SpaceX Signs a 20 year Lease with NASA to use LC-39A

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,259
1,068
SpaceX has officially signed a lease with NASA to use LC-39A. SpaceX will now be in charge to maintain the launch pad freeing NASA of the $1 million annual cost to maintain the pad.

Some notes.....

  • SpaceX will launch the Falcon Heavy from 39A next year
  • They will keep the Shuttle era FSS( with modifications) on the pad to service the rocket
  • Manned launches to the ISS will also launch from 39A
  • SpaceX will build a hangar near 39A to assemble the rocket vs using the VAB

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1404/15pad39a/#.U06jGF6W5yc
 
Last edited:

G51989

macrumors 68030
Feb 25, 2012
2,506
10
NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
SpaceX has officially signed a lease with NASA to use LC-39A. SpaceX will now be in charge to maintain the launch pad freeing NASA of the $1 million annual cost to maintain the pad.

Some notes.....

  • SpaceX will launch the Falcon Heavy from 39A next year
  • They will keep the Shuttle era FSS( with modifications) on the pad to service the rocket
  • Manned launches to the ISS will also launch from 39A
  • SpaceX will build a hangar near 39A to assemble the rocket vs using the VAB

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1404/15pad39a/#.U06jGF6W5yc
I would rather NASA funding be increased, so they don't need to use private companies to launch.
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,259
1,068
I would rather NASA funding be increased, so they don't need to use private companies to launch.
They are designing the SLS HLV. NASA is leaving LEO to SpaceX, Boeing, etc while focusing on beyond LEO missions. SLS will be insanely expensive just to send people to the ISS.
 

G51989

macrumors 68030
Feb 25, 2012
2,506
10
NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
They are designing the SLS HLV. NASA is leaving LEO to SpaceX, Boeing, etc while focusing on beyond LEO missions. SLS will be insanely expensive just to send people to the ISS.
I don't trust the idea of Private companies holding the American taxpayer hostage to put Americans into space.

I also don't trust Private companies to put people into space.

NASA has no reason to cut corners to get people into space safely.

A private compay has every reason to cut every corner it legally can, and if a accident does happen they can just say " space! "

" Hey listen Shareholders! We might have killed 4 people! But no one else died, and we saved a billion by cutting corners most of the time! Freedom! "
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,293
17,112
The Misty Mountains
I too have mixed feelings about this. I'm not saying this is true about SpaceX but the word contractor when it comes to government = cut standards (costs, quality, service, and arguably safety).
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,259
1,068
I don't trust the idea of Private companies holding the American taxpayer hostage to put Americans into space.

I also don't trust Private companies to put people into space.

NASA has no reason to cut corners to get people into space safely.

A private compay has every reason to cut every corner it legally can, and if a accident does happen they can just say " space! "

" Hey listen Shareholders! We might have killed 4 people! But no one else died, and we saved a billion by cutting corners most of the time! Freedom! "
And all I have to do is point out Challenger and Columbia......

NASA is not infallible.
 

wgnoyes

macrumors 6502
Jul 20, 2011
287
30
I would rather NASA funding be increased, so they don't need to use private companies to launch.
So does that mean that private companies like Boeing and Lockheed-Martin shouldn't be building airliners and that the private airlines should all be nationalized? Space should be privatized the same as air travel, with a (speculation here) "FAA"-type government oversight body and NTSB governing safety. You'll get it done faster and you won't be at the mercy of short-sighted politicians.
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,259
1,068
So does that mean that private companies like Boeing and Lockheed-Martin shouldn't be building airliners and that the private airlines should all be nationalized? Space should be privatized the same as air travel, with a (speculation here) "FAA"-type government oversight body and NTSB governing safety. You'll get it done faster and you won't be at the mercy of short-sighted politicians.
I have no problem with space being privatized. But it should be heavily regulated like the airlines were before 1978( and that is another debate of whether deregulation had any benefits as well)......
 

Kissaragi

macrumors 68020
Nov 16, 2006
2,338
361
Nasa probably should get much more funding but its fantastic that companies like spaceX are also involved and helping push everything forward.
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,628
7,865
CT
I don't trust the idea of Private companies holding the American taxpayer hostage to put Americans into space
Isn't that what Washington has been doing to NASA for decades? They have been threatening to cut the budget for years.

There is a lot of money in the space race, they don't want to blow billions on something going wrong. I would argue that they might be able to throw more money at a problem than NASA has been able to do.
 

Antares

macrumors 68000
I don't trust the idea of Private companies holding the American taxpayer hostage to put Americans into space.
I get it. You would rather have the government hold the American taxpayer hostage through their poor spending and inefficiencies. Or have foreign governments hold the American taxpayer hostage to put Americans into space. Why rely on a private/public company which the government can have more oversight of than a foreign government which we would have no control of and tenuous input/oversight.

I also don't trust Private companies to put people into space.
Yep. We also shouldn’t trust private or publically traded companies to fly planes to carry people into the air. Companies shouldn’t operate boats…that should be left to the government! Cars? Nope! The government should be in control of all cars and trucks. You can’t trust a taxi driver to take us home…he should be working for the government, not a private company!

NASA has no reason to cut corners to get people into space safely.

A private company has every reason to cut every corner it legally can, and if a accident does happen they can just say " space! "

" Hey listen Shareholders! We might have killed 4 people! But no one else died, and we saved a billion by cutting corners most of the time! Freedom! "
Bad ol’ private companies care only about the bottom dollar. To them, it’s, “screw safety!” and “killing people is a-okay if it gets us profit and not into trouble!” The government is good! Private is evil! And the people? The people who own companies are all evil. The people who run government are all good and pure. I mean, all that innovation and building of America that was done by private (and publically traded) companies and private citizens…pshh…forget that! All the railroads, buildings, highways, parks, etc…forget that everything was built by private/public companies, not government…that the government merely hired them like they are doing with SpaceX. Nope! We should trust the government and only the government, explicitly. The should run things. They should run all things!


In truth, the private world is what has pushed us ahead as a species. They are the ones who drove the exploration of the world and developed most of the new technologies and systems. Not to say that NASA and the military didn’t…they did….but a lot of the development was done by private companies for the military/NASA/the government. Private/public companies are the backbone of the world. And they are what will move our civilization into space.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
I guess the question I'm asked the most often is: "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract.
- John Glenn
 

localoid

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2007
2,428
1,724
America's Third World
... In truth, the private world is what has pushed us ahead as a species. They are the ones who drove the exploration of the world and developed most of the new technologies and systems. Not to say that NASA and the military didn’t…they did….but a lot of the development was done by private companies for the military/NASA/the government. Private/public companies are the backbone of the world. And they are what will move our civilization into space.
Actually, since the Bronze Age it's been warfare that has largely fostered "progress" and pushed certain groups "forward" via the development of new and improved technology. The great Space Race itself began as a competition to perfect a Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) that could deliver a nuclear weapon to US or USSR cities, easier and faster than a bomber could.
 

Antares

macrumors 68000
Actually, since the Bronze Age it's been warfare that has largely fostered "progress" and pushed certain groups "forward" via the development of new and improved technology. The great Space Race itself began as a competition to perfect a Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) that could deliver a nuclear weapon to US or USSR cities, easier and faster than a bomber could.
What we need then is war! Get weapons and people into space and have nations push to start claiming territory around the solar system. That would be a great way to push forward the development of advanced space vehicles and systems…after all, the nation (or alliance of nations) who have the best and most powerful ships wins the most territory in space! A 2nd Space Race!
 

emaja

macrumors 68000
May 3, 2005
1,706
10
Chicago, IL
NASA has no reason to cut corners to get people into space safely.
EVERYTHING done by the government is done by the lowest bidder. Cutting corners may be even a bigger part of government work than a private business.

How far do government revenues fall when there is an accident?

How much do private industry's revenue fall when there is an accident?
 

ucfgrad93

macrumors P6
Aug 17, 2007
17,586
8,221
Colorado
NASA has no reason to cut corners to get people into space safely.

A private compay has every reason to cut every corner it legally can, and if a accident does happen they can just say " space! "

" Hey listen Shareholders! We might have killed 4 people! But no one else died, and we saved a billion by cutting corners most of the time! Freedom! "
Your post is simply crap, crap, and more crap.

The Rogers Commission found NASA's organizational culture and decision-making processes had been key contributing factors to the accident.[1] NASA managers had known contractor Morton Thiokol's design of the SRBs contained a potentially catastrophic flaw in the O-rings since 1977, but failed to address it properly. They also disregarded warnings (an example of "go fever") from engineers about the dangers of launching posed by the low temperatures of that morning and had failed in adequately reporting these technical concerns to their superiors.
Yep, government never screws the pooch.:rolleyes:
 

snberk103

macrumors 603
Oct 22, 2007
5,484
87
An Island in the Salish Sea
"I guess the question I'm asked the most often is: "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract."
- John Glenn
Thank you for saving me the trouble of looking that quote up ….
 

carlgo

macrumors 68000
Dec 29, 2006
1,804
17
Monterey CA
SpaceX has those soft-landing reusable rockets and a modular approach that should make it the most cost-effective launch company and likely very reliable. Nobody can compete with this unless they are heavily subsidized by a government.

Similarly, Tesla would be the dominant car company in the world right now if they could produce enough cars and there were electric gas stations all over.
 

Kissaragi

macrumors 68020
Nov 16, 2006
2,338
361
SpaceX has those soft-landing reusable rockets and a modular approach that should make it the most cost-effective launch company and likely very reliable. Nobody can compete with this unless they are heavily subsidized by a government.

Similarly, Tesla would be the dominant car company in the world right now if they could produce enough cars and there were electric gas stations all over.
Musk is a pretty amazing guy.
 

ucantgetridofme

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2011
374
0
I would rather NASA funding be increased, so they don't need to use private companies to launch.
Our government is spending so much on climate change theirs nothing left for real projects.

----------

Musk is a pretty amazing guy.
He's a tool just like Steve Jobs. Everybody makes him out to be this great amazing guy when he hasn't made any truly important contributions.