Gwynne Shotwell

[ecarfan]

Yes, as much as I admire and respect her, I find little of interest in most of her public presentations.

 

[Electroman]

go to 21:30 and listen to Nelson tell us how much money SpaceX has saved for US taxpayers. FORTY BILLION DOLLARS

 

[bxr140]

go to 21:30 and listen to Nelson tell us how much money SpaceX has saved for US taxpayers. FORTY BILLION DOLLARS

No question Falcon is cheaper for US taxpayers, but there's some context missing from that statement. Out of the all the launches F9/FH has to date, 25 of them (or less...?) have been DOD (USAF/USSF/SDA/NRO/etc).

In round numbers, DOD probably spends $100M per Falcon. Round numbers, let's say they spend on average $200M per Atlas 5 and $250M per Delta 4. Even if we account for future launches under contract it's real hard to get the $40B math to come anywhere close to checking out.

 

[Electroman]

Don’t forget missions to ISS. That is a dozen plus missions? That is US tax payer money !

 

[bxr140]

Don’t forget missions to ISS. That is a dozen plus missions? That is US tax payer money !

I'm certainly happy to have my interpretation-o-meter recalibrated, but I pretty clearly hear "General such-and-such says Falcon has saved the DOD $40B in defense satellite launch costs".

Its ultimately somewhat irrelevant because even if we rack in non-DOD state funded launches--basically, the 50-odd NASA launches--we still don't get anywhere close to $40B of taxpayer money saved.

 

[Grendal]

I'm certainly happy to have my interpretation-o-meter recalibrated, but I pretty clearly hear "General such-and-such says Falcon has saved the DOD $40B in defense satellite launch costs".

Its ultimately somewhat irrelevant because even if we rack in non-DOD state funded launches--basically, the 50-odd NASA launches--we still don't get anywhere close to $40B of taxpayer money saved.

I agree. It isn't $40 billion. This was a presentation and maybe the press will pick it up and Bill Nelson is a figurehead that plays to the press.

That said, it could get there with development costs and business costs (the billion a year that ULA was getting for launch on demand for many years) that the old school cost plus contractors would drag out and ask for. That is still milking it for every dime imaginable though with NASA and the DOD included.

Side note: Without the fixed price contract system that NASA initiated then I could easily see that Boeing would have asked for, and gotten, a couple billion more for Starliner.

I was shocked that Bill Nelson actually took a big shot at ULA and cost plus contractors in the interview.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

It's actually easy to spend $400 million per rocket. Just agree that you're going to build only 10 of them, and they all have to complete flawless flights.

That's how you spend $400 million per rocket. It doesn't matter who you are. That's artisan construction for you.

It's incredible that we're transitioning into the age of mass production of super heavy lift rockets. Consider the mass production of steel, of cars, of food, and so many other things that fundamentally changed the human experience. Then Elon throws reuse on top of it. Bonkers.

Hmmm. Reusable steel? Done. Reusable cars? Done. Reusable food? Hmmm.

On reusable food, Swift referenced the idea in Gulliver's Travels.

 

[scaesare]

I'm certainly happy to have my interpretation-o-meter recalibrated, but I pretty clearly hear "General such-and-such says Falcon has saved the DOD $40B in defense satellite launch costs".

Its ultimately somewhat irrelevant because even if we rack in non-DOD state funded launches--basically, the 50-odd NASA launches--we still don't get anywhere close to $40B of taxpayer money saved.

Good point.

I wonder if the context missing from the second-hand quote is expected savings over the life of some contract or duration the DoD has in mind...