Not saying there isn't a lot of money to be made playing TSLA , but I wouldn't want it in my 401k.
<strong>Space</strong> <strong>X</strong> is a separate company.
All of you eager pickpockets will be sorely disappointed by any “billionaire or wealth” tax. Almost half of any tax collected is squandered by the bureaucracy of government. Thank god for the billionaires who fund new business, invest in infrastructure and create wealth for many, they also pay the lion’s share of taxes (even if they take loans on their portfolios for income the billionaires pay more in property, sales and use taxes in a month than most will pay in a lifetime) and the exodus fro...
Starship design and Raptor development through production certified engines on the hopper testing in 2018 started in 2012, according to <strong>SpaceX</strong> CTO and head of engine design Tom Mueller. The Starship Heavy lift/raptor team had nothing to do with Falcon or Merlin block D development since 2012. He had completed the raptor engine production cert after 4-6 years.
<strong>SpaceX</strong> head of propusion in 2018"“**I’ve been working on Mars for the last four years, so I’m not going...
I don't think it's that black and white. Elon is a conman in many ventures and a cretin personally, but <strong>space</strong> <strong>x</strong> has succeeded in a way that countless millions of dollars and engineering hours were unable to achieve in other environments. I don't think he was faking it there.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[FCC](/r/<strong>SpaceX</strong>/comments/1ockbwy/stub/nlpsmnh "Last usage")|Federal Communications Commission|
| |(Iron/steel) [Face-Centered Cubic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropes_of_iron) crystalline structure|
|LEO|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned dur...
It already works without <strong>SpaceX</strong>, so yes.
The board should push for a restructuring with Elon at the top.
Say CEO with one direct report/President ala <strong>SpaceX</strong> and Gwen Shotwell.
Tesla needs an actual operator who can prioritize the day to day work, provide clear leadership, and pushback on Elon when needed.
Who are they delivering cargo for? Invisible Space Agency? <strong>Space</strong> <strong>X</strong> would only ever just lift thier owns stuff on Mars, not for a customer. Is <strong>Space</strong> <strong>X</strong> going to bill themselves? Because no one has established a Mars base yet. Yet here we have Elon talk again on him making shit up.
For those downvoting, you have absolute no peer review of this being a real viable thing. Where is Gwen Shotwell on this? List the contracts? Got no pr...
Yep if you don’t give me my trillion I will call the president and tell him to stop all the <strong>space</strong> <strong>x</strong> stuff or he will threaten to start a new company and have Cheeto to transfer the contracts to the new company with these words. I gave those contracts to Elon not Tesla.
UK PS4 ..no update...and crashing like <strong>space</strong> <strong>X</strong>
Ties to Elon are way tighter as one might think. Apparently Shift4 is doing all of the transaction side for Starlink.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/10/shift4-stock-surges-after-<strong>spacex</strong>-starlink-payments-deal.html
Not sure if you've noticed, but Trump hasn't exactly been great for NASA and <strong>SpaceX</strong> recently. But if people on the left talk about sabotaging <strong>SpaceX</strong>, then Musk's going to continue supporting Republicans in elections with the full weight of Twitter.
At this point the best option for Dems is to remove all roadblocks and get Elon to Mars as soon as possible. Don't give the guy with tons of power reason to use that power against you if you can avoid it, when his ex...
I bought 120 shares at 160/190. Dont regret holding those at all
You forget that tesla is tied to <strong>spaceX</strong>
Majority of commercial satellites and payloads can't launch on Chinese rockets due to ITAR. Less about eroding <strong>SpaceX</strong> and more reachong the same point for their own space infrastructure projects.
I dont think it's a concern. <strong>SpaceX</strong> is not cash-strapped like it uses to be during the early Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 days and they can let themselves prioritize R&D above cashflow. It's fine to concentrate on solving full rapid reuse at whatever payload. That would be revolutionary. Merely maximizing upmass can be done by spamming Falcon Heavies, no Starship needed.
Note how much faster they got to Falcon-level reuse with Starship. It had taken 7 years from first Falcon 9 launch...
The transportation secretary wanker - Dufffy - hates Elon because of a fued that goes back to when Elon was toadying Trump and running around doing idiotic things. This is what it's related to, not any actual concern about "Max Max".
[https://www.axios.com/2025/10/21/elon-musk-trump-nasa-<strong>spacex</strong>-duffy](https://www.axios.com/2025/10/21/elon-musk-trump-nasa-<strong>spacex</strong>-duffy)
All the startups are heavily government funded, they are essentially throwing a ton of money at it to try to erode <strong>SpaceX</strong>' dominance. Actual capitalism looks more like what is happening in the US (many startups, but with more limited funding). In any case, all the Chinese rockets on this chart were developed by the Chinese government. Their private space industry is really just getting started.
They can be true, but aren't. Starship is absolutely orbit capable right now and never achieved orbit solely by design in order to minimize risk to the public from a 100t chunk of steel in orbit.
Musk 100% overpromises on timelines but when it comes to <strong>SpaceX</strong> he also eventually delivers, including the more outlandish claims. If instead of 2030 ot will be 2034 it will still be a huge win for everybody.
Thank you for participating in r/<strong>SpaceX</strong>! Please take a moment to familiarise yourself with our [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/<strong>spacex</strong>/wiki/rules) before commenting. Here's a reminder of some of our most important rules:
* Keep it civil, and directly relevant to <strong>SpaceX</strong> and the thread. Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.
* Don't downvote content you disagree with, unless it clearly...
There was a <strong>SpaceX</strong> launch on 26/10, it might be that.
https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-log/
Only 2 places I want to work *at*: MDA (kinda like the Canadian version of <strong>SpaceX</strong> without the douchebag owner.
And ILM because childhood.
> BTW, to claim something is possible is the burden of the claimant to prove. That's a rule of logic. If you can claim to fly, it's not my burden to prove you cannot. Starship hasn't demonstrated any such capability. Therefore you cannot speak as if it can do so.
This discussion is getting puerile, but if I really must repeat, I'll do so with new wording, but only once.
In its HLS selection statement, Nasa claimed that over the planned LRHO-surface return flight, the Dynetics lander would hav...
Showing
101
to
150
of
1040
results
Create Your Own Searcher
Monitor conversations across Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and more. Get instant alerts when your keywords are mentioned.