Your thoughts on Elon musk?

  • 1438 Replies
  • 94007 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #240 on: July 19, 2022, 02:15:44 PM »
So you admit that your whole argument is a fantasy?  Good to know.
Seriously?
Just how did you manage to come up with that dishonest BS?
By reading your posts.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #241 on: July 19, 2022, 02:54:50 PM »
Considering it was at a 32 degree inclination at over 6.5t, its right at the edge of what a F9 disposable could do. F9 reusable is not an option here.
Not really.
That would be assuming that it would achieve the same kind of orbital insertion as the falcon heavy. But as pointed out, it didn't. They are using F9 reusable to launch into a lower energy GTO, which would likely take years off the satellites life.
Seems to match the story quite well.
So I would say F9 reusable

ITAR does not cover everything made in the USA. It covers specific things.
Including satellite components, which was the point I made earlier, and included a link to a news article where a company was fined 8 million dollars for ICs which went into a satellite launched by China.
https://spacenews.com/37071us-satellite-component-maker-fined-8-million-for-itar-violations/

Solar panels and many many other things are not on that list.
ICs normally aren't, yet ones made for satellites are.
Does the same apply to solar panels?
I would think so.
General, commercial grade items typically aren't controlled.
But components intended for use in satellites are.


$400m a year to pay for over 20 Falcon 9 launches, each with about 50 average sats.
According to you, reuse is more expensive, so this is costing them over $1-2B a year just in launch cost.
So either reuse is a hell lot cheaper than you think, or SpaceX has invented a money printing machine somewhere.
Or, they have multiple sources of income which can be used together to pay for launches.

Yet you claim the vast majority of the launch mass for the F9 isn't needed.
Very few rockets ever launch at their max capacity.
Which is just avoiding the point.

No, I never compared just the Flacon Heavy upgrade to the SLS.
I compared
4 rockets (F1, F9, FH, SS)
2 large rocket engines (merlin, Raptor)
deployed over 2500 sats (Of which there are 2 versions)
For 1/3rd of the price of SLS.
And I pointed out one of those rockets is a toy, 2 are basically the same thing, and one is yet to launch or even prove it can get to orbit.

And after that you responded by claiming the falcon heavy took lots of R&D, and that SLS is using some things from the shuttle.
That sure seems to be an attempt to compare the 2.

You mean like how Boeing was building the SLS, and was deeply involved in the $90B STS program should be able to now build Starliner cheaper for cheaper? Like that?
Are they in any way comparable to the strainer?
No.

Why did the others bid more than double for the same service?
Ask them.

But we can make certain informed guesses.
You aren't making informed guesses.
You are wildly speculating on a rocket that hasn't even been to orbit yet about claims of how cheap it will be.
And considering how many broken promises Musk has already made, why should any of that be taken seriously?

Right, this is the first time you said something interesting.
Considering I have already pointed that out, I doubt it.

How much does that complexity cost, in both mass, fixed cost, variable cost and cadence? How often can you reuse and how much does re-use cost?
How much reduction in capacity, and what is the cost of that and market of that lost capacity? How does it compare to using the full capacity?
And they are all questions which no one outside of spaceX knows the answer to for their rockets.
They are things which can cause reusability to cost more.

Everyone in the industry that has done this math is currently developing reusable rockets.
How do you know that?
How many are going for a fully reusable orbital rocket?
Only spaceX that I know of.
Additionally, as pointed out before, sometimes there are factors other than cost.

There does not exist any vehicles with the same capability of the shuttle.
Which is a problem for you, not me.
You can't compare the cost of building the space shuttle with the cost to launch it to try saying reuse is cheaper.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #242 on: July 19, 2022, 03:23:53 PM »
Everyone in the industry that has done this math is currently developing reusable rockets.
How do you know that?
How many are going for a fully reusable orbital rocket?
Only spaceX that I know of.
Maybe not fully reusable, but quite a few at least partially reusable.
Blue Origin is looking to reuse both first and second stages of New Glenn.  New Sheppard is fully reusable.
Rocket Labs is looking to reuse first stage on Electron and Neutron.
Virgin Galactic SpaceShip Two is fully reusable.
ULA Vulcan Centaur is looking to reuse the first stage engine module.
The list goes on...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reusable_launch_vehicle#List_of_reusable_launch_systems
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #243 on: July 19, 2022, 03:48:33 PM »
Everyone in the industry that has done this math is currently developing reusable rockets.
How do you know that?
How many are going for a fully reusable orbital rocket?
Only spaceX that I know of.
Maybe not fully reusable, but quite a few at least partially reusable.
Blue Origin is looking to reuse both first and second stages of New Glenn.  New Sheppard is fully reusable.
Rocket Labs is looking to reuse first stage on Electron and Neutron.
Virgin Galactic SpaceShip Two is fully reusable.
ULA Vulcan Centaur is looking to reuse the first stage engine module.
The list goes on...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reusable_launch_vehicle#List_of_reusable_launch_systems
New Glenn is yet to launch, so we will see if it actually tries to reuse the second stage. Remember, Falcon 9 was meant to be fully reusable.
New Sheppard is a sub-orbital booster, SpaceShip is a suborbital space plane. If you are going to list that, you may as well list planes and cars.

And note that Vulcan is just considering reusing the engine and avionics modules, rather than the entire first stage, and using a parachute rather than a propulsive landing.

If reuse like the Falcon 9 or StarShip is so much better, why isn't ULA planning on making the entire first stage reusable? Why aren't they planning on making the entire craft reusable?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #244 on: July 19, 2022, 04:11:25 PM »
Remember, Falcon 9 was meant to be fully reusable.
Not really.  Maybe at first, but it didn't take long for SpaceX realize that reusing the second stage wouldn't be practical. 

New Sheppard is a sub-orbital booster, SpaceShip is a suborbital space plane. If you are going to list that, you may as well list planes and cars.
If they can go into some officially recognized region of space, then why not?

And note that Vulcan is just considering reusing the engine and avionics modules, rather than the entire first stage, and using a parachute rather than a propulsive landing.
That's why I said "at least partially reusable". ::)

If reuse like the Falcon 9 or StarShip is so much better, why isn't ULA planning on making the entire first stage reusable? Why aren't they planning on making the entire craft reusable?
You would be better off asking ULA, but my guess it that it might have to do with it being an easier engineering solution.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #245 on: July 19, 2022, 04:30:34 PM »
So much bitter arguing and barely any of it to do with Elon himself anymore - only his shitty companies

Well here is a refresher to remind you what this thread is about!!



OK...... Go!

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #246 on: July 19, 2022, 04:47:59 PM »
Not really.  Maybe at first, but it didn't take long for SpaceX realize that reusing the second stage wouldn't be practical.
I wouldn't say almost 10 years amounts to "didn't take long"

If they can go into some officially recognized region of space, then why not?
Because the majority of the difficulty of reuse comes with the energy/fuel requirements to go to orbit, then remove itself from orbit and successfully land.
That is why the first stage, a sub-orbital booster, is relatively easy to reuse compared to the second stage which actually goes into orbit.
It gets even worse the more energetic the orbit.

That's why I said "at least partially reusable". ::)
I know, but my point is it shows discarding parts can be cheaper than reuse.
This particular line of discussion came from discussing a fully reusable rocket (i.e. the current claims for starship).

You would be better off asking ULA, but my guess it that it might have to do with it being an easier engineering solution.
I would think disconnecting a major part of the rocket, and using an inflatable heat shield, would be a more complex engineering task than trying to recover the entire booster.
However, doing it this way means you need to slow down a much lighter object, which means you don't need to reserve loads of fuel to do it.
Imagine a reusable falcon 9 booster, with the payload comparable to an expendable one.

But I suppose it would likely be easier to transport and less likely to fall over and break.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #247 on: July 19, 2022, 05:18:08 PM »
Not really.  Maybe at first, but it didn't take long for SpaceX realize that reusing the second stage wouldn't be practical.
I wouldn't say almost 10 years amounts to "didn't take long"
Do you have any evidence that SpaceX ever put any serious effort into making F9 stage 2 reusable? 

If they can go into some officially recognized region of space, then why not?
Because the majority of the difficulty of reuse comes with the energy/fuel requirements to go to orbit, then remove itself from orbit and successfully land.
That is why the first stage, a sub-orbital booster, is relatively easy to reuse compared to the second stage which actually goes into orbit.
It gets even worse the more energetic the orbit.
Yes, that's why SpaceX isn't trying to reuse F9 second stages.

That's why I said "at least partially reusable". ::)
I know, but my point is it shows discarding parts can be cheaper than reuse.
This particular line of discussion came from discussing a fully reusable rocket (i.e. the current claims for starship).
Then stop bringing up Falcon 9 and Heavy.  Neither were designed to be fully reusable.

You would be better off asking ULA, but my guess it that it might have to do with it being an easier engineering solution.
I would think disconnecting a major part of the rocket, and using an inflatable heat shield, would be a more complex engineering task than trying to recover the entire booster.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.  That's ULA's problem to figure out, not mine.

However, doing it this way means you need to slow down a much lighter object, which means you don't need to reserve loads of fuel to do it.
They probably won't need to reserve any fuel to do it that way.  So what?  Who says that there is only one cost effective way to do reusable?

Imagine a reusable falcon 9 booster, with the payload comparable to an expendable one.
Why?  F9 reusable and expendable have different capabilities (and different price points) for different customers for a reason.  One size does not fit all.

But I suppose it would likely be easier to transport and less likely to fall over and break.
Where will that engine module land?  How much will it cost to refurbish?  How much will it cost to build the rest of the first stage for the next launch?  How long will it take ULA to actually bring it to market?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #248 on: July 20, 2022, 02:09:25 AM »
Do you have any evidence that SpaceX ever put any serious effort into making F9 stage 2 reusable?
No. Do you have any evidence that New Glenn has put it any effort?

Yes, that's why SpaceX isn't trying to reuse F9 second stages.
And why a reusable rocket can easily cost more.

Then stop bringing up Falcon 9 and Heavy.  Neither were designed to be fully reusable.
Tell that to everyone else.

They probably won't need to reserve any fuel to do it that way.  So what?
So more fuel can be spent getting the payload/second stage moving.

Why?
Because it would be better.

Where will that engine module land?  How much will it cost to refurbish?  How much will it cost to build the rest of the first stage for the next launch?  How long will it take ULA to actually bring it to market?
It is planned to be caught by a helicopter. As for the rest, who knows. The same can be asked about spaceX.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #249 on: July 20, 2022, 10:44:40 AM »
So this discussion is not going anywhere because JackBlack is hiding behind the fact that this is a new technology currently still in development.
The discussion started here
Also in regards to the reusable rockets vs non-reusable ones.
Especially as the figures I was able to obtain previously indicate that non-reusable rockets have a cheaper cost per kg to orbit.
In where he can show that a disposable F9 is cheaper than a reusable F9 per kg. Then following this logic up by saying re-usable rockets are a dead end.
This is like showing how a 18 wheeler truck is cheaper than a F150 pick up per kg so you should use it for doing your groceries.
Or that the iPhone is a dead end, because its battery life is shorter than a Nokia 6210.

Your pointing out a mostly irrelevant fact in what gets to decide what model works.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #250 on: July 20, 2022, 02:30:30 PM »
Do you have any evidence that SpaceX ever put any serious effort into making F9 stage 2 reusable?
No. Do you have any evidence that New Glenn has put it any effort?
Nothing firm, but some media speculation.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/07/blue-origin-is-developing-reusable-second-stage-other-advanced-projects/

Yes, that's why SpaceX isn't trying to reuse F9 second stages.
And why a reusable rocket can easily cost more.
And you have yet to provide any evidence that F9 reusable does cost more than F9 (or any other comparable) expendable.
 
Where will that engine module land?  How much will it cost to refurbish?  How much will it cost to build the rest of the first stage for the next launch?  How long will it take ULA to actually bring it to market?
It is planned to be caught by a helicopter. As for the rest, who knows. The same can be asked about spaceX.
Except that we know that SpaceX already brought F9 reusable to market years ago and is doing quite well.  Everyone else seems to be playing catch up.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #251 on: July 20, 2022, 03:04:42 PM »
Then following this logic up by saying re-usable rockets are a dead end.
Not that they are a dead end, just that they aren't as good as people are claiming.

Where this actually started was a comparison of twitter to SpaceX, due to Musk claiming to want to open up twitter for free speech while firing employees at SpaceX for "speaking out", with me pointing out the 2 are different with a joke about wasteful rockets and appeasing a dictator.


And you have yet to provide any evidence that F9 reusable does cost more than F9 (or any other comparable) expendable.
I have on a per kg basis, and in comparing an expendable F9 to a reusable Falcon Heavy.
 
Except that we know that SpaceX already brought F9 reusable to market years ago
Yes, 2 questions answered for spaceX, the other 2 remain unknown.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #252 on: July 20, 2022, 03:19:13 PM »
And you have yet to provide any evidence that F9 reusable does cost more than F9 (or any other comparable) expendable.
I have on a per kg basis...
Oh?  What is the cost per kg for Delta Heavy or Atlas 5?
 
...and in comparing an expendable F9 to a reusable Falcon Heavy
A single core F9 and a 3 core Falcon Heavy is not an apples to apples comparison, especially when understand that FH has more partial reusability options than F9.

Except that we know that SpaceX already brought F9 reusable to market years ago
Yes, 2 questions answered for spaceX, the other 2 remain unknown.
Maybe unknown to you and me, but not to SpaceX and their customers.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #253 on: July 20, 2022, 04:08:52 PM »
Oh?  What is the cost per kg for Delta Heavy or Atlas 5?
Haven't checked.

A single core F9 and a 3 core Falcon Heavy is not an apples to apples comparison, especially when understand that FH has more partial reusability options than F9.
I would say the more important parts are those which are disposed of, which are the same for Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9, as a Falcon Heavy is a Falcon 9 with 2 extra boosters.

Maybe unknown to you and me, but not to SpaceX and their customers.
While SpaceX would know, I don't think their customers would.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #254 on: July 20, 2022, 09:59:34 PM »
Money is a made up BS thing humans invented which in the grand scheme of things, is valueless

Anything which can reduce the use and materials of actual finite resources is a good endeavour.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #255 on: July 21, 2022, 12:27:08 AM »
Anything which can reduce the use and materials of actual finite resources is a good endeavour.
I vote wiping out the majority of the world's population.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #256 on: July 21, 2022, 01:13:23 AM »
Not that they are a dead end, just that they aren't as good as people are claiming.
This is a nuanced discussion, and your trying to make it black and white.

Falcon9 reusable is 25% cheaper than disposable for all payloads up to 16t to LEO. After 16t, disposable slowly closes the gap until about 21t when disposable reaches the same price point per kg as reusable. Disposable F9 is ONLY cheaper per kg between 21t to 22t to LEO.
But For ALL launches under 21t, reusable is cheaper per kg.

If I include Falcon Heavy Disposable in the mix, Heavy is more than triple the price per kg of F9 reusable at 16t to LEO. Its only at 47tons than Falcon Heavy Disposable is the same price per kg as Falcon 9 reusable.

47tons is in the range of National scale projects, that cost of launch is of zero concern anyway.
So saying disposable is cheaper per Kg is being very blind to the actual reality of the situation.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #257 on: July 21, 2022, 01:21:44 AM »
Not that they are a dead end, just that they aren't as good as people are claiming.
This is a nuanced discussion, and your trying to make it black and white.

Falcon9 reusable is 25% cheaper than disposable for all payloads up to 16t to LEO. After 16t, disposable slowly closes the gap until about 21t when disposable reaches the same price point per kg as reusable. Disposable F9 is ONLY cheaper per kg between 21t to 22t to LEO.
But For ALL launches under 21t, reusable is cheaper per kg.

If I include Falcon Heavy Disposable in the mix, Heavy is more than triple the price per kg of F9 reusable at 16t to LEO. Its only at 47tons than Falcon Heavy Disposable is the same price per kg as Falcon 9 reusable.

47tons is in the range of National scale projects, that cost of launch is of zero concern anyway.
So saying disposable is cheaper per Kg is being very blind to the actual reality of the situation.
Now try it for GTO.

And think of how much cheaper it would have been for F9 expendable if F9 wasn't designed as reusable.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #258 on: July 21, 2022, 02:01:12 AM »
Now try it for GTO.

And think of how much cheaper it would have been for F9 expendable if F9 wasn't designed as reusable.
F9 expendable literally has no parts needed for reuse attached when it launches. No legs, no grid fins.


Give me the updated FH launch to GEO from after the May 2018 upgrades and Ill work it out for you.


But for Falcon9.
Reusable at 5500kg to GEO works out at $9100 per kg
Disposable at 7400 kg to GEO works out to $9100 per kg


Anything below 5500kg is cheaper on reusable per kg or otherwise.




« Last Edit: July 22, 2022, 01:55:47 AM by MaNaeSWolf »
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #259 on: July 22, 2022, 06:45:17 AM »
Oh look, Now China also wants some action in the fully reusable rocket business.
Almost like full reusability has a lot of merit to it.

https://spacenews.com/china-could-shift-to-fully-reusable-super-heavy-launcher-in-wake-of-starship/
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #260 on: July 22, 2022, 02:41:53 PM »
Fully reusable has a nice ring to it.
The issue is the practicality of it creating a quite significant cost.

Look at how many people liked the idea of solar stupid roadways, or hyperscam.
People liking the idea and "wanting in on it", doesn't mean it is actually a good idea.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #261 on: July 22, 2022, 02:53:02 PM »
Fully reusable has a nice ring to it.
The issue is the practicality of it creating a quite significant cost.

Look at how many people liked the idea of solar stupid roadways, or hyperscam.
People liking the idea and "wanting in on it", doesn't mean it is actually a good idea.

Money has no real value, ultimately. We made it up. Our 'throw away' society is disgusting

Why is it more economical for the end user to buy a brand new phone instead of repairing the old one? Or for any appliance? It's stupid

Earth's resources are finite.

Once upon a time solar panels were not economical for the the average home owner. Or LED light globes and so on. But here we are, these things not only being standard but cheap. Because we invested in it

Investing in reusable rockets is a good thing

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #262 on: July 22, 2022, 08:21:25 PM »
Fully reusable has a nice ring to it.
The issue is the practicality of it creating a quite significant cost.
Is it more practical to use a brand new booster rocket once and throw it away or build a brand new one and then reuse it 12 more times (and counting) with minimal refurbishment between flights?

Look at how many people liked the idea of solar stupid roadways, or hyperscam.
Irrelevant.

People liking the idea and "wanting in on it", doesn't mean it is actually a good idea.
The market will decide if reusable rockets are a good idea, not you.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #263 on: July 22, 2022, 08:36:43 PM »
The Space Shuttle was partially reusable, and it was cheaper to re-use it than built it again for every launch.
F9 is partially re-usable and is the cheapest rocket to get most payloads to orbit.

But somehow you think the model that has worked every time will now suddenly collapse because . . . . reasons.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #264 on: July 22, 2022, 08:46:08 PM »
He probably thinks that refurbishing an F9 booster is like doing a gut-rehab on a old house.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #265 on: July 22, 2022, 09:00:51 PM »
He probably thinks that refurbishing an F9 booster is like doing a gut-rehab on a old house.
I actually dont know what he is thinking. NASA and others has attempted reuse multiple times before SpaceX. Its just technically challenging because there are massive energies involved. A fully reusable launch system has been the holy grail of rocket design since when rockets where developed. But most rocket designs originated from ICBM's, and evolved to rockets to take things to space. ICBM's dont have great prospects for reuse.
In the future we will see single use rockets less and less, as engineers figure out how to solve the challenges better. Starship will be the first fully reusable rocket, it will be far from the last.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #266 on: July 22, 2022, 09:17:23 PM »
Fully reusable has a nice ring to it.
The issue is the practicality of it creating a quite significant cost.
Is it more practical to use a brand new booster rocket once and throw it away or build a brand new one and then reuse it 12 more times (and counting) with minimal refurbishment between flights?
That is not fully reusable.
As for more practical, that waits to be seen. Considering the prior dishonesty of Musk I see no reason to trust anything coming from SpaceX until it is audited by an independent third party.

Look at how many people liked the idea of solar stupid roadways, or hyperscam.
Irrelevant.
Quite relavent.
It shows that people or even a company thinking something is a good idea and investing in it doesn't actually make it good.
People go after stupid ideas all the time.

People liking the idea and "wanting in on it", doesn't mean it is actually a good idea.
The market will decide if reusable rockets are a good idea, not you.
The realisation and practical implementation and use of the idea, or lack thereof, will decide if it is a good idea, not you.


The Space Shuttle was partially reusable, and it was cheaper to re-use it than built it again for every launch.
Again, meaningless comparison.
You need to compare it to one that is designed to be disposable.

That would be like me saying cleaning and reusing a pure silver fork is a lot cheaper than making a new one every time, while ignoring plastic forks.

He probably thinks that refurbishing an F9 booster is like doing a gut-rehab on a old house.
We have no idea what it entails.

A fully reusable launch system has been the holy grail of rocket design since when rockets where developed.
A launch system which doesn't need rockets at all is the holy grail of space launch.
Such as a linear accelerator or a space elevator.

Something being the holy grail doesn't mean it is possible or practical.

Starship will be the first fully reusable rocket, it will be far from the last.
Starship MAY be the first.
It is yet to be proven to be a reusable orbital rocket.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #267 on: July 22, 2022, 09:22:33 PM »
Starship will be the first fully reusable rocket, it will be far from the last.
Actually, Virgin Galactic SpaceShip 2 and Blue Origin New Sheppard are already fully reusable, albeit suborbital.  Personally, I'd say that I'm cautiously optimistic about StarShip and SuperHeavy.  I think that it's awfully ambitious undertaking and they will probably need to blow up quite a few more before they get it right.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #268 on: July 22, 2022, 09:37:55 PM »
Fully reusable has a nice ring to it.
The issue is the practicality of it creating a quite significant cost.
Is it more practical to use a brand new booster rocket once and throw it away or build a brand new one and then reuse it 12 more times (and counting) with minimal refurbishment between flights?
That is not fully reusable.
I didn't say that it was.  You're the one flogging the "fully reusable" horse, not me.

As for more practical, that waits to be seen. Considering the prior dishonesty of Musk I see no reason to trust anything coming from SpaceX until it is audited by an independent third party.
What evidence do you have that Musk ever lied about the cost or price of F9?  I'd say that Musk is more overly optimistic than dishonest.

Look at how many people liked the idea of solar stupid roadways, or hyperscam.
Irrelevant.
Quite relavent.
It shows that people or even a company thinking something is a good idea and investing in it doesn't actually make it good.
People go after stupid ideas all the time.
So what? 

People liking the idea and "wanting in on it", doesn't mean it is actually a good idea.
The market will decide if reusable rockets are a good idea, not you.
The realisation and practical implementation and use of the idea, or lack thereof, will decide if it is a good idea, not you.
The market seems to have already decided that reusable boosters have been realized and practically implemented, and they are the ones that matter.

He probably thinks that refurbishing an F9 booster is like doing a gut-rehab on a old house.
We have no idea what it entails.
Having worked as a service technician for over 15 years, I think that I might have a small clue.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Your thoughts on Elon musk?
« Reply #269 on: July 23, 2022, 12:17:42 AM »
I didn't say that it was.
Yet you used it in response to a comment specifically discussing full reusability.

What evidence do you have that Musk ever lied about the cost or price of F9?
What evidence do you have that he hasn't?

I'd say that Musk is more overly optimistic than dishonest.
So he was optimistic when he set up a display of his solar roof tiles, claiming they were fully working and powering the houses, when they were a complete fake?
I would call that blatant dishonesty.

So what?
So lots of companies wanting to consider fully reusable rockets doesn't make it a good idea.
This was said in response to someone saying full reusability has a lot of merit because people are looking into it.

The market seems to have already decided that reusable boosters
Again, it was discussing full reusability. Not just boosters.

Having worked as a service technician for over 15 years, I think that I might have a small clue.
So you have serviced an F9 booster?