Posts by John Smith 19

Re: Disappointed

"That Page guy is hilarious, in a Ron White kind of way. You guys should consider having him do some illustrations to accompany his pieces. I bet he's a madman with fresh box of 64 colors! I"

Not to worry. He won't be let go anytime soon.

He's the Editor.

"Seriously, lots of Vancouver is borderline sea level. Richmond, right by airport, struggled with storms for a while."

I think you'll find most port cities are...

London and New York for example.

@briesmith

"What is he on? I always thought Canadians were too dull to be doing drugs but perhaps I was wrong?"

Did you think Cedars and Pines are the only plants that grow tall in the forests of BC?

That pungent herbal aroma is not Pine resin. *

*According to friends who've visited the area on camping trips.

Re: Of course it will look like Albania

"They'd contract the nuclear stuff out to the French government (in the guise of EDF) though, so at least the plants would be well-run, even if the price turns out to be eye-watering."

The price is being agreed now.

It is eyewatering, and like the solar FIT guaranteed.

@RamsBottom

Ah the perils of posting in haste and repenting at leisure.

So I've included the appropriate icon.

Thank you for reminding me.

Of course if the OAP's are still dead what, in fact, is the actual difference?

Re: The additional bases...

"Maybe it's just my cynical mind, but that fact that these bases can't currently be transcribed and translated could make them perfect for the creation of unique serial numbers within genetic code."

Handy for knowing which which clone you're dealing with.

Sometimes called the "Orphan Black" scenario.

@Jaybus

"According to Musk, the Russian stuff is 4 times as expensive."

No he's saying the rocket it attaches to is 4x as expensive.

The RD-180 generates 860 K lb of Sea Level thrust and the Russians sell it for $10m.

The Spacex Merlin 1d generates about 140 Klb and I've seen reports Spacex will sell you one for $5m

IOW about 8x the thrust for 2x the cost. I'd say the RD-180 is a pretty good good cheap piece of hardware.

Re: It is easy to find conspiriacies, with the right outlook...

"I am a US taxpayer. I want the costs lowered. Since Atlas uses Russian-made rockets, they can continue with their current inventory and transition to US manufacturing IF they get $1Bn to build that manufacturing. Elon wants that 1 BN in his pocket, instead."

In a word "no,."

Musk has said Spacex could do a really big engine (1-2 million Lb) for the USG vor about $1Bn but I think that was an off the cuff remark. I suspect Space will do such an engine for a much bigger launcher, as they like the redundancy they get with 9 engines.

BTW that's also what RD-Amross say it would cost to set up US mfg of the RD180, which is what the suite is about.

What Musk wants is to be judged on a launch by launch basis on all the launches (IE the "Single Core Buys") that he thinks Spacex and F9 can compete with.

And BTW he's not asking for a $1Bn "Assured Access Payment" to keep Spacex offices and pads open even if they launch no government payloads that year, although interestingly since the USG is so keen on this "assured access" business Spacex would be within their rights to ask for one as well (or perhaps contest that ULA needs it?).

Re: SpaceX should make big engines..

"And flog them to ULA. That WOULD be funny. Even if SpaceX doesn't get the launch contract, at least he gets to make some money on engine supply."

With FH coming up for 1st launch why sell them parts when he can take their whole business?

The behavior of the Secretary of the Air Force Ms Linda James, and her department, have been very suspicious throughout this affair.

cockup or conspiracy there needs to be some major air clearing.

@DryBones

"As for costs... Heh heh heh. Trust me, "government contract" is pronounced "bend over and spread your books". If someone says they do not have accurate cost figures they do not have access to them, or did not bother to read them. The government requires disclosure of costs and that they be kept up to date, they can recover costs that are not accurately stated / excessive, withhold funds, etc. Basically, they have a hand up the accounting department's backside."

Funny you should say that as the GAO reckons the government does not have the costing figures needed to decide if they are getting a fair price.

"SpaceX are an entirely private company that does not do any of the things that government contracts require them to do, including buying per Federal Acquisition Regulations for all that they do. So yes, SpaceX is cheaper. Expect the playing field to level as government requirements are added to SpaceX, "

I've heard that a lot, usually from ULA employees.

Firstly I expect Musk will split out government specific costs as government specific costs ( Senior management progress report delivered on ice dressed as clowns --> $29326. What's that? Doing it in a conference room in normal clothes is OK after all? Great).

Pricing change requests (and frankly bizarre customer requests) is a standard tactic to avoiding stupid amounts of design drift. Funny how much reasonable customers get when they are told up front that sort of crap is going to cost them.

And if Musk is wrong by a 100%?

Space launches will cost $200m/ea.

Or about 50% what ULA appear to be charging (although with the $1Bn "assured access" subsidy and a few other bits and pieces there's no real way to know)

I find government con-tractors are like farmers.

They are always broke.

The burden of regulation is always nearly intolerable.

And yet they can't seem to wean themselves off the government teat.

Re: I like Elon.

"Elon Musk is Irony Man."

Nice.

Re: national security

"Are they trying to gain a commercial advantage, or are they trying to open the playing field to any interested bidder?"

The actual suite is to allow them to compete. It does not insist they win any of them, just allow them to be on the field.

However stopping RD180 use stops further Atlas V launches and ULA will probably save them for their USAF/NRO launches rather than NASA, which is relevant because 2 of the 3 CCiCAP entrants want to fly on that LV.

Re: national security

"Indeed, as does this contract. Lockheed Martin have every right to manufacture RD-180s in the US. It was just turned out much cheaper to carry on buying the Russian-made ones. If SpaceX can beat the price of the RD-180 and still deliver the reliability and power of that engine they should do so."

No they don't.

The US engine "maker" is called RD-Amross and is a US/Russian joint venture, who ship the engines in from Russian.

They have copies of all the plans and materials specifications a dn claimthey could mfg the RD180's but it would cost them $1Bn to start and this being cost plus land (or rather cost++ with the usual rises) only if the US govt pays up front.

The 2 year US stockpile is meant to be long enough to enable this although the US govt has planned sat launches for 5 years ahead.

Re: We ARE living in the future!

"SpaceX also benefits greatly from a supply chain funded 100% by US taxpayers. A supply chain that shouldn't actually exist. We provide custom tooling and a variety of mission specific component housings to some of the companies that provide SpaceX with 'stuff'. Unfortunately, a lot of those companies are ordering work for projects they know, hell, everybody involved knows, will never be launched. The idea being that if that supply chain were to fall into disrepair it would cost far, far more money and time to rebuild, were it ever needed, it than it does to maintain it with busy work."

Interesting point. It's one of NASA's truly massive contributions that they initially funded companies to put the parts on the shelves in the first place.

But note a lot of that happened through the 1960's, some in the 1970's and a little in the 1980's.

How much since?

However as George Kooperman observed those companies charge arm-and-a-leg fees for the slightest mfg change and their parts are not very cheap to begin with.

That's part of the reason why Spacex has an exceptionally high proportion of hardware built in house.

The one's Spacex is buying in must be very good to still be Spacex's suppliers, both in quality and cost.

Incidentally if you want a real villain that has decimated the US space logistics supply chain look no further than the insane ITAR regs. Some years ago they were estimated to have cost US space businesses $1Bn. That sum is probably well North of $2Bn by now.

There is no telling how many companies have left the business or simply gone under because the US launch market could not sustain the volume they needed to stay.

Re: It's even worse than that

"The USAF keeps moving the goalposts for "National Payload Certified" - first it was a certain number of launches w/o failure, and SpaceX got that, then it was launching to geosynchronous successfully, and SpaceX got that, and then it was handling sooper-sekrit satellite information, and SpaceX got that, and then it was something else I forget, and SpaceX got that too. The DoD/USAF still "but you're not certified" and hands the contract to their ULA golf buddies."

Actually the requirement was 3 successful launches in exactly the configuration the USAF would use (IE Merlin v1.1 engines and a fairing, so Draons don't count).

But (and I think this is the thing that's got Musk p***ed off) a few days before the 3rd launch the USAF signed the 36 core block buy. TBF the USAF though Space would not be able to compete before 2016 at the earliest, but the fact they were days away from getting the results of the 3rd (successful) flight is just bizarre.

Re: will have cost them money since the sats cost over $1 billion.

"ULA has never dropped a sat over 81 launches, nobody else in the world has a perfect launch record like that."

Arianespace?

Your world is quite a small place.

"Atlas rockets do not service the ISS, so no. Servicing is by Soyuz, SpaceX Dragon or Orbital Science Cygnus (IIRC)"

Currently.

But both Dream Chaser and the CTS100 capsule of the CCiCAP programme use it for their LV.

Boeing say they could fly on other launchers but it's the only big one (outside F9) that's human rated.

@Mage

"There is also no evidence that replicating neurons or what people think is a brain's structure would result in an Intelligent machine. "

Oh really....

Re: I was noodling on the idea of AI a few days ago

"Even if it's got only a handful of neurons, all life with a brain seems to want more than mere existence; it obeys the triggers of instinct but it seeks new stimuli. And the higher the intelligence, the more it seeks (watch a puppy or a baby human starting to explore its environment) to expand, and if it can't expand, to sulk.""

Erm.

Very depressing no doubt but I think you're missing something. Instincts are evolved into a system by its development process (evolution in the case of mammalian brains)

Why would they exist in the first place?

It could just as easily think because it thinks.

The question then becomes is that real AI or more like the autistic like behavior of Vernor Vinge's "focused" individuals.

Re: I just wish....

"The best part, it didn't matter if it was true, or even remotely feasible, when he said it. People threw enough money and brain power into it that they could have colonized another planet if they wanted to. Gordon Moore created the most valuable self-fulfilling prophecy since somebody said their God would be born to the line of David. I think it's all just fucking great."

True.

But by my reckoning a current Silicon transistor gate is about 140 atoms wide. If the technology continues to improve (and S-Ray Extreme UV lithography is struggling) you will have 1 atom wide transistors. 1 electron transistors were done decades ago.

Still it's been fun while it lasted.