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

SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 839 posts

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#781

Post by jessedotexe »

aeturnum wrote: post #205

How wonderful! Congratulations to the entire Space X team, this is a real accomplishment and I'm sure not one that came easily. It's exciting to see relatively small companies fulfilling roles that people thought might require massive military contractors. Elon is an interesting figure. He is, I think, a paradigmatic example of the imperfect creator. His undeniable success in difficult endeavors can create an aura of…

It was really cool to see the launch. Your last sentence is something I hope every can strive for.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#782

Post by stevens32 »

modeless wrote: post #329

Perhaps of interest to HN, the cockpit displays seen in the videos are HTML pages rendered in Chromium. https://twitter.com/alteredq/status/1266853705632145409?s=19 SpaceX recently released a browser game where you use the real flight UI to dock with the ISS: https://iss-sim.spacex.com/

We're flying to space on JavaScript? This truly is the strangest timeline

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#783

Post by spullara »

DennisP wrote: post #716
gruturo wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High frequency traders do NOT want to be limited by the speed of light in a fiber - due to its refractive index (1.5 for ZBLAN according to Wikipedia) this is only 66% of the speed of a radio signal. Over 10km this amounts to an 11 microseconds difference - already significant for HFT. This is why they have been leveling hills to carve a (mostly, with minimal amount of repeater towers) line of sight path between NYC…

I've seen speculation that low latency may be a big part of the business plan for Starlink.

It should be faster for long distances than cables for sure. Also less routing.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#784

Post by oska »

mongol wrote: post #662
oska wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bit of a strange criticism. They've got to drive out in something, why not an electric vehicle? And the spacesuits are bulky and difficult to move in, so the falcon doors on that Tesla model make sense for easy egress.

They used to use the "Astronaut transfer van" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronaut_transfer_van but I guess it is too old now

Thanks for the link. I see from that article that Boeing have commissioned a new customised Airstream van to transport crew out to the Starliner. So looks like responsibility for crew transport to launch is up to the commercial provider and so again, completely sensible for SpaceX to use vehicles from its sister company, as appropriate.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#785

Post by jacobolus »

pharke wrote: post #719
mumblemumble wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

> the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg This is also assuming the price per kg to orbit stays stable but Musk has stated he intends to drive the price down much further. He's even given figures for what he thinks they might be able to achieve with Starship[0] and SpaceX's rapid progress seems to indicate that they will, eventually, get there. The best comparison from history is probably…

People used railroads to profitably carry freight (originally with carts pulled by horses) right from the get-go. They became a lot cheaper to make once steel could be economically mass produced.

Steam engines were originally used for pumping water, but there was an obvious huge demand for locomotives to move freight by land once they could be made cheaper or better than draft animals.

I’m sure there exist some commercial uses for space flight, but it really doesn’t seem all that similar to railroads in terms of obvious market demand or effect on the economy.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#787

Post by dahfizz »

yakz wrote: post #424
wolf550e wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SLS and Orion were developed in the 21st century, when there was no need for new basic science research, and their development costs are staggering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System#Funding_hi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)#Funding_his...

Those also act as jobs programs, though.

And nobody works at spacex?

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#788

Post by _bxg1 »

jacobolus wrote: post #785
pharke wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg This is also assuming the price per kg to orbit stays stable but Musk has stated he intends to drive the price down much further. He's even given figures for what he thinks they might be able to achieve with Starship[0] and SpaceX's rapid progress seems to indicate that they will, eventually, get there. The best comparison from history is probably…

People used railroads to profitably carry freight (originally with carts pulled by horses) right from the get-go. They became a lot cheaper to make once steel could be economically mass produced. Steam engines were originally used for pumping water, but there was an obvious huge demand for locomotives to move freight by land once they could be made cheaper or better than draft animals. I’m sure there exist some comme…

Yeah; I would compare railroads/rockets to microcomputers/VR. The latter is definitely impressive, and unique, and evocative for futurists, and has some niche use-cases, but doesn't have a clear "killer app". While the former had people - real businesses - chomping at the bit even before it became economical.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#789

Post by rorykoehler »

kerng wrote: post #273
sandworm101 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture. If we are talking pure commercial travel, it is a vehicle without a destination. The ISS is definitely not a commercial project. There are lots of reasons for the ISS to exist, and they have changed over time, but it has never been a money-making venture. While the dragons certainly do come in under budget, they are a more…

I think one of the main priorities is military supremacy. It might not appear as that from a bit away, but that should not be overlooked. NASA's boss really highlighted some of that indirectly today as well with the increased funding to build out Space Force and some of that money goes to SpaceX obviously. So commercial, yes, but not like a car. More like a tank or fighter jet.

They really know how to butter up the right people with the right words on their live streams and interviews. It is transparently hilarious.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#790

Post by dianastamm »

oska wrote: post #784
mongol wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They used to use the "Astronaut transfer van" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronaut_transfer_van but I guess it is too old now

Thanks for the link. I see from that article that Boeing have commissioned a new customised Airstream van to transport crew out to the Starliner. So looks like responsibility for crew transport to launch is up to the commercial provider and so again, completely sensible for SpaceX to use vehicles from its sister company, as appropriate.

It’s a marketing thing
Post reply on HN