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

SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

spacenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 189 posts

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#91

Post by bryanlarsen »

bumby wrote: post #85
Meegul wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX undoubtedly does have US government agencies as some of their biggest customers, but 98% must be a gross exaggeration. The Falcon 9/Heavy have made nearly all of their launch revenues, and from just perusing the lists [1][2] of all launches, the US government can't be more than some low double digit percentage. SpaceX does receive other funding as part of various NASA contracts, but that funding is also relate…

98% wasn't a number I pulled out of thin air. It's hard to know exact figures, but there are some people who publicly track what they can. [1] From that source, SpaceX has about ~$5.515B in contracts. Of that, about $5.411B is from government contracts (military, NASA). That's about 98.1%. There's probably a good chance it's higher, if they have govt contracts that aren't allowed to be public knowledge for security r…

Starlink revenues are already over $1B per year, and they're just getting started.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#92

Post by matthewdgreen »

gpm wrote: post #59
robotresearcher wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The traditional explanation is that drug users can be blackmailed and security compromised by adversaries threatening to reveal federally prohibited behavior. It seems antiquated. Edit: as cannabis use is transitioning to decriminalized, testing specifically for that will become antiquated. Standing crimes of course will remain leverage for bad guys.

Eh, I buy that "habitually committing crimes" makes it easier for adversaries to blackmail you. Seems like evergreen logic that doesn't get antiquated.

It's an evergreen that can be easily repaired by eliminating silly categories of crime and social conventions. See e.g., the old restrictions on allowing gay people to hold security clearances, which stemmed from the fact that it was easy to blackmail gay people in a society that (foolishly) kept penalizing people for being gay. We lost Alan Turing because of stupid crap like that, god only knows what else we lost.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#93

Post by [deleted] »

mlsu wrote: post #37
xoa wrote: post #18

Whether or not they hit April specifically (some of which isn't under their control, freak weather or the like can happen) they've clearly been checking through prep at an impressive, disciplined pace and it'll be soon. And importantly once they start they've set things up to keep the iteration going and do more and more ironing things out, and then going into full production. All technical merits aside, that , mass…

Gwynne Shotwell has said that SpaceX is a rocket factory company, not a rocket company. I agree entirely, the possibilities here make me so excited.

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#94

Post by avmich »

rqtwteye wrote: post #78

I get pretty sad when I see this and then SLS. So much money and energy wasted on the SLS. I wonder how the NASA guys feel who are working on the SLS.

SLS gave tons of experience, of all kinds imaginable. Like, supercomputers used to calculate aerodynamics, heat-protecting tiles, landing and pacifying procedures, to name some less known. It was definitely not money wasted, even though more than 14 people gave their lives to the program.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#95

Post by dragonwriter »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #92
gpm wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I buy that "habitually committing crimes" makes it easier for adversaries to blackmail you. Seems like evergreen logic that doesn't get antiquated.

It's an evergreen that can be easily repaired by eliminating silly categories of crime and social conventions. See e.g., the old restrictions on allowing gay people to hold security clearances, which stemmed from the fact that it was easy to blackmail gay people in a society that (foolishly) kept penalizing people for being gay. We lost Alan Turing because of stupid crap like that, god only knows what else we lost.

> See e.g., the old restrictions on allowing gay people to hold security clearances, which stemmed from the fact that it was easy to blackmail gay people

AFAIK, they did not stem from that fact, that was a later rationalization from keeping them around. They stemmed from the fact that being gay was seen as a serious moral failing in its own right, and indicative of propensity for other moral failings.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#96

Post by bumby »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #91
bumby wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

98% wasn't a number I pulled out of thin air. It's hard to know exact figures, but there are some people who publicly track what they can. [1] From that source, SpaceX has about ~$5.515B in contracts. Of that, about $5.411B is from government contracts (military, NASA). That's about 98.1%. There's probably a good chance it's higher, if they have govt contracts that aren't allowed to be public knowledge for security r…

Starlink revenues are already over $1B per year, and they're just getting started.

That's based on forecasts and not real numbers (because SpaceX is a private company), but it's a good point.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#97

Post by sgtnoodle »

detritus wrote: post #80
elif wrote: post #43

I saw on their YouTube channel that they are tentatively targeting 4/20 to light it up :)

ughft. I mean: I smoke hashish, but honestly, Musk's adolescent little references like these are really trite and demeaning to the magnitude of what his companies are hoping to achieve. S3XY, poop emoji and 'Titter'. ughft, just stop already.

It's certainly dumb, but what's the harm with being a little irreverent and having fun while you're doing good, impactful work?

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#98

Post by bumby »

Meegul wrote: post #89
bumby wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

98% wasn't a number I pulled out of thin air. It's hard to know exact figures, but there are some people who publicly track what they can. [1] From that source, SpaceX has about ~$5.515B in contracts. Of that, about $5.411B is from government contracts (military, NASA). That's about 98.1%. There's probably a good chance it's higher, if they have govt contracts that aren't allowed to be public knowledge for security r…

That source only lists contracts where the price is known or can be reasonably estimated. Naturally, US government entities which have a semi-public bidding process are much easier to obtain a price estimate from. There's a large amount of foreign government contracts and private commercial contracts that are omitted from that list. Just from 2020 alone, SkySats 16-21, ANASIS-II, SXRS-1, SAOCOM 1B, GNOMES 1, Tybak-01…

Hell, SpaceX is private so we have limited information across all domains. I acknowledged in my first post that accurate numbers are hard to come by. But we have to work with what information we have.

Foreign govts would still be govt money; many of those you listed are still public projects. Do you have estimates for those other private launches? If not, it's just speculation. Based on the information we have, it seems like it's safe to say the bulk of their launches are for governments. It's not a knock on them, and I'm not saying this is your perspective, but there's this kinda weird sentiment that they are some paragon of free-market capitalism when in fact they are a company highly dependent on government money. But that's exactly what I think is reasonable to expect in a nascent industry.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#99

Post by wolfram74 »

bumby wrote: post #83
bane wrote: post #70

If they can pull this off I think we may enter an age with a clear "Before super heavy reusable launch" and "after". It's mind boggling how much stuff a Starship will be able to chuck into space and come down and then do it again and again. Consider this, the military is starting to explore the idea of moving heavy military equipment anywhere in the world within 90 minutes using this kind of capability. International…

> Consider this, the military is starting to explore the idea of moving heavy military equipment anywhere in the world within 90 minutes How reliable would this really be in practice? I'm thinking of all the times a projected launch has to get scrubbed and rescheduled days later. Not exactly the type of delivery uncertainty you'd want for critical equipment.

also: this model is 9 meters in diameter, and will already be more robust to weather effects than the f9, the 18 meter diameter model would be a beast if ever built.

Re: SpaceX closing in on first Starship Super Heavy launch

#100

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Animats wrote: post #75
rlt wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but for now it seems like a nice succinct way of communicating the difference from the legacy rocket companies.

When there was demand, the "legacy rocket companies" mass produced. Atlas missile ICBM assembly line, Convair, San Diego, 1950s.[1] [1] https://live.staticflickr.com/7715/17145288136_e217444837_b....

Continuous versus discrete improvement, largely a function of our public procurement process.
Post reply on HN