Tonaia t1_jefh8am wrote

I don't disagree. The context of that particular story does matter though. Cal-Maine Foods could have taken a smaller profit, but they didn't. They took full advantage and exploited the supply shock, but they could only do that because they didn't lose any production themselves.

Their unwillingness to step back from profit kept the egg prices high.


Tonaia t1_jdd2clb wrote

I was watching the livestream last night. The team was really excited that the rocket,

A. Hit Maximum Dynamic Pressure (Max Q)

B. Survived Max Q

C. Performed stage separation.

The second stage engine failed after like a second and a half, and that was that.

Just for comparison

SpaceX first launch: Corrosion due to sea spray caused the rocket to fail

2nd Launch: Fuel sloshing caused the second stage to fail

3rd. Launch: Residual thrust from the first stage caused it to hit the second after separation, leading to loss of vehicle.

4th: Success.

Rockets are hard.


Tonaia t1_j1c71y5 wrote

The US has contracts with SpaceX and with Boeing. Boeing's Starliner was plagued with problems during development and will be entering service about three years late. Sierra Space's Dreamchaser (It's a mini shuttle, let's go!) will start cargo missions in 2023, and will continue to be developed to have a crewed variant sometime later in the decade, probably for when Orbital Reef becomes a thing.

You complain about SpaceX, but have they ever been a bad partner for NASA to work with?