On April 17, when NASA revealed the result of its competition to develop a spacecraft to take astronauts back to the moon, it was clear that Elon Muskโ€™s strategy of leveraging economies of scale had passed yet another milestone.

The competition pitted three proposals: Dynetics, a regular supplier to the Department of Defense; Blue Origin, Jeff Bezosโ€™ aerospace company, which had partnered with usual suspects in the aerospace world like Lockheed MartinNorthrop Grumman and Draper; and Muskโ€™s SpaceX.

Usually, NASA chooses more than one company for this type of arrangement, so as to cover its back and avoid any of them not being able to deliver its technology on time, but in this case it awarded the contract it in its entirety to SpaceX. In May 2020, NASA had also chosen SpaceX over the mighty Boeing to carry a mission with three astronauts to the international space station, and last week, they used another rocket from the company to send four astronauts more, making Muskโ€™s company already one of the most trusted partners of the government space agency.

What made NASA choose SpaceX? Fundamentally, the aspect that differentiates Elon Muskโ€™s companies: leveraging economies of scale. NASAโ€™s $2.89 billion contract assures SpaceX the ability to develop, test and send two missions to the lunar surface: the second flight, which will be manned, is scheduled for 2024. But the value of the contract could be multiplied by a very important factor if, as expected, NASA continues, after this contract, to place its trust in SpaceX to continue sending regular missions to the moon to supply a base there with a permanent facility: in many ways, NASAโ€™s contract is a major departure from what it has been proposing up to now.

This is precisely the most significant element of the decision, and where SpaceX had the biggest advantage: Blue Originโ€™s project was the most conventional, with a three-stage landing design, in line with NASAโ€™s approach, but from which virtually no components were recovered. Dynetics delivered a more innovative and reusability-oriented proposal, but was unambitious, proposing to take just a few astronauts to the moon.

In contrast, SpaceX presented Starship, its huge rocket designed to reach Mars carrying dozens of people on a mission lasting about six monthsโ€Šโ€”โ€Šwhich Musk insists will be ready before 2030, while accusing the European Space Agency of lack of ambitionโ€Šโ€”โ€Šmaking it oversized for the lunar mission, but which ensures the complete reusability of the spacecraft, a technological challenge SpaceX has been preparing for quite some time after carrying out multiple tests and launches. NASAโ€™s support for such a bold project is an unusual gambleโ€Šโ€”โ€Šgovernment agencies tend to play it safeโ€Šโ€”โ€Šbut it makes sense given the dramatic change in scale involved.

In this sense, winning the NASA contract is critical to SpaceXโ€™s ambitions to go to Mars, but it is also a change of scale for NASA itself, which until now could only aspire to launch one large rocket a year costing $2 billion, which was then lost in the ocean. Now, it can move on to thinking about carrying up to 100 tons of cargo, but building one rocket a month and reusing it dozens of times. More launches imply more experience, hence, more economies of scale. If $2 billion allows it to launch 100 tons of materials into space every two weeks, the dimension of the space program changes completely. 

Once again, Muskโ€™s vision of economies of scale becomes the way to change an industry. Convincing NASA, in this case, was a matter of scale and pure economic logic: setting completely new rules of the game that no previous competitor had ever considered taking to that scale, allowing SpaceX to anticipate the savings to create an unbeatable value proposition while its competitors were playing by the old rules.

If you thought the rules governing industries were written in stone, now you know. Thereโ€™s always room for a new approach.

http://www.enriquedans.com
Contributor

Recently Published

Key Takeaway: Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing investment by making professional financial insight and portfolio management accessible to everyone. AI-powered robo-advisers, such as Betterment and Vanguard, are democratizing investment and providing tailored advice to a new generation of investors. With 31% of gen Zs and 20% of millennials using robo-advisers, the financial industry is adapting […]
Key Takeaway: Nasa’s Artemis program is set to return astronauts to the Moon and establish a permanent orbiting laboratory by the end of the decade. As humanity’s footprint expands, a new field emerges: astroforensics. Space presents a unique and harsh environment for forensic investigations, with altered gravity, cosmic radiation, extreme temperatures, and oxygen-providing climate systems. […]

Top Picks

Key Takeaways: Stock market enthusiasts often claim to predict financial market trends with great accuracy, but this is not possible due to the uncertainty and unpredictable nature of the environments in which we make daily decisions. Human cognition tends to favor a reductionist approach to information processing, sometimes called “tunneling,” which can lead to biased […]

Trending

I highly recommend reading the McKinsey Global Instituteโ€™s new report, โ€œReskilling China: Transforming The Worldโ€™s Largest Workforce Into Lifelong Learnersโ€, which focuses on the countryโ€™s biggest employment challenge, re-training its workforce and the adoption of practices such as lifelong learning to address the growing digital transformation of its productive fabric. How to transform the country […]

Join our Newsletter

Get our monthly recap with the latest news, articles and resources.

Login

Welcome to Empirics

We are glad you have decided to join our mission of gathering the collective knowledge of Asia!
Join Empirics