91–100 of 100 posts
Serious question. Why do you post WSJ articles? Either someone subscribes in which case they don’t need to discover content or they don’t in which case they haven’t discovered anything. WSJ posts are literally just advertisements for a mediocre closed website. Seriously why do you bother?
because people like me want to read the article, and we are happy it was posted. It's also extremely easy to get around the paywall.
I would just like to point out that this story dropped 18 places in 5 minutes: http://hnrankings.info/18591766/ This is something I've seen before, but solely with stories pertaining to Elon Musk. It is very clear that HN rankings are being manipulated for a specific agenda. This saddens me, as HN is otherwise a place I trust for informed and balanced commentary. (Note: I am not necessarily accusing the moderators of…
I would just like to point out that this story dropped 18 places in 5 minutes: http://hnrankings.info/18591766/ This is something I've seen before, but solely with stories pertaining to Elon Musk. It is very clear that HN rankings are being manipulated for a specific agenda. This saddens me, as HN is otherwise a place I trust for informed and balanced commentary. (Note: I am not necessarily accusing the moderators of…
This is likely selection bias. I've seen plenty of stories on other topics sink in rank as well that had nothing to do with Elon Musk.
See the FAQ for more details on ranking:
> "How are stories ranked?"
> "The basic algorithm divides points by a power of the time since a story was submitted. Comments in comment threads are ranked the same way."
> "Other factors affecting rank include user flags, anti-abuse software, software which downweights overheated discussions, and moderator intervention."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately it would have the Ryanair problem of 'Shanghai' spaceport being somewhere in the Gobi desert. And 'NYC' spaceport being somewhere in the Nevada desert, so the journey will still take 12 hours. Plus I can't see China accepting US owned ballistic trajectory rockets firing at their major cities.
Even taking conventional rail tens of miles outside a major city to ride a rocket will overall be faster than conventional air travel. I believe the SpaceX proposal for intercontinental travel involves a ferry boat to a floating launch pad and they don't need thousands of miles of safety buffer. I don't think the BFR will deliberately land at ballistic speeds because it would kill all the passengers. Local authoritie…
And can you imagine the nimbyism for any spaceport near a major city. I even predict that they'll be using images of Russian children, playing on a discarded rocket, with a farmhouse near by.
Yes a large plane could be a bomber, I think rockets are different. We have had 50+ years of major powers staring at early warning systems waiting for an attack. It will be a hard habit to break.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They also proposed super fast intercontinental travel via BFR. I think they claimed something like ~20m NYC to Shanghai travel time.
Unfortunately it would have the Ryanair problem of 'Shanghai' spaceport being somewhere in the Gobi desert. And 'NYC' spaceport being somewhere in the Nevada desert, so the journey will still take 12 hours. Plus I can't see China accepting US owned ballistic trajectory rockets firing at their major cities.
Kind of a nice way to start to create some trust - it’s not a one way affair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even taking conventional rail tens of miles outside a major city to ride a rocket will overall be faster than conventional air travel. I believe the SpaceX proposal for intercontinental travel involves a ferry boat to a floating launch pad and they don't need thousands of miles of safety buffer. I don't think the BFR will deliberately land at ballistic speeds because it would kill all the passengers. Local authoritie…
Yes I might have been exaggerating. I don't think 20 minutes is likely though. Flying is routine, and what proportion of the door to door journey is actually the flight? And can you imagine the nimbyism for any spaceport near a major city. I even predict that they'll be using images of Russian children, playing on a discarded rocket, with a farmhouse near by. Yes a large plane could be a bomber, I think rockets are d…
How is a spaceport significantly different from an airport? Both are disruptive of their surrounding area. Spaceports will make a lot more noise so they will have to be farther out in unoccupied territory but it’s still completely manageable.
Early earning systems intially looked for planes then rockets. The indicators changed with technology. SpaceX isn’t going to launch a rocket at Shanghai without calling local authorities and working to build local infrastructure. It will not come as a surprise to anyone.
It’s really not complicated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon described it in an interview once as this: If you saw $6 million, falling from the sky, would you try to catch it? Each fairing is around $3 million, so they're trying to catch it. That gives them $6 million more per-customer they can discount the price should they need to get really competitive. It is really kind of insane that no one has tried this before.
Link to the interview?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I might have been exaggerating. I don't think 20 minutes is likely though. Flying is routine, and what proportion of the door to door journey is actually the flight? And can you imagine the nimbyism for any spaceport near a major city. I even predict that they'll be using images of Russian children, playing on a discarded rocket, with a farmhouse near by. Yes a large plane could be a bomber, I think rockets are d…
The “20 minute flight” is the same stage of travel as the “15 hour flight” of a conventional airplane. It’s apples to apples. While a spaceport will have to be farther away than an airport it will not have to be 8 hours away. Mostly because that’s an absurd distance that ends up crossing multiple other populated areas. How is a spaceport significantly different from an airport? Both are disruptive of their surroundin…
I'm not sure where you're located but here in the UK, every time a Heathrow airport expansion is mooted, the amount of resistance it meets is massive.
We are currently planning a spaceport, but its in Scotland. Although to be fair I don't think good transport links to major population centres was considered in planning.
Then I think of Concorde and think even if you have a product that does what its supposed to do, sometimes that isn't enough.
Maybe it will be released as a product, I just cant see it being successful. Maybe it ends up like Concorde finding a small niche. Maybe its used as a joy ride. Maybe the numbers just don't add up and it dies a death. I just don't see myself going on a summer holiday in one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon described it in an interview once as this: If you saw $6 million, falling from the sky, would you try to catch it? Each fairing is around $3 million, so they're trying to catch it. That gives them $6 million more per-customer they can discount the price should they need to get really competitive. It is really kind of insane that no one has tried this before.
Link to the interview?
Here is Musk using it in regards to saving the fairing @ ISS Research and Development Conference 2017:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cPMS6cT0Ig&t=825
In regards to the first stage (booster stage) at Code Conference 2016: