<story><title>SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit</title><url>https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-astronauts-launch-from-america-in-historic-test-flight-of-spacex-crew-dragon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>It is hard to convey how &amp;quot;sustainable&amp;quot; this feels to me. For the first time, humans have gone into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.&lt;p&gt;All of the NASA missions prior to this have an ambience of &amp;quot;uneconomical but useful&amp;quot;. Even the shuttle, which was supposed to be this cost effective space truck, turned out to be not even close.&lt;p&gt;And the last thing I&amp;#x27;m feeling is the amazement at how much technology has evolved to get us to this point. I imagined as a child that the Apollo program would lead to a factory of rockets that launched people to orbit, to the Moon, and even to Mars on demand. And seeing what SpaceX has done to get to this point, it is clear to me that was never even close to possible. The Russian program is great in that way. It shows what that path might have looked like. And yes we could have refined the making of F1 engines, the construction of boosters, and just pushed that, but that leads to a steady state that is below what you need to run a program like this with a net positive economic outcome.&lt;p&gt;So very impressed guys, congratulations!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sandworm101</author><text>&amp;gt;&amp;gt; into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.&lt;p&gt;If we are talking pure commercial travel, it is a vehicle without a destination.  The ISS is definitely not a commercial project.  There are lots of reasons for the ISS to exist, and they have changed over time, but it has never been a money-making venture.  While the dragons certainly do come in under budget, they are a more efficient path to orbit, the purpose of the mission is not commercial.  Crew Dragon&amp;#x27;s existence is funded by the need to move people to and from the ISS.  Without the ISS, Crew Dragon would exist.  I hold off on the &amp;quot;commercial&amp;quot; designation until the customer funding the mission actually intends profit.&lt;p&gt;What we need is a commercial, money-making, reason to launch people into orbit.  Astronauts fly for science.  They fly for national pride.  They fly to demonstrate engineering excellence.  They don&amp;#x27;t fly to make money. I&amp;#x27;m a big spacelaunch fan but I just don&amp;#x27;t see any commercial reason to launch people into space.  (Space hotels for billionaires might be a niche but that doesn&amp;#x27;t seem sustainable imho.)</text></comment>
<story><title>SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit</title><url>https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-astronauts-launch-from-america-in-historic-test-flight-of-spacex-crew-dragon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>It is hard to convey how &amp;quot;sustainable&amp;quot; this feels to me. For the first time, humans have gone into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.&lt;p&gt;All of the NASA missions prior to this have an ambience of &amp;quot;uneconomical but useful&amp;quot;. Even the shuttle, which was supposed to be this cost effective space truck, turned out to be not even close.&lt;p&gt;And the last thing I&amp;#x27;m feeling is the amazement at how much technology has evolved to get us to this point. I imagined as a child that the Apollo program would lead to a factory of rockets that launched people to orbit, to the Moon, and even to Mars on demand. And seeing what SpaceX has done to get to this point, it is clear to me that was never even close to possible. The Russian program is great in that way. It shows what that path might have looked like. And yes we could have refined the making of F1 engines, the construction of boosters, and just pushed that, but that leads to a steady state that is below what you need to run a program like this with a net positive economic outcome.&lt;p&gt;So very impressed guys, congratulations!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jl6</author><text>Not to detract one iota from this amazing achievement, but what definition of sustainable are you thinking of? This was still paid for by the government.</text></comment>