Trucks follow well-defined routes that are already well served by several truck stop operators. I would expect the first truly self-driving trucks to partner with Pilot or Loves to offer some kind of full service option where the truck pulls in and someone comes out to fill it up and scan a tag to charge the fuel to the right account.
Well, Jeff Bezos with Blue Origin is so far behind that they haven't launched anything to the Low Earth Orbit yet, and as far as I know they don't have plans to launch to LEO for the next few years.
So wrg to reusable launch vehicles, so far SpaceX is the only game in town.
OTOH, Jeff Bezos has more money and can speed things up if he wants.
Sure, I'm just saying that without Musk we'd still get reusable launch, just a few years later. Blue Origin is definitely behind but they've been focusing on advanced engines, and just licensed one to ULA, which is flying it in 2020. And of course BO is planning to fly suborbital passengers next year. Suborbital is way easier the LEO, but flying passengers at all is something SpaceX hasn't gotten to yet.
I'm a huge SpaceX fan and until recently I kinda scoffed at Blue Origin, but after seeing more about it I was more impressed. (On the other hand, the New Glenn is only first-stage reusable, so they might need to get that flying well before the BFR is ready.)
SpaceX is the only serious private company. And without government launches they would have a hard time as well. In the de-facto public sector you have the Russians, Ariane, the Chinese, the Indians... It's not that there wouldn't be anything in space without SpaceX. The thing I love about SpaceX is how they showed what can be done without the over abundance of bureaucracy you see elsewhere. Not that programs like Ariane would have learned the smallest bit from it.
What's really different about SpaceX is the cost of launch. Governments and their contractors are happy to launch your stuff into space for thousands of dollars per pound, but nobody was putting significant work into reusable rockets. Just a reusable first stage drops the cost by about 80%, and the BFR is supposed to take the cost down to about $50/lb once it's flying at high volume. That completely changes what we're able to do in space.
Refcently I stumbled over an article regarding SpaceX cost structure raising the theory that commercial launches are subsidized by government launches. Also that reusing stages is not such a relevant cost driver. I simply don't know enough about rocket technology and costs to actually judge the validity of these points, but they seemd plausible. As this point is coming up regularly I really have to take a deper look SpaceX costs and launch costs in general.
There's a reason we don't throw away a 747 after one flight.
Fuel is only a couple percent of the cost of a rocket launch. Rockets are expensive, and on the Falcon 9 the first stage is 80% of the cost of the rocket.
In the early days of SpaceX I saw claims that expendables were more economical because you could build them cheaper, but then SpaceX went and build reusable rockets that are also cheap; their rockets cost less than competitors even without reuse.
They're getting government business because they charge the government less than their competitors charge. The subsidy argument doesn't make sense unless it's only the commercial launches that are cheap.
There are a lot of vested interests in this industry that are strongly incentivized to say reusable rockets are no big deal. I think they'll continue to say that until the BFR flies and SpaceX drops their rates to levels far below what disposables could ever achieve.
Well, one point made in the article I mentioned above was that thermal stress limits the life time of a reusable rocket. Plus the lost payload as you need fuel to land the rocket again. Also, and at least that part I can confirm, a missile is tube is not a lot more than a aluminium tube. So, there is my home work for the weekend: rocket science and LEO launch economics!
There's also the rocket engine, which is a lot more than a tube. Disposables throw that away too. You can just look at the cost of the rocket to see how much expensive stuff is getting thrown away.
SpaceX does still use the Falcon 9 as a disposable for extra-heavy payloads. That doesn't mean you have to throw your rocket away for all payloads, and the capacity difference isn't dramatic. And there won't be that many payloads too big for the BFR in reusable mode.
It's true that the rocket wears out eventually. SpaceX is aiming for about ten reuses initially, thus lowering hardware costs by 90%. They hope to do much better than that later.
We agree on the hardware cost side. The missing step now is to compare these saved hardware costs against the lost payload and the revenue value of that payload. Averages will be fine I think.
Just looking at the hardware side without opportunity cost aonewhat misses the point. A really thorough cost analysis would need to factor in the impact on reliability, the risk of failed launches due to reused rocket stages. I assume these numbers are impossible to come by.
One other data point would be, if that's the case, how much premium SpaceX is asking for the use of virgin rockets as compared to reused ones. This would allow a rough estimation of the increase risk for failure and other costs. Again, I don't expect these numbers to be available.
Jeff Bezos has more money and can speed things up if he wants.
The first part is obviously true. The latter, I’m not so sure —- Blue’s budget has increased dramatically over the past few years, but New Glenn flights remain rare, and New Shepard remains well in the future.
It’s interesting to ponder where Blue would have gone if SpaceX (which was founded later) hadn’t happened. I think there’s a very real chance they’d still be thrashing, talking up bits and pieces of technology but without any complete vehicles (even of New Glenn size).
I've seen this referenced a few times in this article. Did the pilot consciously attempt to "land" in the Hudson River, or was the plane simply going down in the Hudson and the pilot was able to correct its pitch enough to land? If its the latter, I would say the autopilot could have done it better.
The pilot was directed to a nearby airport, but realized he could not make it. He then looked out the window and evaluated his options on where to land, and selected the Hudson.
There's nothing 'simple' about landing an airplane in water that is not designed for it, especially a glider.
Hehe...the Hudson airplane did not land in the river by default. The default choice in New York would have been to take out a few city blocks. This incident was a textbook example of good decisionmaking under pressure.
Most computer guys don't realize this, but you can't save the state of a flight. Most decisions are mostly permanent once made. And some, like for instance all decisions made on an aircraft with no engines, are completely irreversible. So if you don't make the right choice on the first try, you have to live with the wrong choice. At low altitudes under visual flight, a pilot makes multiple such decisions a minute. In an emergency, this number would be a lot higher; on the order of once every few seconds.
I don't think it's all that bad, but if the application lags perhaps they should rethink the interface to suit their environment.
Still waiting for a startup to complain on how they've rewritten in C their laggy html5 mmorpg.
It would be very helpful if the article would mention, 114% of what exactly is the household debt. 114% of annual income, perhaps?
Anyway, it looks like we are looking at few more years of decreasing consumption, to get to the year 2000 level of household debt. And even that level is probably too high.
So, mostly troubles ahead for US economy, no matter who the next president is going to be.
Protagonist works for the huge gov bureaucracy in Soviet Union (Gosplan) and imagines that he is going through the levels to reach the Princess. He pretty much lives in the world of Prince of Persia.
Hes colleagues, OTOH, live in the worlds of F19 or M1 Abrams, so when protagonist goes to speak to his boss, he has to go through the tank battlefield of M1 game.
I thought that I knew all novels by V. Pelevin. I haven't even heard of this one before, although I've read almost everything by him. Thanks for the info.
