As a bit of a SpaceX fan (though less and less of a Musk one as time goes on)...oof, this chapter was a bitter pill to read. While I'm admittedly skeptical of a number of CSS's arguments, I can't argue what they led to in this timeline. The Boca Chica incident just branded a huge black mark on SpaceX and finally tarnished Musk's golden boy. Such a catastrophic failure of Starship probably reverberated through the rest of their ventures, from Starlink to Falcon 9. Wouldn't be surprised if companies and nations pulled back launch contracts with them. Musk himself seems to have taken the brunt of the blame (not surprising, since Starship's admittedly impressive but ultimately calamitous build schedule was all on him), and I wouldn't be surprised if he stepped down and the companies new CEO (Shotwell?) preferring to weather the anger by sticking to orbital aspirations.
Blue Origin being the winner of the decade regarding spaceflight is...kinda odd. They've been noted as being pretty behind schedule and conservative in their rocket and engine development, with ULA getting antsy about the hold-up behind the BE-4 engines. Maybe Bezos' recent refocusing on Blue Origin and his biggest competitor getting kilotons of egg on their face let BO retake the lead. Hell, their conservative growth model might make them more appealing in the wake of the Hickenlooper commission. Still kinda surprised their lander won out for the Moon, given that I was under the impression it had some severe deficits in the design.
Virgin Galactic is the iffiest of the trio, which makes their expanding operations in this timeline eyebrow raising. Musk and Bezos have routes for their company to expand into orbit and beyond (well, the latter here at least) but VG's operating a functional dead-end with air-launched Spaceships, which don't seem to have a way to move beyond suborbital tourism. Plus, they have the messiest engines, which is comparatively minor but a sticking point for me.
All in all, I was expecting more of a pivot into federal launchers and designs, like a reenergized SLS or a stronger hand by NASA in the lunar lander.
Blue Origin being the winner of the decade regarding spaceflight is...kinda odd. They've been noted as being pretty behind schedule and conservative in their rocket and engine development, with ULA getting antsy about the hold-up behind the BE-4 engines. Maybe Bezos' recent refocusing on Blue Origin and his biggest competitor getting kilotons of egg on their face let BO retake the lead. Hell, their conservative growth model might make them more appealing in the wake of the Hickenlooper commission. Still kinda surprised their lander won out for the Moon, given that I was under the impression it had some severe deficits in the design.
Virgin Galactic is the iffiest of the trio, which makes their expanding operations in this timeline eyebrow raising. Musk and Bezos have routes for their company to expand into orbit and beyond (well, the latter here at least) but VG's operating a functional dead-end with air-launched Spaceships, which don't seem to have a way to move beyond suborbital tourism. Plus, they have the messiest engines, which is comparatively minor but a sticking point for me.
All in all, I was expecting more of a pivot into federal launchers and designs, like a reenergized SLS or a stronger hand by NASA in the lunar lander.
Last edited: