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

SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 431 posts

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#211

Post by mr_toad »

sgjohnson wrote: post #47
arcticbull wrote: post #39

Remember folks Elon has a way of, er, overstating. He promised that SpaceX launches cost what, 1% of current launches? So far, they're more expensive than the Space Shuttle it replaced in NASA contracts. Their own numbers say that in the fullness of time they may be 10% cheaper. So far, not so. Space exploration is great, we should do it, and this rocket sounds cool. We should do it even if it is expensive. But "dirt…

I personally really don't like Elon's completely ridiculous claims of cutting the price of something by an order of magnitude or two. Even if he could (he can't), what business sense would it make? Why would you cut the prices of launches to 1% of the current ones, if you could also cut them by just 10% and supposedly have an absolutely insane margin, because you'd still get all the business.

All the claims I’ve seen are about reducing the cost. That doesn’t mean the price will drop by the same amount.

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#212

Post by andbberger »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #209
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do suspect we need to find commercial enterprises to justify the Starship economics and I'm just not sure what that looks like yet. At $1 MM per launch with 100 t per launch puts Starship roughly at $10 per kg. Asteroid mining: Will be a huge industry. Especially with growing environmental concerns all around Earth. Waste can basically be disposed of very cheaply into the atmosphere or sun. Starlink, Kupier, etc…

The military wants a C-130 payload anywhere in the world in 1 hour. Military up the wazoo in contracts. Militarization of space is inevitable, they'll want bases up there. If the payload costs are true for starship, they'll put big ones up there. Starship will represent a total paradigm change in space superiority on economics alone. I'm surprised China and Russia aren't loudly complaining about this. It would enable…

if I had 5k to burn I'd get a nice ebike, the view is fine from down here, thank you

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#213

Post by kcb »

arcticbull wrote: post #39

Remember folks Elon has a way of, er, overstating. He promised that SpaceX launches cost what, 1% of current launches? So far, they're more expensive than the Space Shuttle it replaced in NASA contracts. Their own numbers say that in the fullness of time they may be 10% cheaper. So far, not so. Space exploration is great, we should do it, and this rocket sounds cool. We should do it even if it is expensive. But "dirt…

https://web.archive.org/web/20210801024432/https://ntrs.nasa...

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#214

Post by kcb »

arcticbull wrote: post #68
CompelTechnic wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So far, they're more expensive than the Space Shuttle it replaced in NASA contracts do you have a source for this? Wikipedia data in the Launch vehicle estimated payload cost per kg table disagrees with you. By a factor of ~20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_launch_market_competitio...

The space shuttle is a human-rated launch vehicle capable of taking 7 people into orbit at a total cost of $445M per launch, or about $65M per seat. When subcontracted to Russia, the charge was about $85M per person. Crew Dragon costs about $55M per person - which is one place my 10% number comes from. Cargo flights are different, and you should also look at total program costs from the deal with NASA. The NASA contr…

https://web.archive.org/web/20210801024432/https://ntrs.nasa...

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#215

Post by [deleted] »

arcticbull wrote: post #49
kashkhan wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

weren't shuttle flights $2B each? List price of Falcon launch is <$70MM.

Russian Roscosmos costs $35-48.5M per launch. [1] Shuttle launches were about $450M per launch, with 7 people and 50,000lbs of cargo. Came to about $10,000 per kg, vs SpaceX Falcon 9 at $27,000 [edit] and the Dragon around $9,000. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz-2

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#216

Post by cma »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #55

I think Gwynne Shotwell is the rather unsung hero keeping SpaceX running correctly day by day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwynne_Shotwell

This from her seemed dangerously like fraud:

https://www.ted.com/talks/gwynne_shotwell_spacex_s_plan_to_f...

Passenger service by 2028 on starship for between an economy and business class ticket.

A couple years later they confirmed they were still going for the same timeline.

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#217

Post by XorNot »

kklisura wrote: post #42

Starship can deliver 100 t payload to LEO. Does space industry really need that payload requirements? When you look at Falcon Heavy, it can deliver 68 t to LEO, but there was only one launch back in 2019.

Its not mass to orbit (though it helps) - it's $ per kg to orbit.

If Starship hits its mark, it will have a lower $ per kg to orbit then any other rocket in history.

And that's big: most technological innovation happens when we cross economies of scale in the price of some underlying service - or in availability. The existence of computers revolutionized a lot of things - but putting one on every office desk, and then in every home, and then in every pocket - that's what's led to a lot of other capabilities now being viable.

Orbital access is the same trajectory: we probably can't even conceive of the types of business models that will happen once certain cost/availability thresholds are breached. You see this every day in your home - really sit down and think about the logistical chain that means you can use aluminium foil the way you do. The type of resources and logistics which make that possible - all of which didn't have the goal of making home aluminium foil readily available, but who the existence of solves problems without us even thinking out.

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#218

Post by ridgeguy »

danavar wrote: post #15
kilroy123 wrote: post #6

If you're ever in the Houston area, I highly recommend going to see NASA Johnson Space Center. They have a full-size replica (?) Saturn V rocket on its side, you can see. You simply can't grasp how big these rockets are until you see it up close. It's like a tall building blasting off into space. They're humongous. I hope to one day see Starship up close in person as it takes off to space.

In Huntsville AL they have one stood up outside a museum right off the highway - it’s insane to see

Decades ago, I had an SBIR contract with NASA, the contract monitor being in Huntsville. After I briefed him, I went to see the Saturn V. At that time, it was resting horizontal on a long concrete pad. The briefing went really well, and I was in good spirits.

So there was no barrier between the vehicle and visitors. You could walk up and touch it, which I did. Then I walked to the engine end of the first stage and climbed up between two of the F1 engines. I was able to climb into the center F1 and stand up at the end of the expansion bell.

I didn't even come up to the center of the bell. It drove home the titanic size of the machine in a way that nothing else had.

I had to climb down when a moderately pissed-off guard saw me after a few minutes. It was a wonderful experience.

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#219

Post by ClumsyPilot »

adastra22 wrote: post #44
pacetherace wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Lost records 2. Many companies that help build those rockets have ceased to exists 3. Technology and tooling have changed substantially 4. Standards to deem a rocket flight worthy for human space flight have changed

> Lost records This is actually a myth FYI. No records were ever lost, and you can go see all the original blueprints and relevant memos and technical reports in the archives at Marshall or DC if you want. It's all there. Where the myth comes from, and the kernel of truth underlying it is that the Saturn V was a hand-crafted machine made by experts. NASA and their contractors did their damndest to record every aspect…

"undoubtably there is some things that slipped through the cracks and were never written down."

I dont think they slip through the cracks as much as people today have different skils. It's like trying to get. Bunch of Node-JS developers to get a mainframe-based system from the 80s working.

Re: SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform space travel

#220

Post by ClumsyPilot »

edgyquant wrote: post #103
tjchear wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For lack of a political will or the technical know how?

The phrase, “we couldn’t build one if we wanted to,” is misleading. We could build the exact vehicle but we could build one that looks similar and does the same thing.

We could not get it working in 5 years, maybe in 10. At that point you are not building, you are reverse engineering and re-engineering
Post reply on HN