SpaceX: Making Life Multiplanetary [video]

Post by internetionals » Sat, Sep 30, 2017, 7:41 AM UTC

icc97 wrote: post #226

internetionals wrote: post #154

The earth-to-earth idea is nice, and whilst it would be an improvement, I expect the travelling time to be the biggest obstacle. You have to gather the people, check them in and clear them during internation flights. Then you have to load everybody on a boat, ship them to the platform X miles into sea, unload them, take them up the big tower, letting them board and settle and depending on how predicatable this is, wa…

At the moment there's lots of time wasted walking to some gate at the far end of a massive airport. There's only one company here and one or two flights that go straight up and don't need to taxi. So the travel time in the boat won't be much more than the walk from the terminal to the gate.

Post by Goose90053 » Sat, Sep 30, 2017, 12:48 PM UTC

jcriddle4 wrote: post #239

icc97 wrote: post #227

Umm was I the only one too assume that BFR meant Big Feckin' Rocket? Oh, no, I see waitbutwhy has a piece on it [0] I disappointingly see F is for Falcon, but still I really like the lack of marketing in the name. Plus I like the parallel with Roald Dahl's BFG. [0]: https://waitbutwhy.com/2016/09/spacexs-big-fking-rocket-the-...

I was under the impression that for quite a few people, possibly including the people at SpaceX, the 'F' doesn't stand for Falcon or Friendly or Fantastic or ...

Post by woodandsteel » Sun, Oct 01, 2017, 1:48 AM UTC

nickik wrote: post #174

ChelloYello wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, you can't complain about government inefficiency like you can complain about corporate inefficiency because you are granted real power over the government by way of the constitution. If you don't want the space agency to be controlled by corporations not owned by Musk you can do something about it via the many channels that exist for that explicit purpose.

First of all I'm not american. Second, the US was not created democratically. With a corporation I can just not use their product, they don't get my money and beyond that I don't really care what goals they have in space. > If you don't want the space agency to be controlled by corporations not owned by Musk you can do something about it via the many channels that exist for that explicit purpose. Like what channels?…

Post by c0ndu17 » Sun, Oct 01, 2017, 11:51 AM UTC

perilunar wrote: post #43

modeless wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You kidding? There's no way I'm staying in my seat during zero gravity. I might pay more to do a couple of extra orbits and play around before coming down.

I reckon everyone would be out of their seats as soon as boost is done. Getting everyone back into their seats in time for re-entry might be the issue ("take the nearest available"). Earth to earth flights would be sub-orbital though, so no opportunity for extra orbits.

Post by ethbro » Sun, Oct 01, 2017, 4:05 PM UTC

icc97 wrote: post #219

tsaprailis wrote: post #106

So the key takeaway for me today compared to 1 year ago, is that Elon has put a lot of thought on how to make this plan economically viable compared to just the vision last year. Multiple potential streams of revenue: - Government/intragovernment contracts to cleanup space debris. - Government/Private satellite launches. - Earth to earth transportation which Elon announced on Instagram that the cost would be comparab…

The other major thing was that companies could launch much bigger satellites where Space X would have no competition