81–90 of 287 posts
So what's the carbon footprint of one of these launches? Did I understand correctly that we can make the fuel by taking CO2 from the atmosphere? That would make the footprint negative, would it? That seems to good to be true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine you can gain a lot of efficiencies with this approach. Just guessing here: 1. You can't leave your seat. Very high seat density. 2. No restrooms. 3. No food or any other services. 4. Very few (if any) cabin staff. 5. Fully automated flight; perhaps no pilot. 6. More reliable flight schedule; only a small bit of earth's weather on either side of the flight matters. Personally, I'd put up with a lot if the wh…
> 5. Fully automated flight; perhaps no pilot. Almost certainly no pilot.
I wonder what the greenhouse gas emissions will be like for the Earth-to-Earth trips. Ironic that the display showed a snow-capped mountain after the E2E animation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be really excited about a future where everyone had access to clean water. Going to space is fun and exciting. The future of space travel is going to be interesting, but it essential that when we imagine the future that we do so while recognizing the glaring problems of today.
The lack of access to clean water and most of the bad stuff happening around the world is not an engineering problem, it's a political problem. Elon Musk's passion lies in engineering, not in politics. So while your sentiment is fine in a vacuum, I don't think it fits on this thread, and it's certainly not a sound criticism against advancing space colonization. In fact, there's a sizable sentiment that this planet is…
Why would our political failures not follow us to other planets that we colonize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, I think SpaceX will have a lot more trouble with any E2E ambitions than they would with missions to Mars. So much red tape, no one's going to want a space-port in their backyard, different/difficult economics, safety concerns, terrorism concerns, etc. etc.
Thats why they show the spaceport out at sea, as it kills the standard NIMBY objections. Also the cities they want to fly out of don’t have enough room to easily build a spaceport.
I suspect putting the spaceport at sea is mainly a security issue. Failing to reach the landing pad is certainly less catastrophic on water than on the ground.
Honestly, Elon's presentations are some of the most impressive, inspiring I've ever seen. And the way he just stumbles out words and sentences that are completely revolutionary... casually dropping these absurd, incredible statements. I find it incredible. If anyone else was saying this, was showing these graphics, you'd think it was just wish fulfillment; a fantasy. And I'm sure their timeline is a bit aggressive. B…
I would be really excited about a future where everyone had access to clean water. Going to space is fun and exciting. The future of space travel is going to be interesting, but it essential that when we imagine the future that we do so while recognizing the glaring problems of today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was a little disappointed he didn't give any timeline at all on that not even a aspirational one. I also assume it's gonna be really expensive due to frequent heat shield replacement. I wouldn't be surprised if it never became economically viable. Too few passengers and too high cost.
He said the heat shield ablates for Mars trips but not Earth trips (not sure why). If so then propellant should be the only important consumable. Of course this level of reusability and reliability has never been achieved before, but the whole thing depends on it.
I suppose the reentry speed on mars is much higher, since it happens at the end of an interplanetary trip.
Just like everybody else I'm really blown away by what SpaceX does, but at the same time I think the question begs to be asked: Has humanity already given up on earth as a home? Is the future really about planets as disposable habitats?
Are our efforts of colonizing space a detriment to our efforts to keep earth habitable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, I think SpaceX will have a lot more trouble with any E2E ambitions than they would with missions to Mars. So much red tape, no one's going to want a space-port in their backyard, different/difficult economics, safety concerns, terrorism concerns, etc. etc.
Thats why they show the spaceport out at sea, as it kills the standard NIMBY objections. Also the cities they want to fly out of don’t have enough room to easily build a spaceport.
Considering Earth-to-Earth, can the BFR launch through most weather scenarios?
All rockets (during launch) are more sensitive to lightning strikes than planes. That's a given: the exhaust plume conducts electricity. Compared to F9, BFR is fatter and would have less trouble with high-altitude winds at launch. Now landing weather, that's another thing.