Muskrat had absolutely nothing to do with any of this other than being a giant pile of money. Not an ounce of the extremely limited brainpower the husk possesses was put into this.
The only people who deserve credit are the engineers who did it, not some overinflated ego who doesn’t know anything except how to hoard money.
We’d still be funding NASA and it’d be much, much better than dumping taxpayer money (which is where the funding for most of their recent advances come from) into a private company instead of the government agency created to do exactly the same thing.
If NASA didn’t believe something would work, they wouldn’t waste R&D on it, especially when the taxpayer would be paying for the failures and demanding more.
This was only ever possible by being privately funded. And yes, public money was added, AFTER it was proven to be viable, which was purely private. Can’t have B without A first.
You seem to have fallen for misinformation. Eric Berger, an accredited journalist, wrote a book on the early days of SpaceX. It’s called “Liftoff” and I recommend you educate yourself instead of trusting random internet strangers.
Multiple key employees of SpaceX have repeatedly proclaimed that Musk is indeed the chief engineer and has an active role in the company. I also think it’s interesting to draw parallells to other similar space startups such as Blue Origin, Armadillo Aerospace, Rocket Lab. What made SpaceX successful while they failed? It is not money because Bezos has plenty of that.
If you want hear more about Elon and engineering I can recommend the interviews and corresponding starbase tour with “The Everyday Astronaut”. There are many hours Elon talking rocketry and explaining how it works in depth.
Muskrat had absolutely nothing to do with any of this other than being a giant pile of money. Not an ounce of the extremely limited brainpower the husk possesses was put into this.
The only people who deserve credit are the engineers who did it, not some overinflated ego who doesn’t know anything except how to hoard money.
Unfortunately, where would they be without his money?
We’d still be funding NASA and it’d be much, much better than dumping taxpayer money (which is where the funding for most of their recent advances come from) into a private company instead of the government agency created to do exactly the same thing.
If NASA didn’t believe something would work, they wouldn’t waste R&D on it, especially when the taxpayer would be paying for the failures and demanding more.
This was only ever possible by being privately funded. And yes, public money was added, AFTER it was proven to be viable, which was purely private. Can’t have B without A first.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
You seem to have fallen for misinformation. Eric Berger, an accredited journalist, wrote a book on the early days of SpaceX. It’s called “Liftoff” and I recommend you educate yourself instead of trusting random internet strangers.
Multiple key employees of SpaceX have repeatedly proclaimed that Musk is indeed the chief engineer and has an active role in the company. I also think it’s interesting to draw parallells to other similar space startups such as Blue Origin, Armadillo Aerospace, Rocket Lab. What made SpaceX successful while they failed? It is not money because Bezos has plenty of that.
If you want hear more about Elon and engineering I can recommend the interviews and corresponding starbase tour with “The Everyday Astronaut”. There are many hours Elon talking rocketry and explaining how it works in depth.
Removed by mod