They started launching in 2019, according to a quick look at Wikipedia. They told the general public (and regulatory agencies, I think) that the lifetime of the satellites was on the order of 5 years. The plan was to replace them frequently enough to maintain the constellation with that kind of service life (i.e. to launch the whole constellation worth of satellites every 5 years)
Now, here we are 4 years later. It’s not terribly surprising if some of the early satellites are starting to reach the end of their lives.
It’s going to be very expensive for them, but not an unexpected cost. This is the reason they’re so keen to start launching them on Starship
SpaceX sells a service that NASA buys. It’s cheaper and easier for NASA to contract out space launches & the R&D associated with it to other companies. It’s common for other government agencies to contract out to private companies for goods and services. SpaceX isn’t the only space company that receives contracts from NASA either. NASA is always looking to hedge their bet to not be too dependent on a single company.
Like any other company, SpaceX uses the profit from their business + investors to fund new ventures like Starlink. No matter what you think of Musk, Starlink has had a positive impact for a lot of people in rural areas. Starlink is faster, more reliable and costs less than traditional satellite internet. Even if this cost tax dollars, it would be dollars well spent as we’re connecting more of the country to high speed internet. This has direct social, educational and economical impact.
If you want NASA to stop hiring SpaceX for launches then it’ll hurt NASA too. They will have to spend a lot more money to R&D, test, build and maintain a new rocket program.
This is why I mentioned the importance of funding education earlier. You have tunnel vision because you either didn’t attend school, didn’t pay attention while there or simply had a very poor curriculum.
Feeding the starving and doing everything else aren’t mutually exclusive. The reason why we aren’t feeding the hungry is not because we are launching rockets into space.
Space programs and NASA has contributed a lot of technologies that we use in our everyday life. It made our lives easier, safer and has opened up more economic opportunities. If you are generating more money, more jobs, more services then it’s easier to have extra money for social services.
$2,000,000,000 to Elon this past year
At this point it feels like you have comprehension issues, because me and several other people have already explained to you in detail that NASA isn’t donating money to Elon.
People starving has absolutely zero to do with NASA’s budget. We are more than equipped to end world hunger, there’s just no profit in it. In the US, 30-40% of food is simply wasted. That’d be a good start to look at.
They started launching in 2019, according to a quick look at Wikipedia. They told the general public (and regulatory agencies, I think) that the lifetime of the satellites was on the order of 5 years. The plan was to replace them frequently enough to maintain the constellation with that kind of service life (i.e. to launch the whole constellation worth of satellites every 5 years)
Now, here we are 4 years later. It’s not terribly surprising if some of the early satellites are starting to reach the end of their lives.
It’s going to be very expensive for them, but not an unexpected cost. This is the reason they’re so keen to start launching them on Starship
All that pollution…sigh…
It might still be less environmentally damaging that running fibre to every starlink customer. That’s a lot of manufacturing and digging.
How did our tax dollars agree to this.
SpaceX have funded it privately. It apparently started operating at a profit this year.
It’s funded by NASA. Who funds NASA.
The entire company is not funded by NASA
No, but to say it’s profitable without NASA is a stretch.
You have no idea whether they’re profitable or what the sources of income are…since they’re private…
NASA spending is not.
Nobody is denying that NASA pays SpaceX for services.
SpaceX is privately funded, NASA buys launches for it’s own purposes, but StarLink isn’t subsidized
Who funds NASA.
Whoever is funding NASA should devote more funding to education - the need is clearly evident from your comments.
Low effort shill post.
Alright, you dumbass, I will entertain.
SpaceX sells a service that NASA buys. It’s cheaper and easier for NASA to contract out space launches & the R&D associated with it to other companies. It’s common for other government agencies to contract out to private companies for goods and services. SpaceX isn’t the only space company that receives contracts from NASA either. NASA is always looking to hedge their bet to not be too dependent on a single company.
Like any other company, SpaceX uses the profit from their business + investors to fund new ventures like Starlink. No matter what you think of Musk, Starlink has had a positive impact for a lot of people in rural areas. Starlink is faster, more reliable and costs less than traditional satellite internet. Even if this cost tax dollars, it would be dollars well spent as we’re connecting more of the country to high speed internet. This has direct social, educational and economical impact.
If you want NASA to stop hiring SpaceX for launches then it’ll hurt NASA too. They will have to spend a lot more money to R&D, test, build and maintain a new rocket program.
No one wants a rocket program. People are starving. $2,000,000,000 to Elon this past year.
This is why I mentioned the importance of funding education earlier. You have tunnel vision because you either didn’t attend school, didn’t pay attention while there or simply had a very poor curriculum.
Feeding the starving and doing everything else aren’t mutually exclusive. The reason why we aren’t feeding the hungry is not because we are launching rockets into space.
Space programs and NASA has contributed a lot of technologies that we use in our everyday life. It made our lives easier, safer and has opened up more economic opportunities. If you are generating more money, more jobs, more services then it’s easier to have extra money for social services.
At this point it feels like you have comprehension issues, because me and several other people have already explained to you in detail that NASA isn’t donating money to Elon.
2B to SpaceX, the most advanced rocket company on the planet fully run by Americans since they deal with DoD. Access to space is not a bad thing.
Agree people are starving. We’re a country at peace spending >700B on the military industrial complex. Try shaving that down.
People starving has absolutely zero to do with NASA’s budget. We are more than equipped to end world hunger, there’s just no profit in it. In the US, 30-40% of food is simply wasted. That’d be a good start to look at.
Dude, you sound like a jackass.
Reported for harassment
LMAO, I have three comments on your post and somehow I’m harassing you? You really are dumb.