“The biggest [challenge] is generating enough revenue to create a durable, viable industry. The challenges the industry faces are business challenges, far more than technology challenges,” Christensen responded. “Just as a reminder,” she added, “Concorde shut its door, and that wasn’t because supersonic flight was too much of a technology challenge…it was because, ultimately, the business case didn’t close.”
The technology exists. Somehow, customers other than Uncle Sugar need to be signed up.
Customers other than ‘Uncle Sugar’ have already signed up.
Virgin Galactic has several hundred.
SpaceX has these customers:
MDA Corp. (Canada)
ORBCOMM
Bigelow Aerospace
CONAE (Argentina)
Astrium
Plus some unnamed customers for the scheduled Dragon Lab flights.
I love that picture of the Falcon 9 on the right hand frame of that linked article. Those motors clustered together like that just looks so mean. I bet that thing is gonna look pretty when it goes up. Certainly better than that turd on a stick.
I’ll be so glad when it’s private companies handling LEO flights and our exploration isn’t totally subject to NASA and its funding/lack thereof and its bureaucracy. I’m hoping 2010 shows continued expansion and profitability for the companies taking the leap.
So did SpaceX get Falcon 9 in the pad during 2009 or not? *snark*
I support their work and most of their decisions, but we already know by now their real schedules are like 1 year behind their announcements.
Still, I wish them a successful first flight in this year of our Lord of 2010. I also hope we can see successful, and uneventful, Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo passenger flights.
Happy New Year!
“Concorde shut its door, and that wasn’t because supersonic flight was too much of a technology challenge…it was because, ultimately, the business case didn’t close.”
The business case didn’t close because the technology was immature.
So did SpaceX get Falcon 9 in the pad during 2009 or not?
It did, actually. It did a fit check with an assembled and vertical vehicle at the beginning of the year.
And in the Case of Concorde, there were other means available commercially to fly across the Atlantic.
The Concorde business model was killed by the environment restrictions that it could only go supersonic over the ocean and that it would only be allowed into specific airports at specific times due to “noise pollution”.
Money quote:
“The biggest [challenge] is generating enough revenue to create a durable, viable industry. The challenges the industry faces are business challenges, far more than technology challenges,” Christensen responded. “Just as a reminder,” she added, “Concorde shut its door, and that wasn’t because supersonic flight was too much of a technology challenge…it was because, ultimately, the business case didn’t close.”
The technology exists. Somehow, customers other than Uncle Sugar need to be signed up.
Customers other than ‘Uncle Sugar’ have already signed up.
Virgin Galactic has several hundred.
SpaceX has these customers:
MDA Corp. (Canada)
ORBCOMM
Bigelow Aerospace
CONAE (Argentina)
Astrium
Plus some unnamed customers for the scheduled Dragon Lab flights.
I love that picture of the Falcon 9 on the right hand frame of that linked article. Those motors clustered together like that just looks so mean. I bet that thing is gonna look pretty when it goes up. Certainly better than that turd on a stick.
I’ll be so glad when it’s private companies handling LEO flights and our exploration isn’t totally subject to NASA and its funding/lack thereof and its bureaucracy. I’m hoping 2010 shows continued expansion and profitability for the companies taking the leap.
So did SpaceX get Falcon 9 in the pad during 2009 or not? *snark*
I support their work and most of their decisions, but we already know by now their real schedules are like 1 year behind their announcements.
Still, I wish them a successful first flight in this year of our Lord of 2010. I also hope we can see successful, and uneventful, Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo passenger flights.
Happy New Year!
“Concorde shut its door, and that wasn’t because supersonic flight was too much of a technology challenge…it was because, ultimately, the business case didn’t close.”
The business case didn’t close because the technology was immature.
So did SpaceX get Falcon 9 in the pad during 2009 or not?
It did, actually. It did a fit check with an assembled and vertical vehicle at the beginning of the year.
And in the Case of Concorde, there were other means available commercially to fly across the Atlantic.
The Concorde business model was killed by the environment restrictions that it could only go supersonic over the ocean and that it would only be allowed into specific airports at specific times due to “noise pollution”.