4 ms·
Well, the R side pops up when they optimistically tell you that your 20 min commute is going to cost 70 USD... SpaceX is exactly the WORST example in this cont
by looping__lui 6y ago
Well, the R side pops up when they optimistically tell you that your 20 min commute is going to cost 70 USD...
SpaceX is exactly the WORST example in this context: they just went ahead without all the bureaucratic overhead you find at NASA; they weren’t exactly transporting people at the beginning but cargo... And they had a pretty clear market with fat margins; those margins were fat due to the (unnecessary) overhead other agencies created.
You can’t do that in this case.
Put a bit differently: you can probably guess the magnitude of costs for a car to develop. In this case, I would be more than surprised if the get within a 10x magnitude in the end for their cost estimate and EVER get it certified. Again: there are currently NO guidelines how to certify that...
An example from Airbus and the A400 flagship:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europrop_TP400 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europrop_TP400
“Several technical problems delayed the engine's certification test program and pushed the entire A400M aircraft program into further scheduling adjustments. The engine delays were primarily due to problems with completing the full authority digital engine control (FADEC) software to the satisfaction of the civil authorities. More specifically, Europrop determined in mid-2008 that the engine worked correctly, but the FADEC software still did not meet EASA requirements.[27] Since the A400M was intended for humanitarian missions, the aircraft also needed to have a civil certification. Europrop did not realize that this meant the FADEC also had to show traceability and accessibility, so EASA denied civil certification of the software. Because of this problem, the first A400M test aircraft, which was flight-ready by September 2008, was not permitted to fly. Europrop had to triple the size of its workforce to fix the issue,[28] resulting in a FADEC system consisting of over 275,000 lines of code, which was four times more complex than the FADEC software for the largest civil jet engine.[29] Other problems included numerous plane subsystems providing insufficient logging to the main aircraft computer.[30]”
- renewiltord 6y agoThat's a $250 flight which is mostly labour turned into a $70 flight without the labour. That's a marginal cost thing. It goes in a different part of the book. I'm not saying this is doable but those numbers show nothing.
- looping__lui 6y ago? Pilots essentially work for free... It has become “almost industry standards” that young pilots PAY to fly. If I threw a wild guess at 30k USD salaries for these kind of “pilot jobs” with 1000h of flying per year, that puts labor costs to 30-50 USD/h. Maintenance and gas will by far outweigh that.
- renewiltord 6y agoHelicopter pilots in the Bay Area get paid $30k/year? Okay, I don't know that to not be the case but it sounds hard to believe.
- searchableguy 6y agoOP might be talking about europe: https://www.dw.com/en/being-a-pilot-isnt-what-it-used-to-be/a-45038289 https://www.dw.com/en/being-a-pilot-isnt-what-it-used-to-be/... https://dutchpilotgirl.com/pilot-salary/ https://dutchpilotgirl.com/pilot-salary/
- looping__lui 6y agoNo, I wasn’t talking about Europe... I don’t want to “shame” anybody in particular, but look up your local charter airlines and what they offer... This can of course vary if there are rather complex requirements (e.g., a certain type rating, experience level etc.) - but being a pilot isn’t cool financially anymore. A small fraction ends up with “the large airlines” - but if you don’t, you are not in for the big money...