←back to thread

395 points vinnyglennon | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
echoangle ◴[] No.43485519[source]

Don’t want to belittle the achievement but they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read.

replies(10): >>43486164 #>>43486176 #>>43486389 #>>43486503 #>>43487344 #>>43488249 #>>43488350 #>>43489132 #>>43490828 #>>43494066 #
mainecoder ◴[] No.43486164[source]

Of course, even Europe cannot launch cheaply anymore. Arianespace is crawling to space; they are left for dead. The only serious players are the US and China. It's reached a point where it has become like trying to manufacture a state-of-the-art 5nm chip in a developing nation: possible, but at an absurd cost. You might achieve an initial parametric yield of only 10%, meaning only a tiny fraction of the chips coming off the line meet the basic electrical specifications. Even then, the functional yield (the percentage that actually performs the intended computation correctly at the target speed) might be even lower, say 5%. You'd be throwing away 95 out of every 100 chips, and the cost per usable die would be astronomical due to the sheer expense of acquiring and maintaining the lithography equipment, cleanroom facilities, and specialized expertise – resources that are heavily concentrated in a few leading nations and require years, if not decades, to build from scratch.

replies(5): >>43486382 #>>43486523 #>>43486860 #>>43488167 #>>43495285 #
wat10000 ◴[] No.43486523[source]

SpaceX didn't spend an absurd amount of money getting Falcon 9 to where it is. It was a lot, but pretty typical, even somewhat cheap, for developing a brand new rocket. Repeating their feat should be even cheaper, since you won't be taking detours trying out parachutes and such before settling on the final architecture. It's a relatively straightforward application of known technology, not bleeding edge stuff like 5nm chip making.

An organization that can produce Ariane 6 should be able to produce a Falcon 9 clone with similar effort. The real problem is overcoming the of the old, slow, expensive way of doing things.

replies(5): >>43486861 #>>43487478 #>>43488215 #>>43490440 #>>43496245 #
1. TimTheTinker ◴[] No.43488215[source]

> SpaceX didn't spend an absurd amount of money getting Falcon 9 to where it is

That's part of the genius of SpaceX's approach, which culminated in achieving what no one else has achieved on a comparatively shoestring budget.

Credit where it's due: Elon Musk (a) comprehended enough of the technical challenge to ask great questions (and see through BS answers), (b) set and maintained a ruthlessly efficient operational vision, (c) repeatedly took existential financial risks to achieve the next milestone, and (d) set a company vision that motivated people to work extremely hard to achieve what was previously impossible, and (e) worked his butt off solving problem after problem alongside employees.

Love or hate him, very few leaders have ever existed who led companies to accomplish similar feats.