Why SpaceX and NASA Rockets Are So Different

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 3 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 29

  • @OZtwo
    @OZtwo 20 годин тому +18

    Very simple: NASA rockets are over 30 years old whereas SpaceX are still developing new rockets.

    • @KamalaChameleon
      @KamalaChameleon 12 годин тому +4

      Yeah.. even SLS is basically just a bunch of shuttle LEGOs rearranged.. and it's so expensive because they gotta restart entire factories just to make all the old crap function

    • @axidhaus
      @axidhaus 3 години тому

      NASA was founded by a NASI member and space X wasn’t

    • @WernerRachtman
      @WernerRachtman Годину тому

      What kinda boosters does the new glenn have?

  • @blakewilliams3702
    @blakewilliams3702 17 годин тому +12

    Private vs Government…..no comparison.

  • @jeffgrundy7258
    @jeffgrundy7258 20 годин тому +6

    So your premise is that NASA makes rockets more durable than SpaceX's rockets because NASA's rockets go into deep space. This is factually incorrect. The SLS almost entirely falls back into the atmosphere and is destroyed minutes after launch.

    • @TheBooban
      @TheBooban 16 годин тому +1

      This video was completely dumb and illogical.

    • @goldgamercommenting2990
      @goldgamercommenting2990 16 годин тому +1

      NASA also does make their own satellites for deep space missions like Europa clipper
      That’s one of the reasons SpaceX has falcon heavy, it’s certainly one of the many reasons why governments and private companies need such a vehicle since starship is still at its infancy.
      That’s why I like both, NASA with historical backgrounds and the superb probe and satellite production and SpaceX to provide the vehicle. Put them together, we have a SUPERIOR ALLIANCE!

  • @billsauer3164
    @billsauer3164 13 годин тому +1

    There's 10 and a half minutes of my life I will never get back

  • @JizzWrld
    @JizzWrld 20 годин тому +4

    The ai is crazy now

  • @goldgamercommenting2990
    @goldgamercommenting2990 16 годин тому +2

    The thumbnail is sorta off with the SLS’s 4 RS-25s
    The original concept had 5 but was reduce to 4 due to of course money

  • @JMBailey73
    @JMBailey73 13 годин тому

    Nothing can justify the costs!

  • @giminai8000
    @giminai8000 11 годин тому

    1:59 hmm that looks like the Delta 2 rocket that exploded on GPSIII because if you look at the SRB on the far right you can see what i think is a large crack going up the length of the casing of the SRB

  • @ajsooklal
    @ajsooklal 3 години тому

    0:35 shows Rocket Labs Electron Rocket when he says SLS

  • @alexhanna3921
    @alexhanna3921 4 години тому

    It has to do with the trickle down of technology. NASA gets funding to experiment with military hardware, its initial purpose is is delivery of a weapons system. The exotic materials are for other reasons than simply putting humans into space. The g force envelope is entirely different, humans aren’t the final payload.

  • @cormakorma
    @cormakorma День тому +3

    NASA or SpaceX? 👇

  • @ronin2963
    @ronin2963 12 годин тому

    No!

  • @jessebonds1014
    @jessebonds1014 Годину тому

    Nasa has its moments, but let's be real... nasa has become a joke when building rockets.. It's a money grab... and it said in this video.. Elon puts more rocket engines so that if one fails, it's ok.. hell, several can fail.. but Nasa has three rocket engines. If one fails, the whole rocket fails spectacularly, lol😂

  • @JMBailey73
    @JMBailey73 13 годин тому

    I call bs!