blackstar said:
FutureSpaceTourist said:
The various Rocketplane companies filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy (ie liquidation) last month
http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/6691/Default.aspx. Sad, but not a surprise.
Somebody should compile a comprehensive list of these companies and what has happened to them over the years. Some of them just seem to fade away, never to be heard of again. Remember how a few years ago tSpace was getting a fair amount of attention? Now they're gone. And TGV Rockets fired some rocket engines, but hasn't been visible doing anything for a few years now. There's a bunch others. Canadian Arrow, etc.
I'm not an absolute fan of SpaceX. I hate hype, and VASIMR supporters tends to anger me
But I think Elon Musk certainly thouroughly analyzed failures like AMROC, Space Services.inc, OTRAG, Kistler... before starting SpaceX.
Most of the rocket builders financially depended from a *Sugar daddy* that retracted after the rocket initial failure, leading to bankrupcy.
Musk decided he would fund its rocket bussiness by itself.
Other rocket plumbers failed because of bad relations with a major contractor.
Musk decided to build everything by himself. Event if that meant reinventing the wheel - Merlin is akin to Rocktdyne good old RS-27.
Other rocket bussinesses failed because they had the wrong business plan from the start - or because they settled on non traditional, new, risky markets. Best example is the satellite constellation hype of the late 90's, that burst in 2000.
Other rocket bussiness thrusted too much NASA - and failed when the space agency shifted its main effort from RLV to the Moon, then to Mars, then to a space station, then to something else.
Musk again targeted a "classical" market, one that is proven to be profitable - communication satellites, then thrown a bit of NASA into the mix - COTS contract.
So, to make it short: Musk build a classic rocket (no shiny RLV) for a classic market (satellites) using proven technology (low tech LOX kerosene rocket engines)
To make it even shorter: after a careful analysis of previous failures, he chose the most conservative approach ever. He also accepted some early failures, but yet again he could afford that, since he was his own funder. No worried sugar daddy to deal with
That conservative approach looks as if it might work, at least until now. PErhaps Musk heard of this document one day http://www.kelthaven.org/papers/rlvheuristics.pdf