SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#101

Post by DINKDINK » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 12:15 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #5

If SpaceX can fly out their 2015 manifest, that will be impressive. This is the year the Falcon Heavy is supposed to launch. Their first manned flight has apparently been postponed; it's been "2-3 years" away for 2 years now.[1] I notice they've stopped putting dates on their manifest for future flights.[2][3] SpaceX is doing a great job, but they're behind their own schedule. They're two flights behind on ISS resupp…

>it's been "2-3 years" away for 2 years now.

Technically that's still in spec. Example:

Date: Message

2010: We are 2-3 years away from launch.

2011: We are 2-3 years away from launch.

2012:

2013: We launch.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#102

Post by cryptoz » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 12:20 AM UTC

tsotha wrote: post #81

cryptoz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX will IPO when their Mars Colonial Transporter is making regular trips between Earth and Mars. Elon thinks that taking the company public before then would result in a potential derailment of Mars colonization plans. Having MCT making regular Earth-Mars trips before going public will ensure that quarterly-return-investors won't try to interfere with sending millions of people to go live on Mars. Citation: https…

I think we can all read that as "not in my lifetime", though I may just be a pessimist.

MCT should be flying its first trips in about 15 years (Elon says 10-12, so we add some). So I'd guess IPO in around 15-20 years. The real colonization effort will probably be getting going in 20-25 years. SpaceX will want to send about 80,000 people each year (or each launch window), and that scale is probably 30-40 years away.

Most of us will see SpaceX go to Mars. And optimistically, I think many of us will go too.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#103

Post by ceejayoz » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 12:24 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #100

manicdee wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you schedule a rocket launch when someone else owns the 50-year-old range radar equipment that keeps executing HCF?

> How do you schedule a rocket launch when someone else owns the 50-year-old range radar equipment that keeps executing HCF? Recognize that even if you don't own the radar equipment, it is impacting your ability to deliver value, so spend the necessary funds to get them to replace the radar equipment with something that doesn't have that problem.

> Recognize that even if you don't own the radar equipment, it is impacting your ability to deliver value, so spend the necessary funds to get them to replace the radar equipment with something that doesn't have that problem.

And then convince the Air Force to certify and let you use your new radar for their payloads.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#104

Post by spiritplumber » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 12:30 AM UTC

Retra wrote: post #97

spiritplumber wrote: post #75

I have to wonder, if Elon Musk is alive on earth today, what's the use of me? He's done pretty much everything I wanted to do in life, only a little less efficiently, and much faster. What's the point?

This is an unnecessarily depressing way to see things. What you should believe is that your dreams are not meant for you. They are meant for someone much like you who probably doesn't exist yet. Someone who will actually understand what you've done and how you've helped them achieve what you would like to. You will die, and someone else will follow in your footsteps. Make sure that person has what they need to live t…

That's taking the long view, and it makes sense. I guess I'll have to find someone who can use my work, and then go die.

Does anyone want a small robotics company?

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#105

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 12:36 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #103

dragonwriter wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you schedule a rocket launch when someone else owns the 50-year-old range radar equipment that keeps executing HCF? Recognize that even if you don't own the radar equipment, it is impacting your ability to deliver value, so spend the necessary funds to get them to replace the radar equipment with something that doesn't have that problem.

> Recognize that even if you don't own the radar equipment, it is impacting your ability to deliver value, so spend the necessary funds to get them to replace the radar equipment with something that doesn't have that problem. And then convince the Air Force to certify and let you use your new radar for their payloads.

> And then convince the Air Force to certify and let you use your new radar for their payloads.

Well, yeah, which takes more money. I wasn't intending, upthread, to suggest that the route was easy...

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#106

Post by tsotha » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 1:03 AM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #102

tsotha wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can all read that as "not in my lifetime", though I may just be a pessimist.

MCT should be flying its first trips in about 15 years (Elon says 10-12, so we add some). So I'd guess IPO in around 15-20 years. The real colonization effort will probably be getting going in 20-25 years. SpaceX will want to send about 80,000 people each year (or each launch window), and that scale is probably 30-40 years away. Most of us will see SpaceX go to Mars. And optimistically, I think many of us will go too…

Who is going to pay for it, though? If Musk is then, okay, maybe. But if he's counting on Congress to pony up the cash it may never happen at all. Probably won't, in fact.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#107

Post by branchan » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 1:16 AM UTC

avmich wrote: post #68

greglindahl wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're launching a $2B satellite, saving $60mm on the launch is not a slam-dunk. The Air Force had a series of launch failures that made them extremely conservative. Sure, I think they ought to be moving faster with SpaceX, but you should give them credit for having some serious concerns.

A lot of that $2B cost comes from requirement that everything should just work, and therefore thoroughly tested, because customers don't want to have it broken in space where no one can fix things and have to send another one... which costs $2B... see cyclical reasoning? If launches would be cheaper, customers could afford to make less expensive payloads - after all, if it breaks, they can just send another one. A pr…

That's not entirely correct. The bottom line is that military satellites are just expensive - period. They will always be expensive because of their capabilities.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#108

Post by cryptoz » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 1:23 AM UTC

tsotha wrote: post #106

cryptoz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MCT should be flying its first trips in about 15 years (Elon says 10-12, so we add some). So I'd guess IPO in around 15-20 years. The real colonization effort will probably be getting going in 20-25 years. SpaceX will want to send about 80,000 people each year (or each launch window), and that scale is probably 30-40 years away. Most of us will see SpaceX go to Mars. And optimistically, I think many of us will go too…

Who is going to pay for it, though? If Musk is then, okay, maybe. But if he's counting on Congress to pony up the cash it may never happen at all. Probably won't, in fact.

Elon will not wait for Congress. Who will pay for it?

1. The people who want to move there - target price $500k USD.

$500,000 is the estimated price at which the demand is estimated at 80,000 tickets. Elon figures that if the price of moving to Mars is comparable to buying a home in California, the number of people who could afford to go and would want to go is ~80,000. So that's ~$40B or so.

2. Elon - maybe worth $50-100B by then?

If we assume that SolarCity and Tesla will continue to grow for the next 10-20 years, then Elon's net worth will probably be ~$50B or so. Not enough to fund a full Mars colony, but it'd be a really good start.

3. Satellite internet profits

The recently announced satellite internet effort by SpaceX, financed by Google and Fidelity, is intended to provide high-speed, low-latency global internet access to billions of people. Elon expects to be able to fund part of the Mars colonization project with profits from that.

4. NASA / Congress

NASA already expects to spend many billions on making trips to Mars. It does not seem unlikely that, in 20 years, they would be willing to join some efforts and allocate $10-30B towards Mars colonization with SpaceX.

5. VCs and billionaires.

The Martian economy may have a rough start but will probably grow wildly once established. SpaceX already attracts VC funds in the billions from large firms and billionaires, and this will certainly be amplified in the future.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#109

Post by keslag » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 1:27 AM UTC

seanflyon wrote: post #99

lazaroclapp wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can SpaceX, at least from a technology and legal standpoint, launch a manned flight without NASA involvement? If so, is it that it just makes no commercial sense? Or is the idea that the flight is far more likely to succeed with NASA's expertise?

Without NASA there is no customer for manned spaceflight.

Hardly.

Re: SpaceX Profitable as Musk Pulls in NASA Contracts, Google Cash

#110

Post by meric » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 1:43 AM UTC

branchan wrote: post #107

avmich wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of that $2B cost comes from requirement that everything should just work, and therefore thoroughly tested, because customers don't want to have it broken in space where no one can fix things and have to send another one... which costs $2B... see cyclical reasoning? If launches would be cheaper, customers could afford to make less expensive payloads - after all, if it breaks, they can just send another one. A pr…

That's not entirely correct. The bottom line is that military satellites are just expensive - period. They will always be expensive because of their capabilities.

Agreed. They will always have more capability than a non-military satellite, and so will be more expensive. If it didn't have more capability than a non-military satellite, then it isn't a military satellite.