Hacker News Reader

Comment by mulmen | Hacker News Reader

Looks like the landing was perfectly centered on the barge this time as well. Does anyone know when they plan on reusing one of these recovered first stages?

View on HN

Good question - Elon tweeted this https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/728459808270000128 - sounds like they could end up with a backlog ;)

They said at the beginning of the live stream that they plan to do a test fire on the first recovered first stage "sometime soon".

Did they say anything more specific than that? They have already done a static fire of the first one they recovered.

The first recovered stage, F9-021, has already been static fired and will likely end up as a monument outside of SpaceX HQ as they've filed an FAA request to do so.

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action...

The second recovered rocket, F9-023, will be relaunched. It has already been static fired with no announced problems. Elon said it'd be a few months before a customer was announced, but the general feeling is that it will be an SES satellite as SES has already publicly expressed interest.

Amusing... I was wondering why they needed to get FAA permission to park the rocket, but the application says it'll be 160 feet tall. So they're standing it up, as opposed to the NASA methodology of positioning their monuments horizontally.

Normally a 160 foot tall object wouldn't need FAA permission, but SpaceX is located right next to Hawthorne Municipal Airport.

And fairly close to LAX too. Another stop for star tour buses!

There is no open space to park a 160ft long object horizontally anywhere near spacex HQ.

Not sure why your comment was downvoted but this is true, there really isn't much open space around the SpaceX property.

I wish we had a campus like Raytheon or Northrop have in El Segundo/Redondo Beach. The 60's & 70's were certainly the high points in aerospace campus architecture here in SoCal.

Do you work for SpaceX? You have it in your username and comment like you're part of the company, but also spend your time discussing the merits of the NRA. Do you represent SpaceX or are you just super enthusiastic about them? It's not easy to tell.

I do work for SpaceX although I'm not in engineering or software dev. I work in the technician/skilled labor side of the house.

I don't think I've posted anything specifically discussing the merits of the NRA, although I have posted on the subject of gun control and self defense. In any case I'm not sure why discussing that topic and working at SpaceX would be mutually exclusive.

Obviously it should be said that I don't represent SpaceX and the views I express here are my own and not the company's.

That's the response I was hoping for. My only critique then is please register a personal account. You can't have a name like SpaceX_Tech and not expect us to take everything you say as something that they would endorse. I'd be appalled if a programmer I employed created an account under my company name, for use of expressing every personal opinion under the sun. I hope you understand the position I'm coming from and that others may be thinking the same thing when reading your comments.

Ps: keep up the good work

To be honest, I hadn't considered the ramifications of using the company name as part of my username. You make a good point about the potential of being mistaken for representing the company in some official capacity and I will heed your advice and register under a different username.

I'm curious about the etiquette in regards to identifying myself as a SpaceX employee though. I originally joined to relay some of my personal experiences with the company, is it generally a bad idea to identify myself as an employee, or is the bigger issue in your opinion the use of the company name within my username?

Also, if I do identify myself as an employee, do you think it would be wise to maintain two separate accounts, one exclusively for discussing SpaceX/space related matters and another one for other possibly more controversial topics or is it no longer an issue as long as I have a more generic username?

I certainly understand your position and appreciate the advice.

I wouldn't think twice if you had in your profile something like "I work for SpaceX." Good to know, but not the source of your opinions. Your account is young enough that you can gain all that back without the boss in your name. This isn't my first account.

Plus, and I can't speak for everyone, but as a former would-be astronaut, this kind of stuff is tops to me. Info from insiders is always welcome. Consider starting a blog.

Thanks for taking my opinions into account.

Thanks again for the advice, I certainly value your point of view. This is the last time I'll post from this account, I'll go ahead and start a new one at some point.

I appreciate your sentiment in my starting a blog but I don't think I'd have the time to meaningfully contribute to it and I don't feel comfortable enough in my writing ability to do the kind of long form writing I feel such a topic deserves.

There are certainly many would-be astronauts here as well. Thanks for the kind words in support of the work we're doing.

Sick. Hope I helped cuz I'm down for the cause

I'd also advise you to remember that SpaceX isn't taking kindly to employees passing out internal information.

Stick with your name. You earned it.

Based on that FAA application it looks like someone will be losing their prime parking spot.

In all seriousness though, I'm not sure how I feel about this monument. It's going to be really crammed next to the main building and I don't think it will have a very strong visual presence with a giant grey wall directly in the background. There isn't really a good vantage point for viewing either. I suppose it will look ok from the opposite corner of Crenshaw.

You probably know best here, but I'm seeing a first stage height of 135 ft. Perhaps they're thinking of placing it on the roof of the main building? Though I do totally agree that it would look better elsewhere, like over by one of the onramps to the 105. Just a shame that the Western Museum of Flight moved, a nice little rocket garden in that museum would have been a nice touch.

Do customers get a discount for launching on a used rocket?

The first one definitely will (unless negotiations break down and they decide to launch without a customer, but that seems unlikely). Eventually when it becomes routine maybe not.

When it becomes routeine all clients get a discount as price per launch goes down.

Or not, because the next best alternative is much more expensive than SpaceX's current pricing.

We're dealing with a corporation -- I'm not sure we can count of them to "pass on the savings".

Aren't they passing on the savings by bidding lower prices than their competitors?

The thing is they're already able to bid lower than all their competitors.

Only marginally - if none of their competitors can reuse a rocket then they only need to undercut the cost of a non-reusable rocket. The reward for innovation is that you get a temporary monopoly on that innovation and so can extract something very like a monopoly rent.

The demand seems to be quite inelastic at the current price levels, but the comsat industry has been gearing up for reusability. It is possible that there will be some price elasticity at radically lower prices, and the increased demand makes up for the lower unit margin. SpaceX need to kickstart a whole new trans-lunar economy for the Mars colonisation project to work, so it is within their interest to stimulate long-term demand.

If Musk wanted to maximize his risk-adjusted profit, SpaceX would never have started. Remember, he financed the cashflow out of his own pocket, and went from a 100-millionaire to not being able to afford rent during the process. He himself said SpaceX had less than even chance of success, and he is known to be both very meticulous in preparation, and an incurable optimist.

Its more favorable for SpaceX to lower prices as much as possible to crush incumbents (ULA). Extracting maximum profits just gives time for other competitors to catch up.

That may be favourable in the short term but a monopoly position stagnates R&D due to lack of need. Plus Elon Musk doesn't strike me as the type to avoid innovating.

We're dealing with a group of people with strong ideas about space. They probably won't pass on much of the savings, but for a different reason - they need the budget for Mars project. That's the whole purpose this company exists in the first place.

If they're smart (and they are) they'll figure out ways to reduce the price of launch in the right way to maximize an increase in their margins. They could more than double the number of customers using secondary space in the "trunk" and cube-sats. The secondary customers will pay far less than the primary ones, but there will be many more of them.

If they're smart, they're figuring out ways they can own a big part of the infrastructure for an emerging market.

"This ones been up and back, it works. This one hasn't flow yet but we think it's good"

The rumor mill says that they're asking about $40m (the usual cost is $62m). SES are said to be interested, for $30m. Discussions are ongoing.

Assuming SpaceX gets to the point where they are re-flying stages a dozen or more times, I might expect to see a discount on a "new" rocket, as opposed to a "tried and true" rocket.

Would you rather be on the first flight an aircraft makes after leaving the factory, or the tenth?

I would make the decision based on the data available at the time.

It could easily be the case that the initial launches have the lowest failure rate.

023 (Fnord) has been fired? I must have missed that. Got a link?

A few months ago Elon said they were at least initially looking at June or July for a re-fly.

At the presser following the first barge recovery Musk said they would probably re-launch it in June. It sounds like they aren't planning to do much with it beyond test firing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com