Wiki SpaceX as a Company - General Discussion

[adiggs]

I was doing some math and assumed a week at least. The cost is all in getting up there, really. Once there, stay a while. All it takes is life support. And with half of people experiencing nausea for the first few days (sometimes as long as a week), it would be nice to have time to get past that phase.

But I wasn't expecting a willingness to pay $500,000. Oof.

I'm in the camp that I'd be willing to pay $500k. That doesn't mean that I can afford it - I need another big leg up from my TSLA investment. An important consideration for me is that my wife and I have no children or others that we're trying to leave an estate to. We can't take it with us, nor can we take stuff with us. Heck we can't even take the experience(s) with us, but spending money on experiences sounds like a great plan to me.

And yes - the eventual estate, and I expect a whole bunch along the way will be going to charity. Easily the best donation we've made in our lives was a large donation to a small non-profit. It was small enough that they could spend it effectively, and large enough that it enabled them to do something they couldn't otherwise. Sending another equally large (or larger) donation to some large, nationwide non-profit with name recognition (which we also do) just never had that same experience component.


So - buy experiences. And spending a week in space - I grew up in the 70s and 80s. The idea that I would see regular people (not actual astronauts) go into space, much less that there was a non-zero chance that I might be one of those people to go into space. Unthinkable. $500k is cheap.

 

[Grendal]

Apparently there is something fishy about this according to the comments. Pretty much every government contractor has done the same thing yet SpaceX is targeted.

Justice Department sues SpaceX over hiring practices

The U.S. Justice Department has filed suit against SpaceX, alleging the company discriminated against asylum seekers and refugees in hiring.

spacenews.com

 

[ecarfan]

From the latest Ars Technica Rocket Report:

The Justice Department announced Thursday it is suing SpaceX for allegedly discriminating against asylum seekers and refugees in hiring, Reuters reports. DOJ alleged in a statement that, from at least September 2018 to May 2022, "SpaceX routinely discouraged asylees and refugees from applying and refused to hire or consider them, because of their citizenship status, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act." The lawsuit alleges that SpaceX wrongly claimed federal regulations known as "export control laws" limited the company's hiring to only US citizens and lawful permanent residents, or "green card holders." Asylees and refugees stand on equal footing with US citizens and lawful permanent residents under export control laws and are permitted to access export-permitted information and materials, according to the Justice Department.

The DOJ position is directly contrary to what Elon has stated in the past:

The lawsuit cited a June 2020 post on X, formerly called Twitter, by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to his then 36 million followers that said: "US law requires at least a green card to be hired at SpaceX, as rockets are advanced weapons technology."

But the DOJ says:

DOJ also alleges that SpaceX recruiters also "actively discouraged" asylees and refugees from seeking jobs at the company. These positions are not just engineers and managers who require advanced degrees but range from welders and crane operators to cooks and baristas, DOJ said.

Maybe this is simply a case of Elon misunderstanding federal law, but one would think SpaceX would have qualified lawyers who were experts on this issue.

 

[Snerruc]

My daughter is a contract manager on top secret government contracts and is familiar with this subject. She says that as SpaceX holds top secret contracts, they are not allowed to hire non citizen, non green card employees. It is written into those contracts. This is either one hand not knowing what the other is doing or politics. Her company, a large contractor, is subject to the same requirements.

 

[ecarfan]

She says that as SpaceX holds top secret contracts, they are not allowed to hire non citizen, non green card employees. It is written into those contracts.

Is that because of the launches SpaceX has done for the NRO?

I hope SpaceX is right and prevails over the DOJ.

 

[Snerruc]

Is that because of the launches SpaceX has done for the NRO?

I hope SpaceX is right and prevails over the DOJ.

She cannot reveal anything about secret contracts, but I can observe independently that her company is involved in specialized communications and she knows a lot about SpaceX schedules. Some SpaceX flights Don’t exist after launch.

 

[ggr]

For some companies, e.g. Qualcomm where I used to work, it's possible to separate out places where classified or export controlled work happens. However for other companies, this is impossible or extremely impractical. For example, the lawsuit mentions "welders" as people who don't have to be permanent residents. But it's extremely likely that a welder working for SpaceX would get up close and personal with the plumbing of a Raptor engine, which is definitely not exportable and would be covered by the requirements to be citizen or green card. Contractual requirements might also exist, as noted above by @Snerruc.

There are even parts of the federal government (NIST for example) where you have to be a permanent resident to be employed, even though what they do eventually becomes public. It's the things they might come in contact with on the way that make it a requirement.

I'm in the "bogus or retributive" camp about this lawsuit.

Edit: I read more detail of the lawsuit, and apparently refugees and asylum seekers can theoretically also be employed. So not quite as bogus as I first thought. But certainly no H1 visa holders need apply.

 

[ecarfan]

Eric Berger: Why did SpaceX give up on “catching” falling fairings? Its VP of launch explains

As part of his talk, Dontchev spoke about the "algorithm" that SpaceX uses when it designs new technology to solve problems. Essentially, it provides a roadmap for innovating…

The algorithm begins with two steps: "make the requirements less dumb" and "delete the part or process step." This basically means engineers should think outside of the box and challenge existing requirements. They should then ask whether they're solving the right problem… Dontchev said, you repeat the first two steps as many times as necessary before jumping to the final three steps: optimize, accelerate, and automate.

 

[JB47394]

Eric Berger: Why did SpaceX give up on “catching” falling fairings? Its VP of launch explains

Jumping on this, the more interesting quote for me was this:

In the case of the fairings, the problem of catching them before they fell into the ocean was the wrong problem. The right problem was recovering the fairings and refurbishing them for flight as quickly as possible.

So they found that letting the fairings hit the ocean was the simpler overall solution. That's why they gave up. They also moved the sensitive electronics to the higher parts of the fairing to minimize salt water damage.

"Make the requirements less dumb" is just a terrible way of saying "Solve the right problem." I think I'd add in, "Don't be seduced by cool solutions." Catching fairing halves in a big net is impressive and dramatic, and I suspect there was a certain allure in trying to do it that way, but they could have started with something a bit more conventional and less Elony.

 

[ecarfan]

"Make the requirements less dumb" is just a terrible way of saying "Solve the right problem." I think I'd add in, "Don't be seduced by cool solutions." Catching fairing halves in a big net is impressive and dramatic, and I suspect there was a certain allure in trying to do it that way, but they could have started with something a bit more conventional and less Elony.

Agreed. Reminds me of the Tesla Model X rear doors; undeniably cool, but a very difficult to manufacture “solution” to a minor problem that effects a small fraction of X owners; getting very small children into and out of their car seats.

 

[adiggs]

Jumping on this, the more interesting quote for me was this:

So they found that letting the fairings hit the ocean was the simpler overall solution. That's why they gave up. They also moved the sensitive electronics to the higher parts of the fairing to minimize salt water damage.

"Make the requirements less dumb" is just a terrible way of saying "Solve the right problem." I think I'd add in, "Don't be seduced by cool solutions." Catching fairing halves in a big net is impressive and dramatic, and I suspect there was a certain allure in trying to do it that way, but they could have started with something a bit more conventional and less Elony.

I always thought that the attempt to catch the fairings was driven by an "old space" mentality that rocket parts are wrecked through contact with salt water. At some point that orthodoxy got challenged, and it turns out that at least with fairing halves, they aren't wrecked by coming in contact with salt water.

Isn't Rocketlab splashing motors into the ocean now, and then reusing them?

 

[JB47394]

At some point that orthodoxy got challenged, and it turns out that at least with fairing halves, they aren't wrecked by coming in contact with salt water.

It got challenged when the catch system didn't work all that well. They reexamined things and realized that fairings float well. So they moved the electronics and it all worked out. I wonder how much refurbishment work was needed on a fairing half that was caught versus one that is recovered from the ocean.

Isn't Rocketlab splashing motors into the ocean now, and then reusing them?

They reused one engine as a pathfinder, and plan on trying to reuse all nine engines at some point. Time will tell if they can figure out a scheme to minimize damage to the point where it doesn't affect reusability.

I wonder if RocketLab will ever attempt SpaceX-style drone ship landings. They're much more challenging, but they make recovery better all around (except the cost of having the drone ship), and opens the way to landing back at the launch site for even faster turnaround. Elon aspires to get Starship boosters turned around in an hour by essentially landing on the launch mount. I don't ever expect to see turnaround that fast, but landing at the launch mount is admirably ambitious.

 

[Grendal]

Without announcement, SpaceX has switched their livestream events to X. As we are all pretty aware by now, SpaceX has also stopped having an announcer for Starlink launches.

 

[ecarfan]

So now the only way to see a SpaceX launch livestream is to have an X account so you can login?

 

[MyJoule]

So now the only way to see a SpaceX launch livestream is to have an X account so you can login?

That appears to be true as near as I can tell- too bad- I did catch the launch on youtube with nasaspaceflight

they caught an really cool image of the rocket passing in front of the moon. So that was a bonus They also pieced in some of the live feed from SpaceX. Not sure what they did to get the feed legally, but more power to them.

 

[ecarfan]

Well that is annoying. I don’t participate in any of the main social media platforms and I particularly have no interest in supporting X. But I do want to see official SpaceX launch livestreams of the exciting missions (F9 Starlink missions are no longer in that class for me).

Yes, this was a beautiful shot.

 

[Grendal]

So now the only way to see a SpaceX launch livestream is to have an X account so you can login?

I posted the X link with the livestream for the 6-12 launch. Doesn't that come across?

 

[MyJoule]

I posted the X link with the livestream for the 6-12 launch. Doesn't that come across?

Sorry it requires a log in to X Ugh...

 

[Electroman]

Sorry it requires a log in to X Ugh...

No I don't think that is true. I was able to get to that tweet in a private chrome window (incognito) without logging in and was able to watch the video. No issues.

What you don't get to see are the replies to that tweet. So it NOT correct that you can't read a tweet and watch an embedded video without a login. See this screen shot

 

[JB47394]

No I don't think that is true. I was able to get to that tweet in a private chrome window (incognito) without logging in and was able to watch the video. No issues.

There's something goofy going on with linking from TeslaMotorsClub. I can search for the launch video through Google and see it that way, but if I try to post a link to what I watched here, it doesn't work.

Google for "watch falcon 9 launch 21 satellites to orbit" and you should see a link to Twitter with the title SpaceX. That gave me the video. But if I post that video link here, it won't work.

And I just noticed that if I take the working link from Google and paste it here, it gets changed from a "status" link to a "broadcast" link, and the broadcast links aren't working for me.