It made me laugh harder than I thought comment like that would, thanks for making my day.

Tom realized the world needs more companies like SpaceX, Jeff thought the world needed another Boeing

@@TheFalseShepphard yes

People who design and build rockets gets to decide how it will work, your preferences for their rockets are irrelevant.

Ten times, no the number is much much higher

Just don't let the fox get near it.

They even called the engines "reaver engine"

That's not fair, it still hurts

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/q76WYMyJy6_XqZs.html

That show was racist the the black guy on the ship died in the most brutal way of all the crew , and the most brutal killer was also black.

Thanks random KZfaq comment section rocket engineer

They are competing in a different environment all together.

@@ihmpall just some common sense. Missing in a lot in stock investing these days because the word banks open the flood gates. As long as money is unlimited floating in the market, everything goes up.

What are you talking about. Blue Origin? They tested enough to have people get too orbit. I don’t know why everyone seemingly hates blue orgin. Like the more competition the better.

@@neeljavia2965 not really. spacex has what its called rideshare missions, that allow multiple small companies to launch small payloads to orbit, for prices as low as 1M. spacex literelly with this business of rideshare, is taking clients away from this type of companies. if you see the rideshares missions, they usually take 100+ small satalites...the same satalites that companies like firefly would send if spacex didnt exist. if you see the prices of even small rocket companies they have prices around 7M-10M...spacex offers prices as low as 1M. this automatically takes multiple small satalite companies to go with spacex, and not with firefly or other small rocket companies. the reusability of rockts is for this reason...and thats why most small rocket companies wont make it, because they have the likes of spacex that offer small prices, and spacex is capable of doing that becasue of the reusability...this companies cant offer that!!! they will have customers but most customers will go to the likes of spacex. just look at there rideshare missions coming up, they have around 3 every year, that means every rideshare missions averages around 100 small satalites, and that is a lot of satalites that are going to spacex instead of small rocket companies. thats why this types of companies will most likely not survive when big companies like spacex have mastered reusability and prices...spacex has the lowest prices per KG on the market, which means most satalite companies will go with them. very few have the necessity of going with this small rocket companies. we have seen multiple rocekt companies come online the last decade but the reality is only ~5 rocket companies will stay...for example...spacex, ULA, Arianespace...and theres place maybe from 2 or 3 more, but after that its almost impossible to have more, most of those will go bankrupt because they wont have enough customers for them to pay for the bills, salaries or even research for the rockets. this is a new age of space but not every company can stay and be in that new age of space. its almost impossible for us to have so many rocket companies.

No he doesn’t he just likes the image

@@danielmoreno-gama5973 salt

Sold some of Tesla to buy RKLB stocks😁

@@HypaWave1701 probably the best time to sell Tesla

@@danielmoreno-gama5973 really it’s because SpaceX has had such a head start in their range of payloads that it’s hard for competition to show up. That’s why most other startups are launching payloads in the range of a few hundred kilograms.

it was hardly engine failure it was just that one of the valves closed

@@Mindmartyr tell any pilot or someone that has a 10 mil satellite , it’s hardly a failure , the engine just stopped running !

But why are they ex? Now they are seeding competition. Elon was real lucky to get good engineers/employees and Jeff didn't.

@@TheBooban BS. Jeff can get the best if he wants. But he doesn't

don't forget about ex paypal they create youtube, linked in , yelp, yammer, Palantir and most importantly Tesla and Spacex, all have worked with Elon

I think that Elon either had incompetent legal counsels or deliberately pushed against harsh non-compete and IP clauses in employment contracts. Either way, good thing for the technological progress and competition!

@@watershed8685 no matter how good a company is, all of their top employees won't work for them forever.

And SpaceX shows that there is a market

Subsidised by the US government you clueless dunces.

@ and those ones that was favored by the government ( I'm looking at you Boeing) are the ones wasting money

@ You should probably learn what subsides means you clueless dunces. SpaceX does not get subsidies but contracts from NASA.

Rocket lab isn't doing bad either

We need more viable competitors to SpaceX than Blue Origin or Boeing.

I bet Elon will approve because it is exactly what he set out to accomplish in the first place. The goal being to make humanity space faring.

No neo Killer Zone

Yeah. I think RKLB will have a good future.

Yeah they have been in it since before SpaceX even any sort of market outside of government. Problem is though they couldn't go for the heavier payloads right under spaceX's amount because they didn't know there was a market for it. These other companies were able to go after higher payloads since they knew the market already existed, but was expensive under SpaceX

Having Elon acknowledge you on Twitter has little relevance to exactly _how_ he’s reacting. With RL and Astra he’s generally positive, with Blue Origin he’s strongly negative aside from NS launches, and with Relativity he has absolutely no comment whatsoever.

The logo is great it's a shame they always print it way too big when they use it which makes it look kind of tacky.. like some tattoo. A lot smaller is much better.

not so sure about that.

@@Hans-gb4mv well for some things at least

They also only mentioned price but not capacity. SpaceXs rocket is most expensive but also has highest capacity by a huge amount. It’s by far the cheapest per kilogram

Wait for robot body to come and you can join them. :)

Everyone has to start somewhere!!

It would ruin the narrative of american exceptionalism. muh america! manifest destiny! blah! blah! blah!

@@nixonhoover2 can sense you been salty for the success of American rocket companies , notably spaceX he2

Thanks for the input, do you really think they don’t know about FMEAs?

but if you need a dedicated launch, you would need to pay U$ 62 millions at most to SpaceX

And it can lanch multiple satilites

They finally mentioned rocketlab, never mind.

It's business speak for 1. we'll sell our patents to make sure we have a revenue stream and 2. when Boeing buys us our stocks will triple easily. Hes probably bleeding cash and is asking the markets to support him until he goes public next year.

Sue origin lol

i always liked her commentary on spacex launches before she joined blue origin

So Should Zimbabwe And Thailand!

It’s almost obsolete if starship works out, thats 100% reusable

They need to recruit Elon to do it. lol

which is actually crazy to think about. Partial reusability is now the minimum standard for any rocket when a few years ago all rockets would just be wasted.

@@ThreeSixFour starship is still years away and it remains to be seen how versatile it is and how usable it will be. And if you have a small payload, it will always be a choice between a small rocket where you are the primary payload and can get your payload delivered to your orbit of choice or choosing to be a secondary payload that gets you close to where you want to be but where you have no control over when you launch or how much precious fuel you have to waste to get into the right orbit.

I disagree we need a diverse competitive space industry. It's akin to saying that a small company has to compete with the capabilities of amazon. You have to walk before you can run.

The difference is that a payload fit for a Firefly rocket would instead have to rideshare with a bigger payload on a falcon 9. And in some cases where the launch has a mishap that secondary payload gets abandoned or put in a non-ideal orbit as a result.

Agreed watch this good round table chat about space the next silicon valley boom: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lZd2p8Jpy6_Sfps.html

No it doesn't

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is because there are countless examples that demonstrate the opposite!

@@michaeldeierhoi4096 for example?

@@fetB Logic alone can answer that question. When a larger number of companies are developing rockets to fly there is a greater chance for innovative technology because they are going about rocket design differently. If Firefly doesn't make it commercially then it is that reality that would bring them down. So this isn't about inefficiency at all with to many companies. There are examples where one company is the only one providing the technology for the entire industry. ASML is the only company in the world doing EUV lithography which the next level tech in making silicon wafers that can hold billions of transistors. This is an exception. Alternatively, we have Google, Microsoft, and Apple as a few companies making cell phones. If there was just one company there is no competition to keep prices low for customers besides the lack of motivation to provide a better product for the customer. But if you are so wed to the idea of one company making a product then move to North Korea where everything is limited

@@michaeldeierhoi4096 maybe learn to read first, so you can save yourself this embarrassment pickled with condescension. I never said competition isnt beneficial, but that it isn't necessary. I mean, you're literally commenting this on a video of spacex which is built by Musk who had no competition for his 3 big projects, and yet massively innovated, and you even provided other examples of it... good one, dude

@@fetB 😂😅🤣. For what's it's worth I rarely feel embarrassed by something I have said on KZfaq comments. And in this case I still stand by what I said, and apparently given your response it went over your head which doesn't surprise me because you don't seem the type to admit when your wrong. I had that problem too 20 or so years ago. Anyway have a good day.

Thorium reactors do offer a lot promise such as less toxic waste, easier to mine and many more positives. The biggest downside is the high economic cost for development and the regulatory steps that must be completed to make it happen. If it is truly as promising as many claim it will happen eventually.

@@michaeldeierhoi4096 You just proof my point.

It's tha Murican way.

those investors knew what they were getting themselves into and they knew the risks

Bankruptcy happens too a lot of enterprising individuals, but that is no reason to disparage them.

true but if im not mistaken then i think tht current objective for firefly is to be successfull in building and launching rockets, but ur right, there Are quite a lot of other small sat launch providers

Star Ship aka ready to use use the rule book as a door stop to space and beyond... :):)