Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 421 posts

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#151

Post by matmatmatmat »

throwntoday wrote: post #141
matmatmatmat wrote: post #132

I'm stunned at the level of "optimism" in these comments. Guys, we're not going to be setting up colonies on Mars, we're not going to setting up heavy industry in space. There is literally no. point. at. all. Mars is less hospitable than even the least hospitable places on Earth. "Heavy" industry, pretty much by definition, means it's way cheaper to do it on Earth than in space (no amount of rocket development will e…

I am equally stunned at the level of "pesimism" in your comment. We used to do things just because, just for the thrill of exploration, and pushing the limits of human civilization. If Elon wants to spend his money on this, and the government as well for their own reasons, why are you so frustrated? Plenty of money gets spent on fixing problems on Earth.

I don't believe this is true.

Undertaking the risk of exploration has -- I would venture to say -- almost always had some economic, political, or military motive. Someone had to see some potential gain for the risk they were undertaking.

To be clear, I'm not frustrated at Elon for spending his money like this. I mean, if it were his money, because it's not. He's spending his investors' money, which he raises for himself by selling these ideas. I'm less excited by my government spending money on this, but, yes, it's not really that much.

What frustrated me more were the comments that appeared to be divorced from reality about what space exploration will bring.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#152

Post by the_third_wave »

matmatmatmat wrote: post #132

I'm stunned at the level of "optimism" in these comments. Guys, we're not going to be setting up colonies on Mars, we're not going to setting up heavy industry in space. There is literally no. point. at. all. Mars is less hospitable than even the least hospitable places on Earth. "Heavy" industry, pretty much by definition, means it's way cheaper to do it on Earth than in space (no amount of rocket development will e…

> Also, uh, why don't we just fix Earth? Oh, that's not sexy? No, of course not, because real problems are always more complicated than simple, inspirational ideas or a colony run by a dictator.

Go ahead and start "fixing earth" then, you're free to do so if you think it is "sexy". Meanwhile others will work on launching rockets, a task they seem to be quite adept at. Also, drop the nonsensical references to a "colony run by a dictator" or at least explain what made you write that piece of prose.

Humankind needs a frontier to strive towards, this has always been the case and will probably remain so. There used to be many frontiers but technology has developed as such a rapid pace that they're starting to become quite rare. A fully reusable space launch system has the potential to open up space exploration to a far larger extent than the current - soon to be previous - generation of expendable launch vehicles did. This is a good thing since it gives people something positive to look forward to instead of all the negatives which are being pumped in their heads by the media, politicians and, yes, by individuals like you who deal in negatives like "wiped ourselves out on Earth", "a colony run by a dictator", "There is literally no. point. at. all".

As said, feel free to "fix the Earth" but may I suggest framing this in a more positive and inspiring way? If you hit the right tone - yes, tone is important - you might inspire others who might inspire even more people. You may be able to open a new frontier that way, just like people like Musk do by working on reusable launch systems. Negativity and sour grapes do not inspire others, people who want that can simply watch a political debate.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#153

Post by SahAssar »

adampk wrote: post #144
SahAssar wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX has had very impressive successes, some government programs have failed or run over budget. Some government programs were also impressive, both in the US and abroad. I think we can all agree on those points. The point of the GP that I (and I think many others) react to is the "Only in America things like this can happen" part. I just don't get American exceptionalism I guess.

Do you mean you don't understand why American's would think that America has done incredible things, or do you not believe America has done incredible things?

Neither, the term refers to the belief that the US is somehow inherently different from other nations, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

Saying that something "could only happen in America" (usually) indicates a view that America is somehow unique (as in the American exceptionalist view).

I'm not saying that America hasn't done great things, or that Americans shouldn't believe they have done great things. It's just that no country is unique in this manner, and Americans seem to often say they are in ways that I rarely see other countries do.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#154

Post by [deleted] »

adampk wrote: post #144
SahAssar wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX has had very impressive successes, some government programs have failed or run over budget. Some government programs were also impressive, both in the US and abroad. I think we can all agree on those points. The point of the GP that I (and I think many others) react to is the "Only in America things like this can happen" part. I just don't get American exceptionalism I guess.

Do you mean you don't understand why American's would think that America has done incredible things, or do you not believe America has done incredible things?

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#155

Post by perihelions »

milansuk wrote: post #14

In 2019, Elon tweeted[0] that the price of one Raptor engine is under $1M with the goal going under 250K for the next version. Any recent info where there are now? I'm still surprised they moved to this orbital fly so quickly without doing more tests. Going from 3 engines to almost 30 is crazy. Also, If I understand it right, both booster and starship will end up in the ocean. I hope they will be able to reuse at lea…

"I'm still surprised they moved to this orbital fly so quickly without doing more tests."

I'll bet they're going to remove all 29 of these engines and re-attach them again later. I would expect they want much more testing than they've done to date (for example, pressure testing the tanks -- they have not done that with this booster, BN4, according to Reddit).

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#156

Post by jonahbenton »

BobbyJo wrote: post #112
sfblah wrote: post #101

I genuinely don't understand what the point of all this is. Is this all about sending people to Mars? Is it basic research? What is the end goal here? I don't follow this too much, so I'm hoping someone can paste me a link to something I can read to explain the justification for building this thing.

Do you have any idea how much raw material and energy would be available to humanity if we were able to successfully colonize the solar system? The scale of what we could build and learn would be absolutely shaking. Seriously. That's enough 'why' for me.

On what timescale, at what level of capital investment?

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#158

Post by scrumbledober »

pyrale wrote: post #103
gridspy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the best way to save the planet is to move heavy industry into space. Move our power generation into space and beam it down. Make advanced technologies in space which benefit those on Earth. Move people into real orbital habitats. Make Earth proper a gigantic park / nature reserve. We can't "wait" for anything, or the window during which we can develop space travel will close. 10 or 100 years from now we migh…

> I think the best way to save the planet is to move heavy industry into space. Good luck dealing with the absence of cheap oxydizer and the lack of convection which makes heat dispersion a nightmare. > Move our power generation into space and beam it down. Our power is already generated in space, and beamed down to us. It also comes with no infrastructure cost, which is truly an engineering wonder when you think of…

space based solar power actually has some pretty great pros and not many cons other than construction cost

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBCbdThIJNE

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#159

Post by kbenson »

matmatmatmat wrote: post #143
kbenson wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, uh, why don't we just fix Earth? Oh, that's not sexy? No, of course not, because real problems are always more complicated than simple, inspirational ideas or a colony run by a dictator. Fixing your run down car will never provide the same level of utility and redundancy that having two cars will. Preferably you do both. If you live in a somewhat remote location, and your wife is pregnant and you know she nee…

This argument would have a lot more merit if Earth and Mars were similar, but they're utterly not. The difficulty, expense, and risk of setting up life on Mars absolutely pales in comparison to cleaning-up life on Earth. Suppose there were a Mars colony. How many years before that colony could go on indefinitely if it didn't have support from Earth?

> This argument would have a lot more merit if Earth and Mars were similar, but they're utterly not.

So where's the better choice for redundancy?

> The difficulty, expense, and risk of setting up life on Mars absolutely pales in comparison to cleaning-up life on Earth.

First, that's irrelevant, as a sustainable colony on Mars provides something that you don't get no matter how much you clean up Earth. It can be pristine, it still doesn't get you redundancy.

Second, I don't think it's true that the price is so far in that direction. Cleaning up Earth is monumentally expensive as well, depending on what you even mean by that.

> Suppose there were a Mars colony. How many years before that colony could go on indefinitely if it didn't have support from Earth?

Sustainable in that it can produce the materials needed for modern living? I very long time, I imagine. Sustainable in that it provides enough food and water that a group of people could survive without having to worry about modern conveniences? Much less, and that's always got to be the first step, so that's what we go for.

Even if people on a mars colony ended up living a more simple existence in the case of the loss of Earth, that's still a chance for them to advance and continue that wouldn't exist with the world ending disaster on Earth.

Re: SpaceX installed 29 Raptor engines on a Super Heavy rocket last night

#160

Post by afterburner »

jonahbenton wrote: post #156
BobbyJo wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any idea how much raw material and energy would be available to humanity if we were able to successfully colonize the solar system? The scale of what we could build and learn would be absolutely shaking. Seriously. That's enough 'why' for me.

On what timescale, at what level of capital investment?

Hundreds of years, government-level investment.
Post reply on HN