Billionaires' Battle for Historic Launch Pads

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
NASA never thought it would be an easy sale when it put the old Space Shuttle Launch Pads up for grabs, but now NASA has to contend with a battle of the Titans, or in this case, the battle of the Tech Execs for the right to purchase Launch Pads 39A and 39B.
 
Or this could be a classic negotiation failure. Are these guys launching so many ships they need to own the launch pad themselves? Or could it be possible for them to agree to share and then leave NASA with no one to get into a bidding war with and be able to drive down the price?
 
whether Kennedy Space Center's Launch Complex 39A should be given over to California-based SpaceX, founded by billionaire Elon Musk; or Blue Origin

Now by "given over to" I hope they mean "sold to" or "leased to"

NASA will have to keep maintaining Launch Complex 39A past Oct. 1 rather than ceding that responsibility to the private sector — and taxpayers will have to foot the bill, to the tune of an estimated $100,000 a month.
Ok, why the fuck does it take $100k a month to "maintain" the complex? You throw up some chain link fence, get a handful of security guards to keep people off the property, then you sign in any future deals with whomever gets it that part of the cost of it also is the "maintenance" costs associated with it while they were fighting out who gets it.
 
Ok, why the fuck does it take $100k a month to "maintain" the complex? You throw up some chain link fence, get a handful of security guards to keep people off the property, then you sign in any future deals with whomever gets it that part of the cost of it also is the "maintenance" costs associated with it while they were fighting out who gets it.

I was actually thinking 100K was cheap to maintain a complex that large. I worked for a company that had a 97,000 sq foot building and it cost them over $120 a month to run that place, not including wages, that's just the building and utilities.
 
$120 a month is crazy expensive! I bet your boss had to cut ac and heating just to afford that. (maybe even lights)
 
Figures the USA sells off it's launch pads because of cost of space exploration and science to use the money to murder, steal, and bribe other countries around the world for a select few to make more profit at the expense of American taxpayers. Wake up America !
 
Figures the USA sells off it's launch pads because of cost of space exploration and science to use the money to murder, steal, and bribe other countries around the world for a select few to make more profit at the expense of American taxpayers. Wake up America !

lol wut?
 
Figures the USA sells off it's launch pads because of cost of space exploration and science to use the money to murder, steal, and bribe other countries around the world for a select few to make more profit at the expense of American taxpayers. Wake up America !

The pads are currentlynconfigured to accommodate the Space Shuttle. NASA will not need them for the "SLS" which I doubt will ever fly because like all space mandates in the last 20 years it is unfunded.

So, might as well lease them to the private sector. My $.02 is that they should go to Space-X which actually has real flying hardware and a launch manifest going out many years.

Blue origin has a can with motors that has done...nothing. Blue Origin is a hobby for Bezos. He hired a pile of the old DC-X crew and threw money at it along with pulling some old F-1 modtors out of the ocean. Woooo fucking hoooooo.:rolleyes:
 

He's referring to our nations proclivity to bribe, murder (both in the political and real sense) and subvert other nations in the name of quarterly profits for Washington's Wall Street pay masters while neglecting fundamental things like R&D.

We make war because war makes money. Space doesn't make money. And we didn't go to the moon for science, we did it to kick the Soviets in the nuts.

We love "democracy" when it pays out. We crush it when it does not (Iran, 1953; Chile 1973)

We love "freedom" as long as it doesn't cost us profits. (abuse of "imminent domain" to steal land and crush opposition to "development" ; junk science (from the same guys that told us smoking was safe and did not cause cancer) to white wash the costs of things like "fracking." (the oil kind, not the BSG kind))

That's the USA. Love it or Leave It, baby.:cool:
 
Now by "given over to" I hope they mean "sold to" or "leased to"


Ok, why the fuck does it take $100k a month to "maintain" the complex? You throw up some chain link fence, get a handful of security guards to keep people off the property, then you sign in any future deals with whomever gets it that part of the cost of it also is the "maintenance" costs associated with it while they were fighting out who gets it.

rust
 
Yeah, missed the k on there :) makes a world of difference doesn't it?

Very much so... one way makes you seem like a reasonable argument, the other makes me pissed off that my own home monthly "maintenance" bills exceed that!
 
Figures the USA sells off it's launch pads because of cost of space exploration and science to use the money to murder, steal, and bribe other countries around the world for a select few to make more profit at the expense of American taxpayers. Wake up America !

Or you know, the President cut funding to NASA, and the shuttle program was cancelled...You just keep wearing that conspiracy theory t-shirt, and X-Files cap.
 
They are not selling they are leasing it for 5 years prob along with the mission control and support facilities. this is what happens when NASA retires our only means to get into space with out a replacement being ready due to congress's kneecapping NASA's budget every damn year.
 
Back
Top