DBDude t1_jdimo3b wrote

Me in 2010: "Boeing and SpaceX both unveiled their capsules. Good luck SpaceX, Boeing's going to nail crewed flight with all their experience."

Then 2014 hits, SpaceX announces Dragon 2 for crew. Boeing, where are you? Still working on it I hope.

Then 2019 SpaceX successfully tests a Crew Dragon trip to the ISS, while Boeing fails a test flight. WTF is going on?

Then 2020 SpaceX delivers crew to the ISS, and we still have no clue when Starliner will fly.

How the great have fallen.


DBDude t1_jctp25a wrote

What we know of it so far looks about like an M1. It’s unlikely it will match an M2, and it will show up on the market after the M3 (not just a few months). Don’t they know you’re supposed to lead a target? They aimed at two years behind.

Their big problem will be heat. Apple’s M are throttled by heat in small devices, and so will theirs. If you see a big score, find out what kind of device it was on. Don’t compare a desktop Q chip with an Apple laptop or tablet.


DBDude t1_jadsn35 wrote

Looks like Starlink revenue may slightly surpass launch revenue, but that Starlink program also has a massive cost, as it'll take up about twice as many launches as SpaceX is getting paid for, plus the cost of the satellites.


DBDude t1_jads473 wrote

A rocket motor needs liquid propellant at best, so no. So like a jet engine first stage? A Falcon 9 is already 40 miles up in less than two minutes. Your jet first stage would maybe be able to get the rocket to 40,000 feet before rockets have to take over, so maybe some tens of seconds of flight. And then we have size/weight issues. Our most powerful jet engine is the GE9X at 110,000 lbs thrust. You'd need several of these to replace rockets, and they're huge and heavy.

The best idea we have so far is to haul a rocket up high on a jet airplane and then launch it, but that only works for smaller rockets.