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

Starship Flight 7

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 772 posts

Re: Starship Flight 7

#741

Post by yellowapple »

javawizard wrote: post #687
aredox wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stupid comment. Several flights had to be diverted because of the break-up, and anyone in flight at that time would be rightly concerned about barely-visible high-speed shrapnel showering a much larger area than where the visible debris are - especially when you are responsible for keeping your hundreds of passengers safe in a very unexpected situation with no rehearsed procedure to follow.

Ok, this: > Stupid comment got me. There's literally an HN rule about this: [0] > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." I feel like the world would be a better place if people would tone down the ad-hominem in their day-to-day discourse just a little bit. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htm…

> I feel like the world would be a better place if people would tone down the ad-hominem in their day-to-day discourse just a little bit.

    PRAGMA sarcasm = ON;
No, fuck you, I'm going to call you names and shit all over you over a mild disagreement!

    PRAGMA sarcasm = OFF;
But yes, one of the refreshing things about HN is that even when conversations get heated, the participants tend to at least keep to the topic and respect one another / assume good faith. There will of course always be slip-ups on that (I'd be lying if I said I wasn't guilty of that on occasion), but they've managed to be pretty rare (and/or quickly caught by the admins) even as HN has grown in popularity.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#742

Post by inemesitaffia »

tsimionescu wrote: post #564
inemesitaffia wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NASA pays both Boeing and SpaceX less than Soyuz was.

According to this [0] article from Business Insider, from 2006 to 2019, per seat costs for NASA from Russia rose from less than $25M ($38M inflation adjusted) to around $81M ($101M inflation adjusted). The cost per seat in 2012, the year after the USA lost crewed space launch capability entirely, was ~$55M ($75M inflation adjusted). According to this [1] article from Reuters, NASA is currently paying Boeing $90M, and…

Well it's less than the $81 million QED.

I remember the talk of broomsticks and trampolines.

The price savings are clearly evident per that article.

The only reason Boeing ended up charging that much is the extra money NASA gave them.

It wasn't so from the beginning

Re: Starship Flight 7

#743

Post by bgnn »

GiorgioG wrote: post #529
ruivil7 wrote: post #423

Back a few years ago. This was the starship that in 2024 would reach Mars with humans, with so much space taken by crew and materials, and almost no fuel, and "10 times cheaper". And currently is an empty shell. Nice fireworks and show, but no meaningful payload yet. Not even LO. And this will be ready for 2026 artemis mission?

I’m not a big fan of Elon Musk, but this is just the typical executive talking up their product and to some extent being overly optimistic about timelines. You’d think with the quantity of software engineers in HN this would be obvious, but the (rightful IMO) disdain for Elon Musk is resetting people’s brains.

There's nothing typical about this kind of blatantly lying. It's a character trait of Musk, which should be a reason to be fired immediately as CEO in a sound free market operating on trust and transparency. We should not normalize this.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#744

Post by bamboozled »

distortionfield wrote: post #375
bamboozled wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually get this take, but for me it's the ultimate distraction and a way to legitimize the CEOs rubbish behavior. "How can he be wrong when he is a genius and can land a rocket in two chopsticks?"

I’m in a slightly different boat. The CEO’s rubbish behavior sucks, but the company shouldn’t be diminished by that. The people behind SpaceX are a modernd day Apollo Program. Absolute marvels of engineering.

The Apollo program was amazing because it was tax payer funded, it was every Americans project. Space X isn't.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#745

Post by cubefox »

sneak wrote: post #719
cubefox wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should rename themselves NSF, short for NSF Space Flight.

The National Science Foundation is also a division of the US government, and the National Sanitation Foundation (which goes by NSF) is also a well-known large and established private org. NSF is taken, too.

The name would be "NSF Space Flight". Since the National Science Foundation is, unlike NASA, not involved with making rockets, a mix-up wouldn't be so bad.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#746

Post by yreg »

keepamovin wrote: post #471
yreg wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have perfectly described the feeling I had regarding the first belly flop demo (at least I think it was the first one?) https://youtu.be/gA6ppby3JC8?si=wY7TQsbR_wxoud75&t=70 (ten seconds from the timestamp)

If cutting edge engineering with conventional physics looks fake to you folks imagine what a hard time you’re going to have with real videos of actual UFOs.

I don't believe your ability of classifying videos as real or fake to be any greater than mine. Maybe you just have more confidence?

Re: Starship Flight 7

#747

Post by GiorgioG »

bgnn wrote: post #743
GiorgioG wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not a big fan of Elon Musk, but this is just the typical executive talking up their product and to some extent being overly optimistic about timelines. You’d think with the quantity of software engineers in HN this would be obvious, but the (rightful IMO) disdain for Elon Musk is resetting people’s brains.

There's nothing typical about this kind of blatantly lying. It's a character trait of Musk, which should be a reason to be fired immediately as CEO in a sound free market operating on trust and transparency. We should not normalize this.

Your mom experiences much better vastly different than mine. Trust and transparency is not something we have in the current “free market”. Musk is neither the first nor the last lying executive.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#748

Post by mark-r »

BurningFrog wrote: post #572
onion2k wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be unpleasant if there was crew. 19 people have died in the 391 crewed space missions humans have done so far. The risk of dying is very high. Starship is unlikely to change that, although the commoditization of space flight could have reduce the risk simply by making problems easier to spot because there's more flights.

Modern space ships are very likely to change that, as designs mature and improve. Early aviation was extremely dangerous. Now a plane is among the safest places to be.

Planes are safe because investigators were diligent about going to every crash and investigating to find the root cause. That's a lot more difficult when your evidence is dispersed to the stars or burns up on re-entry.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#749

Post by Molitor5901 »

xattt wrote: post #239
Molitor5901 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt.. bad watching that breakup, it reminded me of Columbia.

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, but I thought this too.

It's a weird deja vu feeling of uneasiness. I can't explain it, but I think also Columbia really hit me as my generation's Challenger.

Re: Starship Flight 7

#750

Post by Molitor5901 »

dpifke wrote: post #276
Molitor5901 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt.. bad watching that breakup, it reminded me of Columbia.

Which coincidentally launched 22 years ago today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-107

Seeing it streak across the sky just reminded me of how important this is and how critically SpaceX must get it right before sending anyone up. I will never forget the trepidation of watching Bob and Doug go up and in tears when it was clear they made it.
Post reply on HN