3 ms·

> I do suspect we need to find commercial enterprises to justify the Starship economics and I'm just not sure what that looks like yet. At $1 MM per launch wit

> I do suspect we need to find commercial enterprises to justify the Starship economics and I'm just not sure what that looks like yet. At $1 MM per launch with 100 t per launch puts Starship roughly at $10 per kg. Asteroid mining: Will be a huge industry. Especially with growing environmental concerns all around Earth. Waste can basically be disposed of very cheaply into the atmosphere or sun. Starlink, Kupier, etc constellations: will continually need maintenance. Including similar constellations across the Moon and also Mars. Entertainment: Assuming 500 kgs per human (because of life support, seats, luggage, food, etc), that is $5000 per ticket to LEO. This is a very reasonable price point for luxury vacations, especially considering an "all inclusive" trip like a cruise or resort. In line with this, a space hotel/casino is very reasonable to get constructed. > All of the things you've listed here though aren't really commercial enterprises. Or at least they're far from it. They're flagship missions by governments because they're so wildly expensive. You're using past data to predict the future. Which is typically a good heuristic. However, when it comes to game changing technologies you can no longer use past data to predict future performance. SpaceX will continue to make margins off Starlink and regular F9-like flights. These profits are all going to be reinvested until a Moon and Mars colonies exist and regular trade begins. Finally, other companies like Relativity Space are creating amazing 3D printers for rockets. These new technologies are only used in a small way in Starship, but could greatly reduce costs for Starship or the next ship. If the 2010s were about F9, and 2020s are about Starship, then the 2030s call for another SpaceX ship that gets even better tech advantages.

AtlasBarfed 5y ago
The military wants a C-130 payload anywhere in the world in 1 hour. Military up the wazoo in contracts. Militarization of space is inevitable, they'll want bases up there. If the payload costs are true for starship, they'll put big ones up there. Starship will represent a total paradigm change in space superiority on economics alone. I'm surprised China and Russia aren't loudly complaining about this. It would enable an actual space fortress to some degree. 10 billion dollars for a 1000 tons of hardware in space? Um, that's less than an aircraft carrier. An aircraft carrier is 100,000 tons... As stated, space tourism will be HUGE. If 5g/ticket is true, I mean, who on hackernews wouldn't go on that trip? Even if 1% of people in the world take only one flight that in our lifetime that's 80 million people. How many people want to do the Red Bull parachute from space? I would guess: A LOT. Just wait for the private Starships. Hey they should be cheaper than megayachts. Show up at starport, anywhere on earth in an hour. My biggest dream: starship payloads to get a moon-launched 1.5 million ton Project Orion pulse nuclear ship. That is serious equipment payload to do real asteroid mining. One heavy metal/rare earth metal asteroid will pay for that round trip. But really, I'd argue we just need to enable: https://space.nss.org/technologies-for-asteroid-capture-into-earth-orbit/ https://space.nss.org/technologies-for-asteroid-capture-into... Why fly it out of the gravity well? Need material? It's out there. A bit hard to catch, but it's out there.
- andbberger 5y ago
  if I had 5k to burn I'd get a nice ebike, the view is fine from down here, thank you
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "Just wait for the private Starships. Hey they should be cheaper than megayachts." Any space rocket can turn the whitehouse, the Kremlin or 10 Downing street into a crater withing 30 minutes, with minimal chances of air defence to stoping it. If we start handing out starships to random shady conpanies registered in tax heavens, 9/11 will look like a peacefull day in comparison
  - rurban 5y ago
    Submarines also. Today
    - freemint 5y ago
      Sub marines can't turn the Downing Street let alone Washington DC into rubbel. Rockets launched from submarines can. No one but nation states have this capability today.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      You mean ballistic missile submarines? Do we sell them to random rich people?
  - AtlasBarfed 5y ago
    You're not wrong, but a private 747 could probably pose a similar threat to your stated targets, but who knows if they actually put in a worthwhile air defense after 9/11.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  > they'll want bases up there They'll be highly expensive and highly vulnerable targets. You can't armor a space station.
tigershark 5y ago
You can’t really get better than starship with the current chemical rocket technology. The reason is simple: the Tiranny of the Rocket equation. Starship exists just because of Raptor (2). An incredible engine, the first full flow engine to ever fly and that should be capable of about 230t of force.

AtlasBarfed 5y ago

The military wants a C-130 payload anywhere in the world in 1 hour. Military up the wazoo in contracts. Militarization of space is inevitable, they'll want bases up there. If the payload costs are true for starship, they'll put big ones up there. Starship will represent a total paradigm change in space superiority on economics alone. I'm surprised China and Russia aren't loudly complaining about this. It would enable an actual space fortress to some degree. 10 billion dollars for a 1000 tons of hardware in space? Um, that's less than an aircraft carrier. An aircraft carrier is 100,000 tons... As stated, space tourism will be HUGE. If 5g/ticket is true, I mean, who on hackernews wouldn't go on that trip? Even if 1% of people in the world take only one flight that in our lifetime that's 80 million people. How many people want to do the Red Bull parachute from space? I would guess: A LOT. Just wait for the private Starships. Hey they should be cheaper than megayachts. Show up at starport, anywhere on earth in an hour. My biggest dream: starship payloads to get a moon-launched 1.5 million ton Project Orion pulse nuclear ship. That is serious equipment payload to do real asteroid mining. One heavy metal/rare earth metal asteroid will pay for that round trip. But really, I'd argue we just need to enable: https://space.nss.org/technologies-for-asteroid-capture-into-earth-orbit/ https://space.nss.org/technologies-for-asteroid-capture-into... Why fly it out of the gravity well? Need material? It's out there. A bit hard to catch, but it's out there.

andbberger 5y ago
if I had 5k to burn I'd get a nice ebike, the view is fine from down here, thank you
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"Just wait for the private Starships. Hey they should be cheaper than megayachts." Any space rocket can turn the whitehouse, the Kremlin or 10 Downing street into a crater withing 30 minutes, with minimal chances of air defence to stoping it. If we start handing out starships to random shady conpanies registered in tax heavens, 9/11 will look like a peacefull day in comparison
- rurban 5y ago
  Submarines also. Today
  - freemint 5y ago
    Sub marines can't turn the Downing Street let alone Washington DC into rubbel. Rockets launched from submarines can. No one but nation states have this capability today.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    You mean ballistic missile submarines? Do we sell them to random rich people?
- AtlasBarfed 5y ago
  You're not wrong, but a private 747 could probably pose a similar threat to your stated targets, but who knows if they actually put in a worthwhile air defense after 9/11.
WalterBright 5y ago
> they'll want bases up there They'll be highly expensive and highly vulnerable targets. You can't armor a space station.

tigershark 5y ago

You can’t really get better than starship with the current chemical rocket technology. The reason is simple: the Tiranny of the Rocket equation. Starship exists just because of Raptor (2). An incredible engine, the first full flow engine to ever fly and that should be capable of about 230t of force.