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

SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 926 posts

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#521

Post by djrogers »

CydeWeys wrote: post #283
mabbo wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I love the live streams hosted by John Innsprucker. He doesn't look like a TV star, he looks like an engineer, a rocket scientist. He looks real. The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it.

You're showing your biases here. The other people on the livestream are also rocket scientists. They aren't PR people. They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. So you might want to re-evaluate what you think a rocket scientist "looks like", because your notion is outdated. Sorry to call you out like this, but these kinds of prejudices about who is the "correct" kind of person for tech jobs are harmful a…

You're being overtly crass to call someone out for being racist and bigoted when another reading of the same comment could imply that the other host were so professional, well spoken, and polished that he wouldn't be surprised if that was their profession.

Isn't it rather biased of you to assume that being an engineer is somehow superior to being a professional actor, spokesperson, or hostess?

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#522

Post by latj »

protonimitate wrote: post #110
aphextron wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm this was the greatest thing I've ever witnessed in my life. https://youtu.be/AGPH_i0ZlyM?t=56

There's something awesome (in the literal sense) and unsettling about watching something and being able to say "I am witnessing history".

Did anyone else notice that the bottom two windows are not different cameras on different boosters? The guy even told us, "I know they look similar but they're different". Nope, they are the same. Watch how you can see two pads and they both land on the pad on the right. And you can see the second booster burning in the same orientation. The roads leading to the pads also make it easy to notice.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#523

Post by mike741 »

blackrock wrote: post #258

Did they need to modify the Tesla to make it vacuum worthy? Like, remove any fluids, remove any parts that might explode in the hot or cold of space, deflate the tires, etc. Note: I'm more interested in a scientific answer, as opposed to casual conjectures. Preferably from an engineer knowledgeable of such things. And specifically, the materials sciences aspect of how materials will survive in a vacuum.

the car is not actually in the vacuum AFAI can tell from their GIF: https://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/spacero...

id imagine a 360-camera is projected onto the inside of the sphere/case the car is actually inside of.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#524

Post by viraptor »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #393
shepardrtc wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone asked me to be a reference, I said no, they still put me as a reference anyway. I was not happy. Didn't badmouth him, but I also didn't say anything good about him. And when asked if I would hire him where I worked, I said no.

I asked permission from all of my references beforehand. Two were coworkers and the last was my previous team lead. I knew all of them had positive opinions regarding my work. The problem was BlueOrigin’s reference-questionnaire. One of my references shared it with me afterwards. It’s a stock template - except pretty much all the questions seem contrived to find reasons not to hire someone. One of the questions was a…

> “On a percentage scale where would you rank [candidate] relative to other people you have worked with?”

That does look like a terrible question. Without context, team organisation, and work history for the reference person, the answer is meaningless... Not even if you're poor performing. If that person just happens to work with amazing people, of course you'd be rated lower.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#525

Post by stcredzero »

buildbuildbuild wrote: post #61

Love that SpaceX’s own team shoots, announces, and switches the live production in-house rather than hiring a production company. Also love seeing machinists side by side cheering with software engineers, standing by a mission control which is placed feet from where engines are assembled on the shop floor. Open company culture well-executed. Congratulations to all there!

Should have been written: "Love that SpaceX announces, shoots, and leaves live production in-house." Not because it was grammatically incorrect, but because I wanted just one more chance to make an Oxford comma joke. http://a.co/gc5Izsa

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#526

Post by Timothycquinn »

amckenna wrote: post #332
djsumdog wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they also say the insertion was successful. So the payload made it, but they were planning to recover the center and that failed?

Correct. There were several goals with the launch. The primary was successful payload insertion, the secondary goals were the successful return of the outer two boosters to land, and the central booster to a drone ship down range (success unknown). Additionally the goal was to recover the fairings, but the success of that is not publicly known at this time.

According to News Conference: 1) Elon confirmed that the faring recovery was not a goal as they have a new version of the faring in active development which should have a recovery strategy in place. 2) It appears that the center booster was definitely lost. 3) Loss of center booster was best case scenario for loosing one of the three boosters as the outer boosters had really sweet new titanium grid fins.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#527

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #293
mabbo wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I love the live streams hosted by John Innsprucker. He doesn't look like a TV star, he looks like an engineer, a rocket scientist. He looks real. The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it.

> The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it. Because they are young and good looking and good at public speaking?

Yes. Historically, young people with limited experience didn't end up being the focal point of companies in the media, so the chance that they were some PR workers was much higher than advanced material scientists.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#528

Post by avmich »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #508
DonaldPShimoda wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are only baby steps at the beginning of the adventure.

Falcon Heavy is 1/10th the cost of other heavy lift launchers, and able to launch 10x (or more) often, with a higher payload. This is no baby step.

Yes, that's important.

Wonder what success of FH would do to works on BFR? If BFR would be as successful as Musk writes, would SpaceX make two rockets - or optimization will lead to just one?

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#529

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

jacquesm wrote: post #456
cryptoz wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Star Wars takes place in the distant past, not in the future. Also, 2001: A Space Odyssey is a great movie about a great example why you do not pilot your ships with computers all the time. Also, you do not know what the future holds. You are living in the present, not the future, where we very well may have pilots piloting ships. Star Wars is not science fiction and it does not take place in the future. We are not l…

> Also, 2001: A Space Odyssey is a great movie about a great example why you do not pilot your ships with computers all the time. No, it merely illustrates why you want your AI properly bottled up and airgapped that way the flight computer will follow your instructions after you consult with the AI (assuming an AI is ever built...). Computers can control spacecraft just fine in the present without AI so really there…

HAL is merely an expression of the 20th century trope of the computer run amok. Same as the IBM system from "Desk Set" and the "War Games" WOPR. It's a product of ignorant naivete of what computers are capable of and what their true weaknesses are. It has no basis in reality. Just a way for writers to personify a machine with flaws to drive the plot forward.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#530

Post by Simon_says »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #320
focusgroup0 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to school with one of the other hosts. He's legitimately a genius, top marks and well-decorated in academia. Kind of weird to see the guy I used to hang out with livestreaming to 2.3mm people.

I first read that as 2.3 millimeter people... who busted out the shrink ray?

I did too. mm is millimeter. MM is million. It comes from the Roman numeral M, so it has to be capitalized.
Post reply on HN