Starship Update [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Starship Update [video]

#81

Post by renewiltord » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 3:59 AM UTC

thecrumb wrote: post #3

You'd think someone with Elon's money would spend a few bucks on a public speaking course on Udemy or something.

Some people have to conform. You've got to wear a tailored suit, you've got to sound slick, you've got to have your message clean and correct. But that's the point. It's because you're not exceptional so you have to meet the standard signals of being bare competent. But you take a generational talent, and he can sound however he sounds because it's obvious he is what he is and just being himself is the best thing he can be.

He can suck at all these things but you know he's one of a kind. Or maybe you don't think it. But it doesn't matter. There's enough people who do. And they'll listen.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#82

Post by kortex » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 3:59 AM UTC

JaimeThompson wrote: post #74

hparadiz wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISS was built largely with hundreds of space shuttle and Soyuz launches over two decades hence why it's so expensive. Starship will be able to put an entire ISS worth of stuff into orbit in a single launch for 1/50th of the cost. It's not a zero sum game. The space industry employs a lot of people. Some of the stuff they put into orbit are satellites that literally save lives.

Starship can't lift 462 tons to orbit in one launch and that isn't taking into account the volume needed. It would take more than 1 to get an ISS equivalent on orbit.

Ok, so like 5-10. ISS took 40 assembly flights, with 36 being expensive space shuttle flights ($54k/kg).

Re: Starship Update [video]

#83

Post by sfblah » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 3:59 AM UTC

panick21_ wrote: post #28

rtpg wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need to fly 3 months to some inhospitable planet that is in worse condition than Earth would be (even after nuclear wars and global warming) to make progress? I suppose there's an idea we could apply everything done on Mars to Earth, but like... seriously, what we just took all the prep for mars and just put it in the middle of the Empty Quarter, the Saraha, Antarctica? People barely want to live in the arc…

We have enough land on earth already. Land is not actually the solution to any problem on earth. But Mars is the solution to a potentially big problem on earth. And the technology to manufacture fuel from solar and nuclear energy, building advanced life support system, advancing the state of rocket technology, allowing much more use of sat technology, massively advancing science planetary/biology/(and more), controll…

Let's say someone argued instead that we should figure out a way to establish a human settlement inside of a volcano, or at the bottom of the deep ocean. Couldn't you make all the arguments you just made in favor of doing that as well? What makes Mars any different? Why is this specific Quixotic activity more valid than the ones I just mentioned?

Re: Starship Update [video]

#84

Post by sfblah » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:01 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #13

sillysaurusx wrote: post #5

"It's gonna be cramped, dangerous, difficult, very hard work. You might die." -- Elon's sales pitch for Mars, in his own words. I wonder if any billionaire (or their children) will be doing the early work. It's an interesting game of "Who values their life the least?" knowing that their sacrifice will make for a better future. Of course, it's not a foregone conclusion that there will be a disaster. But over the cours…

Why do we need to fly 3 months to some inhospitable planet that is in worse condition than Earth would be (even after nuclear wars and global warming) to make progress? I suppose there's an idea we could apply everything done on Mars to Earth, but like... seriously, what we just took all the prep for mars and just put it in the middle of the Empty Quarter, the Saraha, Antarctica? People barely want to live in the arc…

I completely agree with this line of reasoning, which is why I called the fixation with Mars Quixotic elsewhere in the thread. I was discussing this with some friends. Why not just pick some other totally inhospitable environment and try to live there instead? I mentioned inside a volcano lower in the thread. It seems to me you'd get all the same side-benefits of technological development.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#85

Post by sfblah » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:02 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #51

sfblah wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then what? What's the use case?

Lifting enormous amounts of mass to orbit and Mars. Arguing the merits of these activities is beyond the scope of this thread.

Sorry, I didn't realize we weren't allowed to discuss the point of the presentation.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#86

Post by drsnow » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:02 AM UTC

JaimeThompson wrote: post #70

kortex wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but if you ever listen to his longer interviews, in particular those with Tim Dodd (Everyday Astronaut), it's very clear he has a deep understanding of rocket mechanics, production, logistics, launch pad development, etc. It's well beyond manager-just-regurgitating-stuff they hear. One interview he stops briefly and gets into some nitty gritty about hold-downs on the starship pad or something.

He also has a deep understanding of how important government assistance was to getting SpaceX where it is now but that hasn't stopped him from trying to stop others from benefiting from the same. He shows a lack of rational thought in regards too SpaceX that is sometimes rather worrying. Take, for example, the time he smoked a blunt on camera which isn't exactly what one of his largest customers likes to see in their…

Weed use makes no difference as to his leadership abilities or trustworthiness

Re: Starship Update [video]

#87

Post by terafo » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:02 AM UTC

garbagetime wrote: post #58

irrational wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic idea is to not have all your eggs in one basket. We are one asteroid strike away from losing all human life on earth. Having 2 habited planets spreads the risk. Obviously having those planets in different solar systems would be even better, but we don’t have the technology for that, yet.

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Our options aren't only (a) live only on Earth, and (b) live on Earth and Mars and potentially other planets. There is, for example, (c) live in man-made structures orbiting the sun at a distance of 1AU, which is debatedly much more sensible than trying to live on Mars.

It is much easier to get protected from radiation on mars, than in the outer space. Nobody knows for certain how would childbirth look like in zero g and it's just the one of many problems. Mars is much more hospitable than pure vacuum.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#88

Post by more_corn » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:02 AM UTC

sillysaurusx wrote: post #5

"It's gonna be cramped, dangerous, difficult, very hard work. You might die." -- Elon's sales pitch for Mars, in his own words. I wonder if any billionaire (or their children) will be doing the early work. It's an interesting game of "Who values their life the least?" knowing that their sacrifice will make for a better future. Of course, it's not a foregone conclusion that there will be a disaster. But over the cours…

Elon plans to retire on Mars. He plans to die there. “Hopefully not on impact”

I expect he’ll share some of the risk (though not the super early super high risk) because the settlement will be risky for the first hundred+ years.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#89

Post by panick21_ » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:03 AM UTC

JaimeThompson wrote: post #70

kortex wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but if you ever listen to his longer interviews, in particular those with Tim Dodd (Everyday Astronaut), it's very clear he has a deep understanding of rocket mechanics, production, logistics, launch pad development, etc. It's well beyond manager-just-regurgitating-stuff they hear. One interview he stops briefly and gets into some nitty gritty about hold-downs on the starship pad or something.

He also has a deep understanding of how important government assistance was to getting SpaceX where it is now but that hasn't stopped him from trying to stop others from benefiting from the same. He shows a lack of rational thought in regards too SpaceX that is sometimes rather worrying. Take, for example, the time he smoked a blunt on camera which isn't exactly what one of his largest customers likes to see in their…

> but that hasn't stopped him from trying to stop others from benefiting from the same.

That's complete nonsense. Unlike others SpaceX has never really attack other space companies. Musk has been supportive of other space companies.

SpaceX busted open the establishment in both DoD and NASA so the contracts are fairly competent, and everybody coming in the industry benefits from that.

SpaceX just recently lost a contract about Commercial Leo Destination but unlike BlueOrigin they didn't release a pamphlet, an army of lobbyist and a bunch of lawyers.

Can you be specific of what actions SpaceX has taken to prevent others space company from gaining government contracts (other then competing for them)?

> Take, for example, the time he smoked a blunt on camera which isn't exactly what one of his largest customers likes to see in their executives they are entrusting with launching one of a kind national security assets.

Something that had basically no impact other then some not really serious slap on the wrist because the military is federal and not state law and they had to pretend to give a shit.

It wasn't the smartest thing to do but to hold that up as some great example about how he is a bad manager is ridiculous for a company that has been as successful as SpaceX.

> I'm glad SpaceX has an actual professional management team to run most day to day operations.

A lot of those manager are engineers that came up in SpaceX. Early on it was basically Elon and his secretary and a group of senior technical team lead that did everything. Musk was heavily in involved in recruitment, supply chain and other typical management things.

He is very capable of doing management work for small or large company but whenever he can avoid it, he doesn't do it, because its not where he adds most value beyond overall strategy.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#90

Post by more_corn » Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 4:04 AM UTC

garbagetime wrote: post #58

irrational wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic idea is to not have all your eggs in one basket. We are one asteroid strike away from losing all human life on earth. Having 2 habited planets spreads the risk. Obviously having those planets in different solar systems would be even better, but we don’t have the technology for that, yet.

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Our options aren't only (a) live only on Earth, and (b) live on Earth and Mars and potentially other planets. There is, for example, (c) live in man-made structures orbiting the sun at a distance of 1AU, which is debatedly much more sensible than trying to live on Mars.

Better rockets and better spacecraft serve all space exploration and colonization efforts.