7 ms·

"We could see people flying next year". O_O This is "Elon Time" at its best, but worth keeping in mind how fast Starship development has actually gone. Elon T

by mabbo 7y ago

"We could see people flying next year". O_O This is "Elon Time" at its best, but worth keeping in mind how fast Starship development has actually gone. Elon Time is becoming more realistic.

smashem 7y ago
Why has it taken so long to get people on-board the Dragon Crew Capsule? Isn't it mostly because of all the safety testing that has to be done? Didn't get the chance today to hear about Starship's safety mechanisms.
- thunderbird120 7y ago
  NASA requirements + lack of full reusability. It's a lot easier to vet safety through large numbers of tests if you can launch much more often and at a much lower cost which is what they want from Starship.
- tus88 7y ago
  Because one blew up.
  - TheCraiggers 7y ago
    I doubt it. Everyone knows that this shit is dangerous. It's not a question of if something bad will happen, it's a question of how often. There's some pretty gnarly diminishing returns on proofing these beasts, but SpaceX has a huge advantage over the boosters that NASA used- they're reusable so getting a few extra 9's of safety is not necessarily a waste. Of course, the non-reusable boosters had an advantage too where they were only subjected to the insane stress of a launch once, but I'm guessing that's a smaller advantage than what I said above or else we wouldn't have modern airlines.
eugenhotaj 7y ago
I have not seen the presentation yet. Still, I am willing to bet anyone a non-trivial amount of money that we do not see people flying next year.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- krick 7y ago
  Time to make a gambling lot on some sweepstake platform out there.
  - cptaj 7y ago
    Ahem... https://www.reddit.com/r/HighStakesSpaceX/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HighStakesSpaceX/
- mandeepj 7y ago
  Right. Dragon still has not taken Astronauts onboard
- nabla9 7y ago
  It's good to keep track of your predictions and improve them. One of the sites where you can do this is https://www.metaculus.com/ https://www.metaculus.com/ Are there others where you don't have to put money into predicting?
  - krilly 7y ago
    Wow, sick web design and a sick idea. It's like Augur without the bullshit
- Laremere 7y ago
  This was more of an off the cuff remark than it was a guided estimate, though his reasoning was fairly valid: He expects a Starship successful orbit in 6 +- 3 months. Demonstrating human capability with non-reusable hardware means building and throwing away hardware 10 times. A rocket capable of rapid reuse would be able to do about 3 flights a day (due to orbit time + needing to align to landing site again + some downtime) Even at the "low" rate of 1 a day, that's less than two weeks of flights. If they're way off their mark, one launch a week is 2.3 months. Not that I would take your bet, but it's not unthinkable.
- 7y ago
_ph_ 7y ago
I would understand his estimate as that he thinks they have the capability to send humans to space with Starship next year. The actual flights might come later, as for proper safety evaluation, tests and of course small enhancements to spaceship. Fundamentally, humans could have flown to ISS with the Dragon 1 capsule, but hopefully, the Dragon 2 flies manned next year. But as Elon said, progress with Starship should be faster, as they can fly the first human-rated one many times in a short time to demonstrate its safety. The space shuttle did 135 flights over its entire life-time. A single Starship could do that in a year, if needed.
- hef19898 7y ago
  So basically the narrative is "I could send humans to space with Spaceship, but I didn't yet. Take my word for it, as without flights we don't have any proof". Stuff like that is the main reason why I my opinion about Musk changed, his other attics and the way Tesla is managing safety relevant things are, as far as I am concerned, just further proof.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    That’s really not the narrative at all. Elon said several times, these are not official estimates. He said “this is just stream of consciousness”. He was giving you literally the picture in his head of what could theoretically be possible if everything came together perfectly. Then people go and quote just the last sentence which was ...[so that could mean there’s at least a chance we might even see] humans in orbit on Mk4”, take the last part out of context, and run wild with it. It’s like the “1 million robotaxis” comment. What Elon was actually trying to explain in that moment is that the day the software is ready, they push it to the fleet and every Tesla with AP3 can immediately be a robotaxi. The point is to convey the enormity of the architecture that’s been built and what it enables if the software can be made to work. I think the way Tesla is managing safety relevant things is the way forward for automobile safety which can save 30,000 lives a year, and not to mention countless maimings, injuries, and hundreds of billions in property damage. Roads are dangerous and lethal for humans, and IMO Tesla will be the company which makes them orders of magnitude less so.

by mabbo 7y ago

"We could see people flying next year". O_O This is "Elon Time" at its best, but worth keeping in mind how fast Starship development has actually gone. Elon Time is becoming more realistic.

smashem 7y ago

Why has it taken so long to get people on-board the Dragon Crew Capsule? Isn't it mostly because of all the safety testing that has to be done? Didn't get the chance today to hear about Starship's safety mechanisms.

thunderbird120 7y ago
NASA requirements + lack of full reusability. It's a lot easier to vet safety through large numbers of tests if you can launch much more often and at a much lower cost which is what they want from Starship.
tus88 7y ago
Because one blew up.
- TheCraiggers 7y ago
  I doubt it. Everyone knows that this shit is dangerous. It's not a question of if something bad will happen, it's a question of how often. There's some pretty gnarly diminishing returns on proofing these beasts, but SpaceX has a huge advantage over the boosters that NASA used- they're reusable so getting a few extra 9's of safety is not necessarily a waste. Of course, the non-reusable boosters had an advantage too where they were only subjected to the insane stress of a launch once, but I'm guessing that's a smaller advantage than what I said above or else we wouldn't have modern airlines.

eugenhotaj 7y ago

I have not seen the presentation yet. Still, I am willing to bet anyone a non-trivial amount of money that we do not see people flying next year.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
krick 7y ago
Time to make a gambling lot on some sweepstake platform out there.
- cptaj 7y ago
  Ahem... https://www.reddit.com/r/HighStakesSpaceX/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HighStakesSpaceX/
mandeepj 7y ago
Right. Dragon still has not taken Astronauts onboard
nabla9 7y ago
It's good to keep track of your predictions and improve them. One of the sites where you can do this is https://www.metaculus.com/ https://www.metaculus.com/ Are there others where you don't have to put money into predicting?
- krilly 7y ago
  Wow, sick web design and a sick idea. It's like Augur without the bullshit
Laremere 7y ago
This was more of an off the cuff remark than it was a guided estimate, though his reasoning was fairly valid: He expects a Starship successful orbit in 6 +- 3 months. Demonstrating human capability with non-reusable hardware means building and throwing away hardware 10 times. A rocket capable of rapid reuse would be able to do about 3 flights a day (due to orbit time + needing to align to landing site again + some downtime) Even at the "low" rate of 1 a day, that's less than two weeks of flights. If they're way off their mark, one launch a week is 2.3 months. Not that I would take your bet, but it's not unthinkable.
7y ago

_ph_ 7y ago

I would understand his estimate as that he thinks they have the capability to send humans to space with Starship next year. The actual flights might come later, as for proper safety evaluation, tests and of course small enhancements to spaceship. Fundamentally, humans could have flown to ISS with the Dragon 1 capsule, but hopefully, the Dragon 2 flies manned next year. But as Elon said, progress with Starship should be faster, as they can fly the first human-rated one many times in a short time to demonstrate its safety. The space shuttle did 135 flights over its entire life-time. A single Starship could do that in a year, if needed.

hef19898 7y ago
So basically the narrative is "I could send humans to space with Spaceship, but I didn't yet. Take my word for it, as without flights we don't have any proof". Stuff like that is the main reason why I my opinion about Musk changed, his other attics and the way Tesla is managing safety relevant things are, as far as I am concerned, just further proof.
- zaroth 7y ago
  That’s really not the narrative at all. Elon said several times, these are not official estimates. He said “this is just stream of consciousness”. He was giving you literally the picture in his head of what could theoretically be possible if everything came together perfectly. Then people go and quote just the last sentence which was ...[so that could mean there’s at least a chance we might even see] humans in orbit on Mk4”, take the last part out of context, and run wild with it. It’s like the “1 million robotaxis” comment. What Elon was actually trying to explain in that moment is that the day the software is ready, they push it to the fleet and every Tesla with AP3 can immediately be a robotaxi. The point is to convey the enormity of the architecture that’s been built and what it enables if the software can be made to work. I think the way Tesla is managing safety relevant things is the way forward for automobile safety which can save 30,000 lives a year, and not to mention countless maimings, injuries, and hundreds of billions in property damage. Roads are dangerous and lethal for humans, and IMO Tesla will be the company which makes them orders of magnitude less so.