3 ms·

I think SpaceX's efforts have highlighted the huge amount of talent that is languishing in the United States right now. Engineering and operations budgets have

by foxyv 5y ago

I think SpaceX's efforts have highlighted the huge amount of talent that is languishing in the United States right now. Engineering and operations budgets have been cut so much in US companies that we have engineers and trained professionals like welders, aircraft mechanics, and construction workers stuck in underpaid and underutilized roles. Elon seems to be dedicated to focusing on Engineering and Operations and it's resulting in the full potential of those engineers and professionals being explored. Instead of focusing exclusively on market capture, lobbying and new marketing strategies, SpaceX is focused on actually getting something done. I've been nothing but impressed with them so far. While not nearly as financially successful as Tesla, I think SpaceX is closer to reaching Mars than Tesla is to reaching sustainable transportation and power.

DisjointedHunt 5y ago
There is inherent value stored in all of Spacexs accomplishments thus far that is very, very hard to place financial value on simply because it is the only asset in the world with the capability. A reusable rocket? How much would China pay for that capability? Don't worry about ITAR rules, it's a hypothetical question to understand the value of having such an asset available for defense or aerospace contracting purposes. The centuries prior to the digital age, whole private empires were built on the back of shipping and transport. Spacex is presently sitting on the largest payload capability fleet in the world, by tonnage to orbit. Yes, including China. Yes, including Russia, Yes, we're not even counting one single Starship here yet. The alloy itself that allows their turbines to run as hot as they have demonstrated to achieve such insane chamber pressures. What is that worth? No one else in the World has been able to do that in the history of mankind (In the unclassified realm atleast) The thing i love about the company that you allude to as well is they're running a ship that converts these "ideas" into tangible business value quicker than anyone we've seen in classic space industries.
- cloutchaser 5y ago
  I have no domain specific knowledge so would love some feedback… Once starship actually works it seems like a less complicated task diverting asteroids and mining them. Obviously not easy with a million new problems, but still easier than a fully reusable space transport system. At that point humanity’s resources will become orders of magnitude larger. It will be a different world. And I don’t see how this doesn’t happen in my lifetime.
  - Someone 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt: The total mass of the asteroid belt is about 4% that of the Moon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon#Size_and_mass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon#Size_and_mass: The Moon's mass is 1/81 of Earth's So, the total mass of the asteroid belt is about 1/2000 that of earth. Assuming (slightly incorrectly) an even distribution of mass throughout earth, thats’s about as much as in the outermost 1/6000 of the radius of earth, or the top km. That’s a lot of material, but there also is the complication that asteroids are far away, and far away from each other. ⇒ I wouldn’t count on asteroid mining making our resources orders of magnitude larger.
    - XorNot 5y ago
      Space is both big and small though. The distances are large, but everything is measured in Delta-V - once something is on its way, it's going to get there no matter what. And unlike Earth, we don't live in any of that volume.
    - mr_toad 5y ago
      Composition is important. Most of Earths metal is in the core and completely inaccessible. However there appear to be some asteroids that are largely composed of metal and are completely exposed. We mine about 3 billion tonnes of iron a year. A single iron rich asteroid could plausibly have hundreds or even thousands of times as much iron. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-type_asteroid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-type_asteroid
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    One thing we can be almost certain of: no asteroids will be diverted, in any meaningful sense, in your lifetime. Maybe in 50 years robots will be nipping off bits of some, to loft someplace where they are wanted.
    - simonh 5y ago
      May be so, but it's also quite possible we will have started the diversion process within that period, it's just these things take a lot of time.
throwaway894345 5y ago
I agree. It's like we have so much talent in these occupations and very, very little talent or ambition or imagination or something at the executive and investor levels.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  The latter which you refer to receive the most financial gain for expending as little energy and capital as possible to maximize their returns. You have to want more than financial gain to engage in high risk high reward engineering endeavors (building EVs, building space vehicle build and launch systems with your own capital), although financial gain is likely a side effect of being successful in those endeavors.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    > You have to want more than financial gain to engage in high risk high reward engineering endeavors I think it's more likely that people who are purely motivated by financial gain are likely to lack the imagination or drive to realize anything significantly innovative. Maybe we're saying the same thing?
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      Note: I say this as someone who has never realized anything significantly innovative :)
iancmceachern 5y ago
I 100% agree. I don't think I'd like the culture in one of his companies (I like my life outside of work too much), but I agree. So many of our tech projects at big companies and government projects have been taken over by business/bureaucrat folks making them into job factories, not product factories. I've seen this in aerospace, medical, and other areas too.

by foxyv 5y ago

DisjointedHunt 5y ago

There is inherent value stored in all of Spacexs accomplishments thus far that is very, very hard to place financial value on simply because it is the only asset in the world with the capability. A reusable rocket? How much would China pay for that capability? Don't worry about ITAR rules, it's a hypothetical question to understand the value of having such an asset available for defense or aerospace contracting purposes. The centuries prior to the digital age, whole private empires were built on the back of shipping and transport. Spacex is presently sitting on the largest payload capability fleet in the world, by tonnage to orbit. Yes, including China. Yes, including Russia, Yes, we're not even counting one single Starship here yet. The alloy itself that allows their turbines to run as hot as they have demonstrated to achieve such insane chamber pressures. What is that worth? No one else in the World has been able to do that in the history of mankind (In the unclassified realm atleast) The thing i love about the company that you allude to as well is they're running a ship that converts these "ideas" into tangible business value quicker than anyone we've seen in classic space industries.

cloutchaser 5y ago
I have no domain specific knowledge so would love some feedback… Once starship actually works it seems like a less complicated task diverting asteroids and mining them. Obviously not easy with a million new problems, but still easier than a fully reusable space transport system. At that point humanity’s resources will become orders of magnitude larger. It will be a different world. And I don’t see how this doesn’t happen in my lifetime.
- Someone 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt: The total mass of the asteroid belt is about 4% that of the Moon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon#Size_and_mass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon#Size_and_mass: The Moon's mass is 1/81 of Earth's So, the total mass of the asteroid belt is about 1/2000 that of earth. Assuming (slightly incorrectly) an even distribution of mass throughout earth, thats’s about as much as in the outermost 1/6000 of the radius of earth, or the top km. That’s a lot of material, but there also is the complication that asteroids are far away, and far away from each other. ⇒ I wouldn’t count on asteroid mining making our resources orders of magnitude larger.
  - XorNot 5y ago
    Space is both big and small though. The distances are large, but everything is measured in Delta-V - once something is on its way, it's going to get there no matter what. And unlike Earth, we don't live in any of that volume.
  - mr_toad 5y ago
    Composition is important. Most of Earths metal is in the core and completely inaccessible. However there appear to be some asteroids that are largely composed of metal and are completely exposed. We mine about 3 billion tonnes of iron a year. A single iron rich asteroid could plausibly have hundreds or even thousands of times as much iron. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-type_asteroid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-type_asteroid
- ncmncm 5y ago
  One thing we can be almost certain of: no asteroids will be diverted, in any meaningful sense, in your lifetime. Maybe in 50 years robots will be nipping off bits of some, to loft someplace where they are wanted.
  - simonh 5y ago
    May be so, but it's also quite possible we will have started the diversion process within that period, it's just these things take a lot of time.

throwaway894345 5y ago

I agree. It's like we have so much talent in these occupations and very, very little talent or ambition or imagination or something at the executive and investor levels.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
The latter which you refer to receive the most financial gain for expending as little energy and capital as possible to maximize their returns. You have to want more than financial gain to engage in high risk high reward engineering endeavors (building EVs, building space vehicle build and launch systems with your own capital), although financial gain is likely a side effect of being successful in those endeavors.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  > You have to want more than financial gain to engage in high risk high reward engineering endeavors I think it's more likely that people who are purely motivated by financial gain are likely to lack the imagination or drive to realize anything significantly innovative. Maybe we're saying the same thing?
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    Note: I say this as someone who has never realized anything significantly innovative :)

iancmceachern 5y ago

I 100% agree. I don't think I'd like the culture in one of his companies (I like my life outside of work too much), but I agree. So many of our tech projects at big companies and government projects have been taken over by business/bureaucrat folks making them into job factories, not product factories. I've seen this in aerospace, medical, and other areas too.