I guess one thing NASA is really not taking too kindly is his dollar figure claims of what he can do certain mission objectives with since it's making them look like the less cost effective option.
NASA
is the less cost effective option. It's pretty much always been that way, it's just that nobody noticed because the only
other option was the Russians.
I think I know what you're
trying to say - which is that private industry has the
potential to be more cost effective - but what you really said was that an alternative that doesn't yet exist (to NASA) is more cost effective. A private space industry
doesn't exist yet, not one that actually flies cargo and personnel, therefore it isn't a more cost effective option to NASA.
You still missed my point though, which is that since SpaceX is privately held, he doesn't have to show anybody shit, from bills to income records to research costs, so he could be dipping into his personal wealth to supplement operational costs; or receiving undisclosed private funding from other sources. He could budget the Falcon Heavy development at $2.3 bn when it's really going to be $2.9b, front or otherwise procure the extra $600m on the basis that when the technology is developed and matured, the returns from the sale of the Falcon Heavy will return and profit on the original investment.
It's not exactly an accusation of anything underhanded, it's simply a reality that the guy's books aren't public, so he could be doing anything. I wouldn't blame him, I'm not saying it'd be illegal or shady, but since it's the number he hands Congress or whoever, it's understandable (if such a scenario were the case), why it would piss off a contending contractor (NASA), who can't provide a lowballed number and then pad the coffers later on.
Also keep in mind that the proof is in the pudding - we haven't actually
seen SpaceX deliver on any of its magnanimously ambitious promises yet. I'm not saying they're not going to, or can't; I'm just saying be aware of the reality. The reality is that the Falcon Heavy doesn't exist yet. Falcon 9 has flown but only a maiden flight and one successful test flight, it hasn't carried cargo yet; much less people. And even though Dragon and Falcon Heavy are "human rated", 2 successful launches and a certification next to hundreds of thousands of hours of flight and millions of man hours of flight testing (vs the shuttle) is a hell of a difference in terms of launch vehicle maturity. This platform is promising but, you have to remember what a conservative industry this is. I mean space exploration gets less money than education for cryin out loud, they're like the Marine Corps when it comes to frugality, they're careful and painstaking and annoyingly over cautious. You have no idea, everything's triple-redundant and factors of safety are 3-4x flight ratings. It's absurd and insane, and it means development of a new vehicle is going to be slow, and grueling, and we're not gonna toss astronauts into orbit in 2013 after 3 or 4 launches of the Falcon/Dragon. Not in a million years would NASA sign off on that.
