Are they going to have to change their name to Vacuumbus? Although, it is a cargo ship, so maybe Vacuumtruck would be more accurate.
It doesn't exactly roll trippingly off the tongue, does it?
Spacebus is better. Better hop on the Spacebus!
Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
201–210 of 219 posts
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, you definitely can. 1) Tesla driving fully autonomously from LA to NY by the end of 2017 [1][and many others] 2) Tesla producing 10,000 cars per week by the end of 2018 [2][3] 3) "Funding secured" [4] 4) All Teslas produced after Oct 2016 have all the hardware necessary for full self driving [5]. This was apparently before Tesla realized they needed/wanted to design a custom ASIC for full self driving. Many mor…
1) It's again that time of the year... although this time he merely promised FSD to be feature complete by the end of the year. I think same will happen 2021, 2022, etc. 2) That they did achieve pretty much that, just a bit late. 3) Head scratcher, but some speculation it was to fend off a hostile takeover attempt. A bit fishy indeed. 4) They do replace all HW 2 & 2.5 computers for free, if the owner got FSD package.
2) Pretty sure Tesla is still not producing 10k cars per week. Their Q2 2020 update shows max quarterly production was ~105k in Q42019, which is ~8k per week. I can't find anything suggesting they have ever peaked over 10k per week.
4) Replacing old hardware is obviously not the same as shipping all the necessary hardware in 2016.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#203SpaceX Starship is planned for 2024, and with a cargo capacity in the hundreds of tons. Even if it gets delayed by four or five years it will be able to bring back samples before this is is even launched. NASA’s plans seem very slow in comparison.
I've been on this website long enough to remember when everyone was saying 'of course manually-driven cars will be the exception by 2020', and believing Elon Musk's timescales has taken over as the new naive credulity of the HNer.
Who actually believes Musk's timescales? Musk's overly optimistic yet technically plausible timescales seem to be part of the reason why his ventures are so successful. With the right culture and team members, it drives people toward the finish line. The challenge and constant pace of progress is motivating. With the wrong culture and team members (most companies, most people) it leads to crash & burn. Musk's exhausting personality is precisely what makes it all work.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#204SpaceX Starship is planned for 2024, and with a cargo capacity in the hundreds of tons. Even if it gets delayed by four or five years it will be able to bring back samples before this is is even launched. NASA’s plans seem very slow in comparison.
Though I would very much like to see Starship succeed, it must be understood just how risky a project it is. Just having the rocket be able to work in Earth orbit is a risky proposition, given its novel design and materials challenges. Add to that the many novel challenges returning Starship would entail, refueling in space, landing and taking off from Mars, setting up multi megawatts of solar, mining, methane produc…
> That was doing something that had been done before, strapping rockets together to make a Heavy version.
That’s a common misconception - in fact, even SpaceX itself made this mistake! Musk said that making Heavy was almost as complex as designing a whole new rocket; which is also why they went with new next time (Starship) instead of incremental (Super Extra Heavy).
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are they not even planning to at least try and send a fuel factory on the first Mars launch?
I don't know. But in any case, it's not just the fuel. Have you seen the proposed Moon-Starship? They'd require some quite impressive crane to even get cargo into the ship. Additionally, there's the problem of the landing site. It's considerably more difficult to land a rocket on unprepared, rocky terrain than on a carefully prepared landing pad. Plus a suitable area has to be found first, too. There's simply no guar…
Two things to consider:
1) They plan on working out orbital refuelling before sending a Starship to Mars, this might not be enough to return it to orbit from Mars surface depending on how much fuel needs to be used for Earth orbit departure but I wonder if it would be enough to decelerate into Mars orbit and have enough left over to return to Earth, this could open up some other possibilities which leads to #2
2) If they wanted to do a sample return mission, they might not need to land the whole Starship on Mars. If they put the Starship in orbit they could use it as a command module and send a Mars Lander down that was kitted out with enough fuel to return a sample to orbit. They should have about 330,000 lbs of payload to play with.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#206If NASA really wanted to answer the 'life on Mars' question, Perseverance would have included a microscope. AFAICT, the reason it doesn't is because nobody wants to stake their reputation on the hypothesis.
What hypothesis? If you found life on Mars you're going to be rendered immortal as long as knowledge survived. No one is refusing out of pride.
Gilbert Levin might disagree.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently listening to the biography on Musk, he jokingly accepts that his timelines are all off, but he doesn't feel too bad about it because he eventually hits the goals. When asked about comments that a timeline for an electric car took a couple years longer than he had predicted (like a 1 year prediction, and it took 3.5 years, or something like that) he said roughly "Oh yeah, that's crazy. But I didn't know that…
You can try doing the same thing in your job and see how that will end. The mere fact that he doesn't just get away with it, but also gets funding every singel time, and has a huge cult following, makes all of my BS whistle ring.
Maybe the trick is to be your own boss, risk your own personal wealth, and not try “getting away” with stuff at your job.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#208Interesting, but the SpaceX Starship/Falcon Heavy, which will start flying in a few years, will be able to do this a thousand times better.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can try doing the same thing in your job and see how that will end. The mere fact that he doesn't just get away with it, but also gets funding every singel time, and has a huge cult following, makes all of my BS whistle ring.
Maybe the trick is to be your own boss, risk your own personal wealth, and not try “getting away” with stuff at your job.
Which I am now. In which case you have to get away with missed deadlines with your customers, banks and, if there are any investors. Good luck with that.
Re: Airbus to build 'first interplanetary cargo ship'
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you can call him Musk "master of the dubious marketing promise" anymore now that Tesla is meeting production goals, SpaceX is landing boosters, re-supplying the ISS, and has brought astronauts to the ISS. His promises are far more reliable than most at this point.
https://elonmusk.today
That's some deliberate misreading.
"people who get brain surgery from him" - the tweet doesn't say from him.
"since Elon Musk told Jay Clayton of the SEC to" - he didn't say it to Jay Clayton.
"since Elon Musk promised to get rid of most possessions" - he didn't promise anything.
"since Elon Musk promised to produce ventilators at the SpaceX factory" - saying SpaceX is 'working on venitilators' is not any such promise.
"Elon Musk assured parents that" - there is no context about "assuring parents", he was justifying a previous prediction.
"since Elon Musk advised consumers that Teslas can safely function as a boat for short periods of time" - the Tweet doesn't say "safely" it came with a video on escaping a sinking car by rolling down the window, and he's saying the electronics are water-sealed and it won't lose power to a blocked air intake (like an ICE vehicle).
"since Elon Musk offered a chance to fly to Mars and work off the price of the ticket with a Mars job" - nope, since Elon Musk said "the goal needs to be such that anyone can go, with loans available" in the context of "how will people be chosen to go to Mars".
What an awful website. As if there isn't enough real strange stuff he's said without making shit up and then linking directly to the Tweets which don't say what it claims they say.