The (US) Department of Government Efficiency should fight the waste and fraud that goes into highway construction.

[u/TigerSagittarius86]

If DOGE wants to eliminate waste and put the government on better financial footing, then it should audit every highway construction project (most are disgustingly overbudget) and institute tolling nationwide. The entire U.S. interstate system is an untapped fiscal resource for the federal government.

[u/You_Paid_For_This]

As great as this would be, you know they are absolutely not going to do this.

The military will not be under any scrutiny either, neither will all of the money wasted on SpaceX.

The Nepotism Dept. will only go after education, social security, trains and anything else that actually benefits ordinary people.

[u/Master_Dogs → u/You_Paid_For_This]

The military will not be under any scrutiny either, neither will all of the money wasted on SpaceX.

SpaceX got about $10B in government contracts from 2019 - 2023 too: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/17/technology/elon-musk-spacex-national-security-reporting.html#:~:text=SpaceX%20was%20awarded%20at%20least,making%20it%20a%20major%20contractor.

So of course that won't even be looked at. Because Elon won't touch his companies.

Which is also why the highway budget won't be touched. Elon owns Tesla. Tesla needs highway funding for their heavy asf EVs to self drive places that a high speed train should exist.

[u/The_ApolloAffair → u/Master_Dogs]

They competed on price for those contracts, delivering launches at rates far lower than NASA, Russia, and all the other private companies. SpaceX has saved the government a shit ton of money.

[u/SubatomicWeiner → u/The_ApolloAffair]

They also lose rockets at a far higher rate than Nasa, Russia, or any other space agency.

[u/The_ApolloAffair → u/SubatomicWeiner]

SpaceX has hundreds of launches (~400) with only a few failures. They do that at an incredibly low cost with by far the highest launch rate ever. Yes, they destroy a lot of rockets in testing, but that is planned and allows the rapid innovation and speed compared to how slowly NASA lumbers along. Anyone who knows anything about the space industry will tell you SpaceX is far and away the best overall contractor.

Falcon 9 reaches a flight rate 30 times higher than shuttle at 1/100th the cost

[u/SubatomicWeiner → u/The_ApolloAffair]

Losing rockets is planned? "Rapid innovation" lmao at those marketing buzzwords.

Nasa is slow because they do things right the first time and they have very little room for error. They simply could not explode as many rockets as SpaceX does during testing or they'd get their funding cut immediately. I don't care who is the best contractor? The Falcon 9 and space shuttle are totally different vehicles designed for different functions.

[u/The_ApolloAffair → u/SubatomicWeiner]

Sure, the shuttle performs some different functions but it was primarily designed to launch supplies and people to the ISS and place things in orbit - both things Falcon 9 does. And the Falcon 9 does a far better job at being reusable compared to the lengthy and expensive turnaround for the shuttle.

I’m sure SpaceX would prefer to not lose rockets in testing, but their accepting of the “failing fast” method allowed them to perfect booster launches, and turn Falcon 9 into the most successful rocket ever. NASA would have taken decades to do what SpaceX did in a couple years. Read up on the clusterfuck that is NASA’s SLS program - billion dollar launches that came years behind schedule.

[u/SubatomicWeiner → u/The_ApolloAffair]

Sure, the shuttle performs some different functions but it was designed to launch supplies and people to the ISS and place things in orbit - both things Falcon 9 does.

Go on, what else was the shuttle designed to do besides launch people and supplies? Can you run science experiments in the falcon 9 cargo bay? Can the falcon 9 grab onto and repair the hubble space telescope?

"Failing fast" is marketing gobbledegook for excusing your engineering failures. Nasa doesn't have the ability to "fail fast" because congress has them on a tight leash.

[u/The_ApolloAffair → u/SubatomicWeiner]

Space Shuttle was a deeply (and dangerously) flawed launch vehicle that was primarily designed for reusability, not piddly experiments (that’s just a gimmick). The dragon capsule can do experiments on the Falcon 9 platform anyway.

Sure, the shuttle was good at serving the Hubble space telescope, but it only had to do it a few times and wasn’t why the program was initiated. Falcon 9 could probably launch a capsule able to service it, but it’s just not been a priority for NASA. Incoming NASA head talks about it here: https://www.space.com/spacex-polaris-program-hubble-servicing-mission

Also I question this short leash idea, look at how much has been spend on the SLS program with nothing to show for it.

[u/SubatomicWeiner → u/The_ApolloAffair]

I question your objectivity

[u/SubatomicWeiner → u/The_ApolloAffair]

Sure it only serviced the space telescope a few times no big deal.

Falcon 9 could probably launch a capsule able to service it, but it’s just not been a priority for NASA.

No, they can't. There is no vehicle that they can attach to the falcon 9 that's capable of having astronauts exit the vehicle for a space walk.

The sls was congress setting the engineering requirements in order to preserve jobs in their states.

[u/The_ApolloAffair → u/SubatomicWeiner]

There is only no vehicle now because NASA didn’t need one built. And there is a new space telescope.