EPTNASA and the Private Sector - Page 240
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
WASHINGTON — Axiom Space announced Aug. 21 that it has raised $350 million from Saudi Arabian and South Korean investors to continue development of a commercial space station. The Houston-based company said it raised a Series C round that was led by Aljazira Capital and Boryung Co., Ltd., along with what it called “an array of diverse backers” that include venture capital funds and strategic brand partners. “We are honored to team with investors like Aljazira Capital, Boryung and others, who are committed to realizing the Axiom Space vision,” said Michael Suffredini, president and chief executive of Axiom Space, in statement. “Together, we are working to serve innovators in medicine, materials science and on-orbit infrastructure who represent billions of dollars in demand over the coming decade.” Aljazira Capital is a Saudi investment company owned by Bank Al Jazira. Boryung is a South Korean pharmaceutical company that disclosed in December 2022 that it had invested $50 million into Axiom. In the statement announcing the new round, Axiom described Boryung as a “multi-round lead investor” in the company. “In line with the Saudi Vision 2030’s transformative approach, we acknowledge the need for technology toward the advancement of human life. To that end, we are excited to support Axiom Space along its journey of building for beyond,” said Naif AlMesned, chief executive and managing director of Aljazira Capital, in a statement. “We recognize the depth of human spaceflight knowledge and the level of space station construction and management experience at Axiom Space, as well as the sophistication of the company’s sales and business strategy,” Jay Kim, chairman of Boryung, said in the same statement. Axiom did not disclose specific plans for the new funding, but the company is actively working on a series of commercial modules it plans to start installing on the International Space Station by 2026. Those modules will later separate from the ISS and form the core of a standalone space station. As a precursor to those modules, Axiom has been flying a series of private astronaut missions to the ISS on SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. The second of those missions, Ax-2, went to the ISS in May and included two Saudi astronauts. The next, Ax-3, is planned for early 2024. Axiom, along with Collins Aerospace, won Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services contracts from NASA in 2022 to develop spacesuits for use on the ISS and Artemis missions. Axiom has received $370 million in funded task orders for its contract to date, which the company said in its statement has a maximum value of $1.26 billion. Overall, Axiom said it has more than $2.2 billion in customer contracts but did not include details about those contracts beyond its NASA spacesuit award. The Series C round brings the total raised by Axiom to date to more than $505 million. Source | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6193 Posts
SpaceX turned a profit during the first quarter due to surging revenue, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, citing documents detailing the privately held company’s quarterly and annual results. The Journal reports that SpaceX posted a first-quarter profit of $55 million on revenue of $1.5 billion. For the full year 2022, Elon Musk’s rocket company posted a loss of $559 million on revenue of $4.6 billion, the report says. It roughly halved losses while doubling what it brought in during 2021. If they weren't sinking a huge amount of money into Starship development, they would be very, very profitable, but it's not bad as-is. https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/15tyxr0/spacex_reportedly_turned_a_profit_in_the_first/ https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/17/spacex-reported-a-profit-in-the-first-quarter-wsj-says.html | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Xrivalfitness
1 Post
| ||
|
BradTheBaneling
37 Posts
On August 12 2023 12:49 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: SLS flying again before Starship is not happening. Only thing keeping oribtal flights from happening is NASA and FAA. Once they figure out what went wrong with the last attempt, Starship will fly again and then it'll be just like Falcon9; routine. Isn’t part of that because of a Fish & Wildlife Services report that states that the launch caused a fire that killed wildlife? You know in large part because Elon decided he knew better than NASA and a water deluge system was not required? That same water deluge system that they’re literally installing. And yeah generally there is going to be something of an expectation that you are going to first test fire your reusable engines on the ground to ensure they can all run before you try and just full send it… It’s foolish that SpaceX didn’t build the facilities necessary to hot-fire test their setup for the duration it would need to burn for an orbital placement. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
On September 06 2023 18:20 BradTheBaneling wrote: Isn’t part of that because of a Fish & Wildlife Services report that states that the launch caused a fire that killed wildlife? You know in large part because Elon decided he knew better than NASA and a water deluge system was not required? That same water deluge system that they’re literally installing. And yeah generally there is going to be something of an expectation that you are going to first test fire your reusable engines on the ground to ensure they can all run before you try and just full send it… It’s foolish that SpaceX didn’t build the facilities necessary to hot-fire test their setup for the duration it would need to burn for an orbital placement. You'll have to show me which companies hot fire rockets for the full duration it takes to reach orbital placement. I've only ever seen short fires to test engines are functioning properly, with the longest being around 1-2 minutes. I may be remembering incorrectly. That report was also later found that it didn't kill any wildlife or nothing was found. Same with the debris that was kicked up. This being one of, if not the most, powerful rocket ever constructed is going to break a lot of stuff. I think the water pool being added now is because they didn't build the concrete/metal firing pad strong enough. Is a water pool needed? For the sake of redundant safety, sure. Still won't guarantee that once this thing takes off it doesn't melt the stand or something else. That fire isn't going to be contained to just the pod when it takes off, but definitely spread a little bit. If they had cleared more grass/debris maybe? But then what doesn't stop a rogue piece of whatever from lighting up the wildlands anyway? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Also at Rocket Lab: | ||
|
BradTheBaneling
37 Posts
On September 07 2023 00:07 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: You'll have to show me which companies hot fire rockets for the full duration it takes to reach orbital placement. I've only ever seen short fires to test engines are functioning properly, with the longest being around 1-2 minutes. I may be remembering incorrectly. That report was also later found that it didn't kill any wildlife or nothing was found. Same with the debris that was kicked up. This being one of, if not the most, powerful rocket ever constructed is going to break a lot of stuff. I think the water pool being added now is because they didn't build the concrete/metal firing pad strong enough. Is a water pool needed? For the sake of redundant safety, sure. Still won't guarantee that once this thing takes off it doesn't melt the stand or something else. That fire isn't going to be contained to just the pod when it takes off, but definitely spread a little bit. If they had cleared more grass/debris maybe? But then what doesn't stop a rogue piece of whatever from lighting up the wildlands anyway? SLS was hot fired on the ground for ~6 minutes. That’s not what Bloomberg is reporting from a Fish and Wildlife Services report on the subject. I mean NASA literally managed to launch SLS which is 50-60% of the thrust of Starship but the launch repercussions mostly involved things like paint being stripped away - not concrete blocks being flung hundreds of feet and particulate matter miles away. It’s not a “water pool” it’s a water deluge system. The difference may seem pedantic but the point of the system is that you limit the acoustic damage and the thermal damage that the rocket is doing to everything around it. It’s an extremely necessary part of a safe launch pad and has been known to NASA now for decades and yet SpaceX made the choice to ignore their recommendations. That fire can absolutely be contained to the pad I don’t have an idea as to what you’re talking about… Somehow NASA could launch the Saturn 5 with 50% the thrust of Starship and not cause fires miles away. Prior to computer simulation and our much more extensive understanding of the localized damaged caused by rocket engines they managed that one over a half century ago. And that was sending the first people to another heavenly body to mark a turning point in our species - not to pursue the financial pursuits of one man and his partners. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
On September 08 2023 19:29 BradTheBaneling wrote: SLS was hot fired on the ground for ~6 minutes. That’s not what Bloomberg is reporting from a Fish and Wildlife Services report on the subject. I mean NASA literally managed to launch SLS which is 50-60% of the thrust of Starship but the launch repercussions mostly involved things like paint being stripped away - not concrete blocks being flung hundreds of feet and particulate matter miles away. It’s not a “water pool” it’s a water deluge system. The difference may seem pedantic but the point of the system is that you limit the acoustic damage and the thermal damage that the rocket is doing to everything around it. It’s an extremely necessary part of a safe launch pad and has been known to NASA now for decades and yet SpaceX made the choice to ignore their recommendations. That fire can absolutely be contained to the pad I don’t have an idea as to what you’re talking about… Somehow NASA could launch the Saturn 5 with 50% the thrust of Starship and not cause fires miles away. Prior to computer simulation and our much more extensive understanding of the localized damaged caused by rocket engines they managed that one over a half century ago. And that was sending the first people to another heavenly body to mark a turning point in our species - not to pursue the financial pursuits of one man and his partners. First, I stand corrected on the hot fire duration. Watched the NASA test and it was amazing. It was also held off of a tributary with direct exhaust going into the habitat around it (quite a verdant habitat it looked like as well). Just a thing I noticed. The infrastructure that NASA has built over the years is commendable. But that isn't what these other companies are doing. Some are going the tried and true approach, albeit making the materials more robust and reuseable. SpaceX does and has always done rapid iterative development. Build, test, refine. They don't have the luxury of a government body feeding them 50bn every year for projects that run over budget/time by a decade. This doesn't excuse the negligence of SpaceX if there are any. Second, in order to get a "water deluge" system at the Boca Chica facility, development on a lot of things would have had to hault for 2-5 years as they excavated the ground and/or raised the pad to what NASA has at Johnson. I can't understand why they didn't. Now that they are doing it, it's the bare minimum to comply with whatever FAA regulations are put forth. I personally think something like this is needed now that they know just how powerful of a rocket they have. I don't care of 4 eggs and a handful of crabs were burnt. And with the EPA and everything else going tits up, this little 4 acre fire means nothing, really. Third, the fire can be contained initially. I'm talking about as it launches or as it is ascending. A good hot piece of whatever could spark a fire. Or if it's close enough after launch and pad clear, could still spark a far. Have you see how extensively HUGE NASA launch facilities are compared to almost every other company? I get you want safety, or you just want Musk to fail and by extension, SpaceX. That's not my concern. Allowing these companies to operate wherever is what is pushing us forward in this new Space age. If you forced everyone to have facilities at NASA centers and they could only launch from NASA/FAA approved centers, we'd be fucked because the back log of launches would be astronomical. In summary, I don't care that there was a 4 acre fire. I don't care that a handful of wildlife was burnt. I don't care that they blew up the launch pad and now have to eat crow. I don't care what your personal grudge or misgivings about SpaceX/Elon Musk are. I care that we continue to push space exploration for all companies and the US in large, forward. I want it done safely but not at the cost of innovation. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
edit: And here they are: | ||
|
BradTheBaneling
37 Posts
On September 08 2023 21:20 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: First, I stand corrected on the hot fire duration. Watched the NASA test and it was amazing. It was also held off of a tributary with direct exhaust going into the habitat around it (quite a verdant habitat it looked like as well). Just a thing I noticed. The infrastructure that NASA has built over the years is commendable. But that isn't what these other companies are doing. Some are going the tried and true approach, albeit making the materials more robust and reuseable. SpaceX does and has always done rapid iterative development. Build, test, refine. They don't have the luxury of a government body feeding them 50bn every year for projects that run over budget/time by a decade. This doesn't excuse the negligence of SpaceX if there are any. Second, in order to get a "water deluge" system at the Boca Chica facility, development on a lot of things would have had to hault for 2-5 years as they excavated the ground and/or raised the pad to what NASA has at Johnson. I can't understand why they didn't. Now that they are doing it, it's the bare minimum to comply with whatever FAA regulations are put forth. I personally think something like this is needed now that they know just how powerful of a rocket they have. I don't care of 4 eggs and a handful of crabs were burnt. And with the EPA and everything else going tits up, this little 4 acre fire means nothing, really. Third, the fire can be contained initially. I'm talking about as it launches or as it is ascending. A good hot piece of whatever could spark a fire. Or if it's close enough after launch and pad clear, could still spark a far. Have you see how extensively HUGE NASA launch facilities are compared to almost every other company? I get you want safety, or you just want Musk to fail and by extension, SpaceX. That's not my concern. Allowing these companies to operate wherever is what is pushing us forward in this new Space age. If you forced everyone to have facilities at NASA centers and they could only launch from NASA/FAA approved centers, we'd be fucked because the back log of launches would be astronomical. In summary, I don't care that there was a 4 acre fire. I don't care that a handful of wildlife was burnt. I don't care that they blew up the launch pad and now have to eat crow. I don't care what your personal grudge or misgivings about SpaceX/Elon Musk are. I care that we continue to push space exploration for all companies and the US in large, forward. I want it done safely but not at the cost of innovation. Wow it’s almost like NASA had to do the same thing when they were building rockets without the use of a computer. Jesus bro maybe take some time and read even the slightest amount about the history of space programs. By the way NASA doesn’t get 50bn a year, although SpaceX does get hundreds of millions to billions a year in grants from the US government. Kind of funny how you skip all of that. Oh so at first it was no wildlife, now it’s “I don’t give a fuck about wildlife”. Well don’t worry pal, that’s why you’re not working at Fish and Wildlife Services. It’s sort of funny how you just left this point by the wayside with a “fuck crabs and bird eggs”. Once again I fail to understand what you’re talking about with a “good hot piece of whatever could spark a fire”. Are you talking about the rocket? Cause if that’s ripping apart it’s probably bad and rockets generally tend to not just have pieces fall off of them during flight. Oh so at first there was no damage to these rare wetlands, now you just don’t give a fuck. They also don’t let these companies launch from “wherever”. You really, really need to read about this and maybe take some time to understand a little bit about how this all works. No these companies can’t launch from anywhere or we would have rocket stages falling back to land and killing people like you can see in China. Outside of the fact that you move the goalposts more than anyone I’ve ever met I’m glad you responded. Can you go ahead and tell me how SpaceX has helped space exploration? Their biggest accomplishment is that Falcon 9 stages can land themselves assuming the payload isn’t too heavy. Other than that it’s kind of funny when there are individuals like yourself who are creaming themselves that Elon did in 2015 what NASA did in 1965. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
NASA got 33bn FY23. Sorry I said 50bn. That's a big difference. I didn't say SpaceX didn't get money from the government, but those are obligations to perform a variety of tasks and mostly come from NASA with a few defense launches here and there. I also said nothing was found. I was mistaken. When I say something hot can get flung into the environment, I literally mean that. There are any number of things that could come loose or was ignited by the engine taking off. I fail to undesrtand what is so hard to understand with that statement. ANYTHING COULD CATCH FIRE. We're not building in space, but on Earth. Debris is a thing and can happen. I didn't say there wasn't any damage to the wetlands. Unless you're adding wetlands and wildlife into the same boat. I saw there was a fire. I never said anything to the contrary. I commented on the initial investigation and in my reply, I stated as such that the fire was unfortunate but ultimately, I don't care. And these companies are launching from California, Texas, Florida, Washington, Nevada. If we can pick the pace up, We'd launch from the Midwest as well as the upper East Coast, alwhile ensuring safety is paramount. I'd love to have more sea-based launch platforms, but I don't know if that will ever happen. And I don't understand your remark on what space exploration. SpaceX, not Elon, did that in 2015. He only pushed them forward. Don't cream yourself at every opportunity to dig at the company to spite one person. I don't care about Elon and wish he'd stop interferring with what SpaceX is doing. The amount of talented people working there don't need a hype man. They're doing fine by themselves. I don't really care to continue this back and forth. I think SpaceX is moving in the right direction with the way they're going about the process of launches and rocket design. I'd love if NASA could cut the bullshit from their program and operate autonousmly, but we can't have that. So until then SpaceX is handling the bulk of the workload. I'm fine with that. I think NASA/JPL needs to be involved in every launch or new test of some new tech. They're masters of what they do. | ||
|
BradTheBaneling
37 Posts
I mean generally unless you have a RUD you’re not going to have anything “catching fire”. The tanks would be eaten away and rapidly destroyed if the vehicle itself was on fire, if it’s the pad that’s on fire then who cares? It’s a concrete and metal pad, it’s not exactly like the fire is going to go on for days. The problem is when you destroy concrete chunks by heating their exteriors to a few hundred degrees and launching them a few miles. You should care about wildlife. The most common experience from human beings in space is something called the “overview effect” and it occurs regardless of country of origin, faith, background, or occupational origin. It’s where people see the Earth in all her majestic blues, greens, oranges, reds, yellows, blacks and whites seemingly floating in the abyss, with breathable air and vast skies and incredible nature and great seas and rivers of freshwater and they come to value the Earth far, far more than they did prior to when they were in space. There’s not going to be a planet we can get to that will mimic 1/1000 of Earth’s quality - we must protect it or we motherfuck ourselves for eternity. I don’t think launches ever happen from Nevada and I’m fairly sure they don’t really happen in California or Washington. You aren’t going to launch a rocket over land considering that any issues might mean you drop a few thousand pounds of rocket fuel and debris on a city. You don’t want to launch over the pacific from California or Washington as you’re going to have to fight the natural spin of the Earth and add 200 m/s of Delta-V to your vehicle - those launch sites would only really be useful for sun-synchronous orbits. You will never see a rocket launch from the midwest or from the east coast - the first is safety due to safety, you will never have FAA approval to launch over land, the second is due to orbital mechanics, as you generally want to launch as close to the equator as possible, I suppose if some specific inclination was needed the East coast presents an opportunity, but even then I really doubt that. My comment on space exploration was in reference to the post of yours I quoted in the last sentence. Except the company is actually one man when he holds the majority of share votes, he’s the majority shareholder, and it’s not a public company. The problem is that you’re making the wrong assumption that correct next step in human space progress is the biggest fucking rocket we can make. Why doesn’t NASA just strap 29 RS-25s together and have themselves their own ridiculous Starship vehicle? What specifically does a very large rocket actually accomplish for humanity? Going to Mars? When? How does that even begin to work? Where is any of the work on the hundreds of thousands of issues that you need to address outside of building big rocket? NASA doesn’t have bullshit in its program, SpaceX is a bullshit program that has so far mostly been used to launch military satellites and Elon’s space based internet company. I’m sorry but between this, the lack of knowledge about space history and the lack of knowledge about space physics I’m going to conclude that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about specifically when it comes to the nature of operations at NASA (in terms of SpaceX and other private companies you do seem very knowledgeable). I don’t even understand what you think the point of space is… To make as much money as possible for a handful of companies? It’s that space provides us with a beautiful opportunity for ingenious collaboration both domestically and internationally, it’s that space provides us with a vastly different environment than our own (such as 0G, almost zero pressure, almost zero temperature etc…), it’s that space is the only way we can learn about the origins of the very universe that we get to inhabit a tiny minuscule fraction of, it’s that space is the only way we can learn about the fundamental laws that govern all reality. It’s not so a few egotistical maniacs can run pathetic tourism businesses or litter it with internet satellites controlled by a child of apartheid South Africa. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8833 Posts
EVERYONE ELSE: Apologies for mucking up the thread. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||
