SpaceX just broke its annual launch record – and it’s only July(theverge.com)
theverge.com
SpaceX just broke its annual launch record – and it’s only July
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/22/23273077/spacex-falcon-9-launch-record-2022-32-high-cadence
104 comments
A great time to be alive. Can't wait for the bfr. Does anyone know or can link to what the general pricing has come down to for the Falcon 9?
Looks like Falcon 9 is $67M and Falcon Heavy is $97M.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/23/spacex-raises-prices-for-lau...
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/23/spacex-raises-prices-for-lau...
I'm a bit sad that they're not calling it BFR anymore. Maybe they can reuse the name for the next one.
Why should the price come down? Who is the competition pushing spacex to lower prices?
I am sorry but BFR point-to-point will never ever happen. Just watch their presentation where they show cities such as Zürich, Switzerland. Zürich is extremely small, if you launch a rocket the size of the BFR you will blow out every window in the entire city.
It absolute snake oil and will never ever happen. There is no way to make a rocket that size quiet enough to launch in most places in the world. Especially not near any city.
It absolute snake oil and will never ever happen. There is no way to make a rocket that size quiet enough to launch in most places in the world. Especially not near any city.
Seeing how point-to-point is not their primary use case (or even secondary or tertiary), I don't see how this matters at all.
I can see how maybe in the far future, when Starship has been perfected, they could possibly try it. Obviously not downtown Zurich, but at a space port nearby.
I can see how maybe in the far future, when Starship has been perfected, they could possibly try it. Obviously not downtown Zurich, but at a space port nearby.
You're right. But it is interesting to ask the question, what is the use case? Starlink is the only commercial customer that can plausibly use a significant fraction of Starship's capabilities right now. NASA moon missions are the only government customer so far. The government may start work on new programs that can use Starship's capabilities (e.g. fleets of bigger but cheaper space telescopes or interplanetary probes), but they haven't started yet and it will take decades for them to get going at their normal rates of progress. Elon wants to build a city on Mars but that isn't going to produce revenue for the foreseeable future and I don't think he can fund it personally despite being the richest person on Earth.
Can Starlink and NASA moon missions alone pay back the cost of the Starship program? Will new commercial use cases be unlocked by Starship? Will the government commit to new programs that use Starship's unique capabilities? What will they be and how soon can they start producing revenue for SpaceX?
Can Starlink and NASA moon missions alone pay back the cost of the Starship program? Will new commercial use cases be unlocked by Starship? Will the government commit to new programs that use Starship's unique capabilities? What will they be and how soon can they start producing revenue for SpaceX?
A couple of things.
I am not sure that they need a use case for Starship's "bigger" capabilities. If a Starship launch ends up being much cheaper than F9 (like Musk claims), then SpaceX will be using it to send payloads to orbit even for things that don't require a 1000 tons to orbit. That's a win right there.
As for what payloads will utilize Starship to the max...NASA is already thinking about it. https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/05/spacex-engineer-says...
Yes, it will take a while, but they'll get there eventually. Meanwhile, Starship can do the NASA missions to the moon and whatever F9 is doing today.
I am not sure that they need a use case for Starship's "bigger" capabilities. If a Starship launch ends up being much cheaper than F9 (like Musk claims), then SpaceX will be using it to send payloads to orbit even for things that don't require a 1000 tons to orbit. That's a win right there.
As for what payloads will utilize Starship to the max...NASA is already thinking about it. https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/05/spacex-engineer-says...
Yes, it will take a while, but they'll get there eventually. Meanwhile, Starship can do the NASA missions to the moon and whatever F9 is doing today.
They’re not going to be launching the whole rocket, just the second stage (Starship) for hops between cities. Also, even if they land say 20-30 km outside of the city limits and then transfer by train/hyperloop that’s still way faster than a plane, even the Concorde.
This isn't really true. Starship when fully fueled can't even get off the pad under it's own power. It has a thrust-to-weight of under 1. Point to point will absolutely require the first stage, even if it needs less fuel load than normal.
What’s the lag time between launch orders and actual launches? Wonder if we’re looking at a 9-12 month trailing indicator of health and the broader tech reset is dampening orders in the last 2-3 months.
I'm not at all an Elon fanboi, but you do have to respect that launch cadence (to the degree you have to respect anything.)
Isn't it sad that Elon has been so successful with Tesla and SpaceX, revolutionary success at that, that people feel impelled to dis him?
Let's face facts. Without Elon, there would be no SpaceX, and no Tesla. Musk deserves credit for two great achievements.
Let's face facts. Without Elon, there would be no SpaceX, and no Tesla. Musk deserves credit for two great achievements.
Your "facts" viewpoint appears to be based in a multi-dimensional model of human achievement - wherein a person can be great in some dimensions, but far less admirable in others.
Most people have a far more scalar worldview. :(
Most people have a far more scalar worldview. :(
Yes, I'm well acquainted with the popular stance of focusing on a great person's irrelevant flaws, and justifying it as having some sort of "balance".
Even Einstein has been attacked in this way. People try to dismiss him as a great man because he treated his wife poorly.
Steve Jobs disowned his daughter. He rooked Woz in the Atari deal. He's been nasty to a lot of people. It doesn't detract from his incredible success.
The point is, we all have our flaws, and zeroing in on a great person's flaws as a way to diminish his achievements is, frankly, small and petty.
Even Einstein has been attacked in this way. People try to dismiss him as a great man because he treated his wife poorly.
Steve Jobs disowned his daughter. He rooked Woz in the Atari deal. He's been nasty to a lot of people. It doesn't detract from his incredible success.
The point is, we all have our flaws, and zeroing in on a great person's flaws as a way to diminish his achievements is, frankly, small and petty.
It's a tell tale sign of one's own insecurity when they obsess over the flaws of achievers.
"nu uh! they suck because unrelated thing" is an expression of insecurity.
"nu uh! they suck because unrelated thing" is an expression of insecurity.
Judging by (say) the success of the British tabloid press, there are a whole lotta petty & vindictive little people in this world.
But when it is less malicious, public, and monetized, such a focus-on-flaws way of viewing people would seem to have some utilitarian value. Regular news of palace scandals does not do much damage to the national welfare. Vs. having a very flaw-focused outlook on whether the great, royal Prince Andrew should be trusted around your under-age daughter might prove extremely beneficial...
But when it is less malicious, public, and monetized, such a focus-on-flaws way of viewing people would seem to have some utilitarian value. Regular news of palace scandals does not do much damage to the national welfare. Vs. having a very flaw-focused outlook on whether the great, royal Prince Andrew should be trusted around your under-age daughter might prove extremely beneficial...
Why shouldn't we remember that great people often have great flaws? They aren't gods. They have a particular set of skills and circumstances that made them wildly successful. And that's great, but it doesn't mean they aren't human, with human flaws.
That's great and all, but I wasn't really talking about Musk, I was talking about SpaceX.
He does deserve credit for two great achievements.
But that credit does not extend to letting him get away with being an asshole. He is frequently deliberately offensive. He promotes dubious ventures. He's frequently in trouble with the SEC for violating securities rules, including the latest debacle with Twitter. He has been over-promising and under-delivering on Tesla's FSD for a really long time.
I own Tesla stock because I believe in the company and think it has, and will, do great things. But that doesn't make Musk less of a jackass.
But that credit does not extend to letting him get away with being an asshole. He is frequently deliberately offensive. He promotes dubious ventures. He's frequently in trouble with the SEC for violating securities rules, including the latest debacle with Twitter. He has been over-promising and under-delivering on Tesla's FSD for a really long time.
I own Tesla stock because I believe in the company and think it has, and will, do great things. But that doesn't make Musk less of a jackass.
I'm not suggesting Musk should "get away" with doing bad things. I am saying it does not diminish his contributions.
Being a jackass is hardly the worst thing a person could be. In fact, it's pretty ordinary. We've all been a jackass in our own lives here and there.
Being a jackass is hardly the worst thing a person could be. In fact, it's pretty ordinary. We've all been a jackass in our own lives here and there.
> Without Elon, there would be no SpaceX, and no Tesla. Musk deserves credit for two great achievements.
You achieve something when as a CEO you sign off a consequential improvement in the quality of life of a lot of people, then you pass the baton and the company is still there.
Tesla is just a car company that jumped early on a quite singular and unprecedented political trend (limiting ourselves for the benefit of people who'd be alive 150 years from now). If the unprecedented trend disappears, so will Tesla.
Space has been driving big entities out of business ever since the Apollo program days, there is no quality of life and no ROI for us up there.
Musk has nothing in the bag as a matter of accomplishments because his companies are not 'in the bag' type companies. Examples of 'in the bag' type companies are : Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Tencent, Exxon, Shell etc.
He's essentially a politician
You achieve something when as a CEO you sign off a consequential improvement in the quality of life of a lot of people, then you pass the baton and the company is still there.
Tesla is just a car company that jumped early on a quite singular and unprecedented political trend (limiting ourselves for the benefit of people who'd be alive 150 years from now). If the unprecedented trend disappears, so will Tesla.
Space has been driving big entities out of business ever since the Apollo program days, there is no quality of life and no ROI for us up there.
Musk has nothing in the bag as a matter of accomplishments because his companies are not 'in the bag' type companies. Examples of 'in the bag' type companies are : Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Tencent, Exxon, Shell etc.
He's essentially a politician
That's an interesting viewpoint. I'm sure if Mueller hadn't been there, Elon would have been just as successful launching Dneiprs to orbit.
What great achievement is Tesla? They caused the entire industry to delay broader releases of electric vehicles because they didn't want to compete with a company willing to lose $10k per vehicle.
It allows rich people in California drive in the HOV lane when they're alone in their cars. That's a pretty good trick.
What industry? Tesla reinvigorated that industry.
Did the miss when the EV2 was going to be released?
Did the miss when the EV2 was going to be released?
Tesla did a very good job marketing battery technology from energy.gov with the $1.2B Nevada gave them. A lesser man would have squandered all that cash. In all seriousness, however, Musk did a great job of convincing Compass and SDL to give Eberhart and Tarpenning money.
>Isn't it sad that Elon has been so successful with Tesla and SpaceX, revolutionary success at that, that people feel impelled to dis him?
"I'm not at all an Elon fanboi, but" is just a variant of "I hate Trump, but".
"I'm not at all an Elon fanboi, but" is just a variant of "I hate Trump, but".
I don't feel pushed to dislike him for his success, I think the way he leverages his unmatched popularity and global reach to manipulate markets (whether pumping bit/dogecoin or promising FSD by a date) is not in line with the standard of excellence he has otherwise delivered with Tesla and SpaceX. It smacks of either a disdain for investors or a desire to attain even more wealth (or both), neither of which is is particularly flattering. That's really my primary complaint.
He shouldn't be let off the hook for allegations of racism at his firms either, but that's between claimants and him, nothing to do with me.
He shouldn't be let off the hook for allegations of racism at his firms either, but that's between claimants and him, nothing to do with me.
Tesla already existed before Elon. Can you make the case that they wouldn't have been as successful without him? I don't see any specific performance that would indicate that he's instrumental to their success.
Yes, I know he bought a struggling company.
> Can you make the case that they wouldn't have been as successful without him?
Easy. They never, ever would have sold it to Musk if they knew it could be such a runaway success and make them container ships full of money. They had no idea how to do it. Musk did.
> Can you make the case that they wouldn't have been as successful without him?
Easy. They never, ever would have sold it to Musk if they knew it could be such a runaway success and make them container ships full of money. They had no idea how to do it. Musk did.
So the willingness of the founder to stay/leave is the only metric for the long-term success of the company?
Did I say "only"? Nope.
Then how is that a convincing argument that Elon is the reason that Tesla is successful.
You're confusing Elon with the founders.
Man I had no idea that Tesla had only one employee! It's nothing short of amazing that Musk can design and implement a car and a rocket from the ground up and still have spare time to man the machines in the factories and shitpost on twitter every day! My respect for him grew immensely.
I hope this is trolling because the details of this are widely reported and discoverable. There is no Tesla without Elon, and there barely was an entity called Tesla before Elon. Even with Elon the company barely made it many times
> Even with Elon the company barely made it many times
This is the crux of my argument. If Tesla failed, would it been because of Elon? Did X.com, Boring Co., etc fail because of Elon?
This is the crux of my argument. If Tesla failed, would it been because of Elon? Did X.com, Boring Co., etc fail because of Elon?
Yes and yes.
If I were to argue that Tesla succeeded in spite of Elon, how would you disprove that?
I could point to his bitcoin investments, many discrimination cases, failure to release Autopilot (against his own promises), SEC action, and Tesla share price manipulation as examples of him hurting the companies success, and directly connect them to his actions. Could you do the same for the companies success?
I could point to his bitcoin investments, many discrimination cases, failure to release Autopilot (against his own promises), SEC action, and Tesla share price manipulation as examples of him hurting the companies success, and directly connect them to his actions. Could you do the same for the companies success?
> how would you disprove that?
Easy. Nobody else's electric car company succeeded.
What's the common factor in Tesla's and SpaceX's highly unlikely successes? Elon Musk.
What's the common factor in Pixar's and Apple's recovery from near bankruptcy and catapulting to the top? Steve Jobs.
Easy. Nobody else's electric car company succeeded.
What's the common factor in Tesla's and SpaceX's highly unlikely successes? Elon Musk.
What's the common factor in Pixar's and Apple's recovery from near bankruptcy and catapulting to the top? Steve Jobs.
> Easy. Nobody else's electric car company succeeded.
Define "succeeded"? Tesla was definitely not first to market, Ford is expected to surpass them in EV cars shipped by end of this year, and Tesla is well known for their poor car QA + service (as an owner myself).
The comparison between Steve Jobs and Elon Musk is very apt, but I think you lack the historical knowledge to understand why that is.
Define "succeeded"? Tesla was definitely not first to market, Ford is expected to surpass them in EV cars shipped by end of this year, and Tesla is well known for their poor car QA + service (as an owner myself).
The comparison between Steve Jobs and Elon Musk is very apt, but I think you lack the historical knowledge to understand why that is.
> Define "succeeded"?
You might not be aware that your replies to me have exhibited 3 characteristics of losing the point:
1. inserting extra words into what I wrote so you can then attack the strawman
2. diversion into arguing about the meaning of words
3. lobbing a personal insult
I'm sure you can do better.
You might not be aware that your replies to me have exhibited 3 characteristics of losing the point:
1. inserting extra words into what I wrote so you can then attack the strawman
2. diversion into arguing about the meaning of words
3. lobbing a personal insult
I'm sure you can do better.
I'm aware. It's difficult to have a causational discussion with someone continually using correlational evidence.
If I say with "provide a reason why Elon is necessary to the success of the company", and you respond with "Look at the success of these two companies he led" that's completely tangential to the question.
So in exchange for "doing better" answer a simple question for me: What specific actions did Elon take that led to the success of Tesla and/or SpaceX?
I've provided several specific actions that were to the detriment of Tesla, so it should be straightforward to do the inverse.
If I say with "provide a reason why Elon is necessary to the success of the company", and you respond with "Look at the success of these two companies he led" that's completely tangential to the question.
So in exchange for "doing better" answer a simple question for me: What specific actions did Elon take that led to the success of Tesla and/or SpaceX?
I've provided several specific actions that were to the detriment of Tesla, so it should be straightforward to do the inverse.
I'm sure it's just random chance that Elan has been very closely involved in managing 2 different companies (SpaceX, Tesla) which have seen such massive growth over the past 2 decades. /s
By your "make the case" criteria - has there been any business leader who clearly deserved credit?
By your "make the case" criteria - has there been any business leader who clearly deserved credit?
Survivorship bias. Elon has led many failed companies, success doesn't imply correlation.
Okay...now assume that I took Probability 101 as an undergrad, got an B+, and kept the textbook.
If we knew how many companies Elan has lead, and the percentage of barely-founded little companies from ~2003 which have been as successful as SpaceX and Tesla over the past 2 decades, then we could perform the calculations, and see what the odds actually are on Elan hitting two such jackpots by random chance & survivorship.
Elan's Wikipedia entry only has him leading ~10 companies. If you could name a few hundred more, that would help your case...
If we knew how many companies Elan has lead, and the percentage of barely-founded little companies from ~2003 which have been as successful as SpaceX and Tesla over the past 2 decades, then we could perform the calculations, and see what the odds actually are on Elan hitting two such jackpots by random chance & survivorship.
Elan's Wikipedia entry only has him leading ~10 companies. If you could name a few hundred more, that would help your case...
So a person that wins the lottery twice is good at the lottery? You need to make a causational argument, and so far everyone in this thread has replied with a correlationary argument.
I'm sure Michael Jordan has missed many shots at the basket, too.
This is a great analogy. Would you say that Michael Jordan is only successful because of the owner of the team he played for?
Jordan was successful on more than one team.
Other players on the same team were not remotely as successful.
Other players on the same team were not remotely as successful.
Awesome, so we agree that Elon isn't attributable for the success of Tesla.
The owner of the team matters less to the success of the team than the participants, as is easily proven by the argument you have just made.
If Elon had consistently led successful teams, as Jordan has, then the correlationary argument would be more convincing. Since he has led a mix of failures and successes, the likely indicator is the teams that worked for him, not his own ability.
The owner of the team matters less to the success of the team than the participants, as is easily proven by the argument you have just made.
If Elon had consistently led successful teams, as Jordan has, then the correlationary argument would be more convincing. Since he has led a mix of failures and successes, the likely indicator is the teams that worked for him, not his own ability.
The number of people who have led two independent companies to great success is exceedingly rare. The only other one I can think of is Steve Jobs, who did it three times.
> Since he has led a mix of failures and successes, the likely indicator is the teams that worked for him, not his own ability.
Or far more likely, he knows how to assemble a team that can deliver, knows how to motivate it to succeed, and knows how to get financing for it. Which is an essential skill for an entrepreneur.
> Since he has led a mix of failures and successes, the likely indicator is the teams that worked for him, not his own ability.
Or far more likely, he knows how to assemble a team that can deliver, knows how to motivate it to succeed, and knows how to get financing for it. Which is an essential skill for an entrepreneur.
FWIW, the real puppeteer making sure the wheels don't fall off is Gwynne Shotwell. She sounds fantastic [1]
[1]: https://youtu.be/1b-vAeYTxRA
[1]: https://youtu.be/1b-vAeYTxRA
Do you really think Elon had much to do with it?
We should be praising you instead, who with a bit of sarcasm demonstrates to be a world class CEO - CEO without company
I'm a huge space nerd, and it's amazing to me that SpaceX has managed to make first stage recovery almost boring, it's so routine (still, I try to watch every one of those launches/landings).
The article mentions that the majority of the launches have been for themselves (i.e. Starlink) but neglects to mention exactly how many. Does anyone know?
Holy crap you people like to dicker about Elon Musk.
Elon can sure help design some shit, but he sucks as a manager.
It takes a heluva great manager to successfully run companies like SpaceX and Tesla.
As Apple eventually discovered, the CEO matters a great deal. The difference between bankruptcy and the biggest market cap in the world, in fact.
As Apple eventually discovered, the CEO matters a great deal. The difference between bankruptcy and the biggest market cap in the world, in fact.
I will add to this - while Elon has a ton of flaws and is overrated by people who think he brought the tech expertise, you have to give him credit for the simple fact that without him, our space program might be dead and electric cars really might have never happened. We take them for granted now, but 15 years ago they seemed completely absurd.
Electric cars never happened? (1) Nearly all major auto companies had electric car programs, or even finished electric cars, before the first model S came out of a factory. And (2) it's not like electric cars will save us from whatever problems cars are currently causing, like pollution or the 2,000,000 annual dead from car crashes. Boring things like trains and re-thinking our cities for better walkability will. Not electric SUVs and tunnels for cars.
In almost every earth in almost every multiverse, electric cars probably have more impact than thinking about how great it would be if it was easier to walk in cities.
He did bring a lot of tech expertise! The guy taught himself rocket science. There's a quote from Tim Forstall somewhere, recounting an anecdote in which he happens to one night receive a call from Elon Musk, many years ago, asking about the properties of some obscure metal Forstall happens to be an expert in. Musk was researching it for use in his rockets.
[deleted]
Screw this. I don't care if they succesfully send people to mars today, with the things Elon has been doing, the way they treat workers and the endless racism lawsuits I can't support this. Feds need to threaten Elon with cancelling Space X contracts unless he gets his shit together.
Elon fired employees for asking him to cut out the b.s. because it is a distraction!
Elon fired employees for asking him to cut out the b.s. because it is a distraction!
The workers disagree and aren't looking for a white knight.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/SpaceX-Reviews-E40371.htm
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/SpaceX-Reviews-E40371.htm
Ironically, if you read the details of the Fremont cases, the problem was perhaps the disinclination by managers (presumably disproportionately white) to intervene. Almost all the harassment was line-level employees harassing each other, and the vast majority were black and Latino employees harassing other particular black and Latino employees. It was widely reported that the N-word was regularly thrown around; less widely reported that in the vast majority of the cases (and for some plaintiffs, all the cases) it was other black employees saying the word, and despite the stereotype some of the targets (i.e. plaintiffs) found it harassing regardless of who was saying it.
The managers should have gotten involved sooner, of course, thus the verdicts. But my impression is that the environment was perhaps better described as one of hazing, rather than one of pervasive racism (at least of the white supremacy variety) implied in the popular discourse. And before anyone starts justifying their outrage with arguments regarding historic power differentials, there are many similarities with the caste bias sometimes reported by and among Indians in IT, where non-Indian employees and managers are blind to much of it and hesitant to involve themselves when its brought to their attention. In those cases Indians are often overrepresented at the managerial and executive level.
None of this excuses managers from accountability, but the prickliness of woke race ethics certainly doesn't make identifying and resolving the harassment any easier.
The managers should have gotten involved sooner, of course, thus the verdicts. But my impression is that the environment was perhaps better described as one of hazing, rather than one of pervasive racism (at least of the white supremacy variety) implied in the popular discourse. And before anyone starts justifying their outrage with arguments regarding historic power differentials, there are many similarities with the caste bias sometimes reported by and among Indians in IT, where non-Indian employees and managers are blind to much of it and hesitant to involve themselves when its brought to their attention. In those cases Indians are often overrepresented at the managerial and executive level.
None of this excuses managers from accountability, but the prickliness of woke race ethics certainly doesn't make identifying and resolving the harassment any easier.
First time around you maybe right but this keeps happening .
Unfortunately Glassdoor reviews were not used as evidence in any of the several lawsuits. And it is the minority that aren't engineers and managers that are being mistreated
Celebrate people's accomplishment and criticize when they make egregious mistakes.
There's no need to be for all or totally against a company/person.
There's no need to be for all or totally against a company/person.
I agree except willful malice is not a mistake. I will not support looking the other way because of elon's accomplishments. He is not above any rules or expectations that apply to any CEO or company.
>Feds need to threaten Elon with cancelling Space X contracts unless he gets his shit together.
When did abusing contracting, environmental reviews, and government process/prmits to address unrelated political actions become acceptable?
When did abusing contracting, environmental reviews, and government process/prmits to address unrelated political actions become acceptable?
The federal government is supposed to be run by elected officials so any contract with them is a contract with the people who can support or rescind any agreements with the private sector (with enough popular support of course).
The alternative vendors have no shortage of similar issues.
I disagree, when was the last time Amazon had multiple law suits for discrimination?
I would be willing to bet amazon gets sued/settled/arbitration
for discrimination fairly regularly.