In article e5370032-317a-473f-9866-71e060234f47@
16g2000vbx.googlegroups.com, says...

On Apr 10, 8:27*am, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article f8178699-4da7-4a5e-8137-
, says...



a lot more could be accomplished if private companies do much of the
work

This statement is so vague that it does not hold true in all instances.
I'm assuming you're talking about SLS and the like. *Note that on the
SLS program, private companies *already* "do much of the work", so your
assertion isn't even true for SLS.

You'll need to be much more specific to pinpoint why some government
programs are cheaper than others. *Specifically, why is SLS so darn
expensive? *After all, it is supposed to be using as much "heritage"
hardware as possible to reduce development costs and risks.

musk designs tend to cut costs by 90%

But do you know *why* SpaceX's costs are lower? Hint: It's not just
because they're a "private company".

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer