Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX BFR [video]

youtube.com

61–70 of 277 posts

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#61
Aren't supersonic jets more affordable? I mean I know SpaceX is about changing the world, and I know SpaceX is about rockets, but in terms of market, I think having a new Concorde would better fit the idea of earth to earth travel.

I like how SpaceX innovates, but I think this is a "too soon", bad product idea because it will be too expensive at first, and supersonic jets would be a better competitor.

Although I have to admit I really like the disruptive way of "showing the way to the future" communication ad. But to be frank, I wonder if people at SpaceX are not full of zeal sometimes. One bigger problem for SpaceX might be "how to sell space to consumers, or make money with space?".

Maybe that is the reason NASA existed as a government agency, because there is no real, direct ROE with space exploration. In the end SpaceX might make money with wealthy people who can afford going to mars or the moon, but I doubt that many people would be interested if there is no financial gain (or maybe for the hell of it). Innovation from NASA research was shared or benefited the military.

I want SpaceX to endure and succeed but I really wonder about the money/market sides of it. It requires a lot of vision, which goes beyond the reality of capitalism.

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#62

How many hours early should we arrive to the launch pad? Are laptops allowed?

> Are laptops allowed?

No idea. But the fastest flight (non stop) from NYC to Shanghai right now is almost 15 hours. This promises 39 minutes.

Would you rather fly 15 hours with a laptop than 39 minutes without?

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#63

wait and what's the energy usage of that thing? Carbon footprint?

EDIT: I forgot the fact that CH4 is being burned, not released as-is in the atmosphere.

Original comment:

Carbon footprint is just one way of measuring the impact on climate, but that's only because CO2 is the biggest pollutant. However, methane (CH4) is much much much better in trapping heat. 19 times more potent over a 5 year period, or 4 times more over a 100 year period (source: http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-ca...).

This is despite having the same number of carbon. So technically the "carbon footprint" is zero if, as Elon said, you're extracting carbon from CO2 in the atmosphere, but if you change it to CH4, you're worsening by a big factor the impact on climate. Maybe over thousands of years that factor goes down to 1x but still...

All this is assuming you extract CH4 from atmosphere, which is extremely unlikely for economical reasons, as others have pointed out.

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#65
post #29

I wonder if they can compete with Boom Supersonic [ https://boomsupersonic.com/ ] at the fuel cost. One reason Concorde failed was NOISE and FUEL COSTS.

I lived under the flight path of concord and the twin boom-boom was highly annoying.

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#67

I thought the ship was going to take off

Not too get too off-topic with HN's strict rules, but here's an anime depiction of what I believe you to have been imagining: https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/ActualFeistyBettong (sorry for the image macro, I couldn't find a HTML5 embed without it)

Re: SpaceX BFR [video]

#70
Marketing of that product is awesome. But does it scale? Very unlikely! That's great to have impossible goals to make people dream, but stop bullshitting people saying it will replace commercial airplanes and everybody will be an astronaut for the same price.

Why is the Concorde not in service anymore? Simple: it was a very little market, over-polluting for over-privileged and we do not need that to enhance traveling, we already tried! How would this BFR be different?

Post reply on HN