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

A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

fourmilab.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#11

Post by btilly »

SCM-Enthusiast wrote: post #4
philipwhiuk wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really that novel.

the novelty is how to handle such scale. Sure, if we build a million rockets it'll be cheaper, but how do we USE those rockets and get funding at "relative peace time". SpaceX's real innovation was starlink in allowing it to "Soak up" excess production. Besides the obvious of reusability, which wasn't that "Obvious" considering the temperatures of reentry.

Actually, reusability was an obvious idea from the start. For example the Space Shuttle and the McDonnell Douglas DC-X are examples of attempts at reusability in the USA, and other countries had their own experiments.

It just became non-obvious that it was the right approach after a long history of failed attempts at it.

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#12

Post by mlsu »

SCM-Enthusiast wrote: post #4
philipwhiuk wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really that novel.

the novelty is how to handle such scale. Sure, if we build a million rockets it'll be cheaper, but how do we USE those rockets and get funding at "relative peace time". SpaceX's real innovation was starlink in allowing it to "Soak up" excess production. Besides the obvious of reusability, which wasn't that "Obvious" considering the temperatures of reentry.

Starlink wasn't really considered for years until SpaceX already was well underway.

It was fortuitous but unplanned, not a factor in the original vision of the company when it was founded.

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#13

Post by twic »

mlsu wrote: post #12
SCM-Enthusiast wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the novelty is how to handle such scale. Sure, if we build a million rockets it'll be cheaper, but how do we USE those rockets and get funding at "relative peace time". SpaceX's real innovation was starlink in allowing it to "Soak up" excess production. Besides the obvious of reusability, which wasn't that "Obvious" considering the temperatures of reentry.

Starlink wasn't really considered for years until SpaceX already was well underway. It was fortuitous but unplanned, not a factor in the original vision of the company when it was founded.

Before Starlink, SpaceX assumed/hoped that a mass of new customers would come out of the woodwork when cheap launches became available (the easyJet strategy!). When they didn't, they came up with Starlink to be that customer.

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#16

Post by joebig »

vl wrote: post #10

John Walker is also an author of The Hacker's Diet: https://www.fourmilab.ch/hackdiet/ While perhaps a bit outdated by modern standards, general principles are sound and it's still a very fun read in itself since he includes some general reflections in the text.

The man is also one of the authors of AutoCAD, a mechanical and civil engineering drafting software, which is globally popular (or hated, depending on who you ask!). I personally love the keyboard/commandline integration of AutoCAD, makes for an efficient and 'tactile' workflow (compared to the heavy dependence on mouse for other CAD software out there).

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#17

Post by lkbm »

flashback2199 wrote: post #14

[flagged]

There are thousands of long-haul flights—and something like 100k flights overall—per day. If we're doing 10k+ rocket launches per day, then that's a huge problem. If we're doing 1 per day, it's a rounding error. This is premature optimization.

(Either way, the solution, of course, is a carbon tax to price in the emissions.)

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#18

Post by joebig »

sabareesh wrote: post #15
flashback2199 wrote: post #14

[flagged]

If we can generate Methane for example from CO2 in the atmosphere this could potentially solve this problem

Oxides are incredibly stable chemically. Any further conversion or sequestration process is guaranteed by thermodynamics to be very energy-intensive.

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#19

Post by Ma8ee »

sabareesh wrote: post #15
flashback2199 wrote: post #14

[flagged]

If we can generate Methane for example from CO2 in the atmosphere this could potentially solve this problem

The concentration of CO2 is measured in parts per million. Just that simple fact make me believe it is very unlikely there ever is going to be economical to extract CO2 from the atmosphere at any significant scale.

Re: A rocket a day keeps the high costs away (1993)

#20

Post by flashback2199 »

lkbm wrote: post #17
flashback2199 wrote: post #14

[flagged]

There are thousands of long-haul flights—and something like 100k flights overall—per day. If we're doing 10k+ rocket launches per day, then that's a huge problem. If we're doing 1 per day, it's a rounding error. This is premature optimization. (Either way, the solution, of course, is a carbon tax to price in the emissions.)

Edit: I messed up the math - didn't see 100k per day of flights...
Post reply on HN