News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by SEJeff on Friday January 16, 2015 @03:15PM (#8901388)
Not sure what you're saying reflects reality. When Orbital Science's rocket recently exploded, Elon's words were nothing but polite:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/527247155954610176

And his comment on their rocket being the butt of a joke, using engines literally made in the 1960s and stored in Siberia were true. It is upsetting, but still not as surprising that they suffered catastrophic failure having such an adversion to new tech.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by avmich on Friday January 16, 2015 @04:33PM (#8901860)
> And his comment on their rocket being the butt of a joke, using engines literally made in the 1960s and stored in Siberia were true.

That was quite misleading on Elon's side. Engines were manufactured in 1970's (I believe in 1973-1974) after quite an extensive RND program - actualy, remake of similar engines, NK-15, which weren't nearly as good. NK-33 engines were tested as perhaps no others of theirs caliber - with tests like throwing metal chips (nuts?) into pumps, or running uninterrupted for ~4 hours (!) . Technical capabilities are also quite formidable - ok, Merlin-D has better thrust-to-weight, but worse Isp, and that's with the hindsight of ~40 years. Throttleable... relatively modest pressure by today's standards... And they were stored in Volga region, which is firmly Europe.

So, Musk's comment - intentionally or not - painted OSC's decision in less-than-objective color. Well, Elon is known for exagerrating... and sometimes quite grossly. We'll know the scale.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by reneherse on Saturday January 17, 2015 @12:18AM (#8903506)
The odyssey of the reclaimed NK-33's is intriguing as hell, but I can only imagine that everyone involved in their resurrection knew the odds of failure would be higher than with modern engines. Soviet metallurgy in the 1970's likely didn't have the consistency and precision we have today. So while the NK-33 was (is) a remarkably advanced design, it was likely pushing the limits of the materials of its time and place–even before sitting in storage in uncontrolled conditions for decades.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by avmich on Saturday January 17, 2015 @01:21AM (#8903647)
Odds of failure would perhaps be higher, given all the rest equal. Which is not - Soviet rocket engine school was at its golden age at the time, there were a lot of people both academically educated and who participated in large scale experiments with engines. Granted, today's capabilities allow us to surpass the level of sophistication achieved during the space race. However, we still need to try hard enough - and we know the support from governments is not as great.

Limits of materials were pushed indeed. Some safety margins for materials were claimed as under 1.0 - i.e., 0.97 - that is, materials were pushed further than their limits. The idea was that since the engine is used once, we can use it in the manner that greatly reduces the life of the engine - and nobody would care, since a stage will be done with in a few short minutes. A lot of things were done quite unconventionally - remember SR-71, for example, or oxygen-rich pre-burners which were considered rather impossible.

NK-33 remains unsurpassed even today by many criteria. Now it includes even the ability to work after 40 years of shelf line - which probably left the trace on engines reliability.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by schiffern on Saturday January 17, 2015 @01:56PM (#8905151)
>with tests like throwing metal chips (nuts?) into pumps

SpaceX did this test with the Merlin engines too. http://www.airspacemag.com/space/is-spacex-changing-the-rock...

The chamber pressure (and therefore Isp) are both dialed back for the sake of reusability. They're stated multiple times that they're not running those engines anywhere near their physical limits.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by avmich on Saturday January 17, 2015 @07:12PM (#8906074)
It's certainly good that SpaceX uses many ways to test hardware, including those approaches successfully used before. During development of F-1 some interesting debugging techniques were invented, some could be well applied in SpaceX.

Gas generator cycle in general doesn't allow reaching effective Isp as high as closed loop cycle. On the other hand, smaller pressure reduces stress and generally considered safer. NK-15 were single use engines, but NK-33 and most other modern engines are all reusable.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by gamegoblin on Friday January 16, 2015 @03:45PM (#8901583)
One example of his being polite doesn't mean he doesn't also make fun of competition publicly. Look at the interview where the interviewer asks him about a competitor's electric car (BMW I think) and he just laughs for a not-insignificant amount of time followed by something like "have you seen the thing?"
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by schiffern on Friday January 16, 2015 @06:15PM (#8902418)
You're conflating two different events.

The "have you seen their car?" comment was from an interview with Bloomberg regarding BYD, not BMW.

He laughed when asked about BMW during the Q2 2013 conference call, but it was a chuckle followed by serious comments. It was only when the questioner began nervously laughing that he laughed for a significant time.

Compilation video containing both events (unfortunately with music, but I don't care enough to track down the individual sources): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gt6CAswSOY

So, the big criticism here is that… he's too forthright about competitor's products? I'm actually quite ok with that.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by SEJeff on Friday January 16, 2015 @04:37PM (#8901887)
His theatrics aside, he wants to make electric cars viable and take us to mars. Even if he ultimately fails, if he makes everyone else rise up to compete with him, we as humanity win.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by threeseed on Friday January 16, 2015 @04:56PM (#8901987)
Tesla didn't start the electric car resurgence nor is it likely to take us to Mars.

The way I see it Elon is rising up to those around him not the other way around.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by dredmorbius on Friday January 16, 2015 @05:26PM (#8902135)
Elon is rising up to those around him

Sometimes -- and I'd argue often -- leadership consists more of both 1) getting out of the way of and 2) enabling those who Want To Get Shit Done.

I find the fanboiism somewhat tedious (I don't find the top comment of this thread all that insightful), but I do admire Musk for seeming to hit a number of remarkable goals. That said, I find Tesla and Solar City more impressive/promising than SpaceX (technical challenges and accomplishments notwithstanding) or the Hyperloop (ultimately an idea that's been rightfully junked in the past).

Given the history of US industry of doing just the opposite -- stalling and preventing needed innovation -- if I had to pick a single attribute of his that I find most encouraging it's his leadership in that regard.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by tsotha on Friday January 16, 2015 @06:05PM (#8902367)
He may not ever get to Mars, but he's doing something far more important, which is to drastically reduce the cost of putting things into LEO. If he can get it low enough a whole list of things pencil out that weren't economically feasible in the past, like space-based solar power generation.

Without SpaceX it's likely the business would have muddled along without putting any effort into reducing costs for decades.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by avmich on Friday January 16, 2015 @07:56PM (#8902832)
Yes. The biggest achievement of SpaceX so far was economical and organizational. Musk cleverly employs latest - which are considered common sense in other industries - approaches to the industry known for its conservatism. That gives them - eventually - proverbial kick in the sensitive parts, making them care more.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by Redoubts on Friday January 16, 2015 @03:48PM (#8901600)
Have you seen it, though? It's an appropriate response for most.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by skywhopper on Friday January 16, 2015 @09:49PM (#8903171)
To be fair, the BMW electric car is the ugliest car BMW has ever made. It looks like they accidentally welded two different models together in the middle. They deserve to be made fun of for that disaster.
Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by JanezStupar on Friday January 16, 2015 @04:49PM (#8901956)
Its not his fault that everybody else makes electric cars that suck in comparison.

There will be a time of reckoning for Elon, but this is not it.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by threeseed on Friday January 16, 2015 @05:01PM (#8902014)
That's just your opinion.

By and large the BMW i3/i8 has received wide praise amongst motoring reviewers and has seen strong sales.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by JanezStupar on Friday January 16, 2015 @05:52PM (#8902285)
BMW puts food on their plates.

The sales of BMW's EV's are strong because of the brand, not because they are excellent electric cars.

Don't get me wrong, it is awesome that more players are entering the market. But for a little while longer, Elon can keep sniggering in his corner.

Re:SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time” by tsotha on Friday January 16, 2015 @05:56PM (#8902311)
Didn't he make that comment about the engines before the launch failure?