Comment on [deleted]

• Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Also, most of their starlink launches are done when someone else is paying for a launch too. Rarely do they have a launch that doesn’t have mass or volume left over, and they just shove starlink sats into that as a secondary payload.

  Elon is dumb as fuck with a lot of decisions, but Gwen shotwell knows what the fuck she’s doing.

  source

  • ThePrivacyPolicy@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This is incorrect unless you’re providing a source. I follow several space need sites and they do dedicated launches. Here’s an article even showing the payload setup - which fills the cargo bay. spaceflightnow.com/…/next-spacex-launch-to-deploy…

    source
• ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  When they worked out those details they also thought they would have 20,000,000 subscribers before now and not just 2,000,000

  source

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    They are nevertheless already profitable, and they haven't even begun using Starship to launch satellites yet.

    source

    • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      All that sweet gov’t funding doesn’t hurt the bottom line.

      source

      • zoe@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Not a musk simp, but Musk corps are actually fullfilling contracts and dont have much cost overruns ( unlike other inefficient corps like Blue Origin, Lockhead Martin, and car manufacturers like Chevy and Ford that feed on gov grants and tax incentives )

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • FaceDeer@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        There are government users among their customers, yes. Customers are customers. Is this supposed to be a negative?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • zoe@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      i thought why didn’t they just use Falcon Heavy (64 of payload to LEO) but it seems to be too risky and costly (99million$ per launch?, cost in house probably (factual number) 60 million? ). On the other hand, a Falcon 9 (22 tons to LEO, would cost 35 million $ in house (factual) ), but launching and spreading the payload among 3 separate F9’s is less risky and costly than launching aboard the FH, i wonder how much Starship would save on launches

      source

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        They're also limited by the volume of space within the fairing, which is the same for a Falcon 9 and a Falcon 9 Heavy. They already fill the fairing with Starlinks for the regular Falcon 9, so they'd need to design a new fairing to make use of the extra weight capacity of the Heavy.

        The long-term plan for Starship is for a launch to cost on the order of $1 million, as opposed to the current $67 million for a Falcon 9. Starship's payload to LEO will be about 150 tons, compared to Falcon 9's 23 tons. So it's going to be a lot cheaper. Though they'll be launching the somewhat larger Starlink V2 satellites, so the numbers aren't straightforwardly scaled.

        source

        • -> View More Comments