Tesla Slashes Prices

[All Hat No Cattle]

Not a good day for the Techno King. Looks like his rocket had an
"unscheduled disassembly".

Must have had an OTA update that did not work, LOL.

You would think that Musk would have better Quality Control on a spaceship than on a Tesla. Oh well.

Sponsored

 

[moparguy]

Lol, if you talk common sense here, and give Tesla the credit you immediately get the right-wing label attached to you, forums are for debate, either debate people or don't comment but don't attempt to silence others because they do not agree with you.

 

[Mach1E]

Doesn't this logic make all automotive manufacturers scumbags that use the ZEV credits to subsidize their gas guzzler trucks and SUV's? Seems Ford and GM fit that description.

Sure, but scumbags for different reasons and with drastically different results. None of the others ended up with a 150 billion net worth using mostly government money to get there.

 

[Mach1E]

Not a good day for the Techno King. Looks like his rocket had an
"unscheduled disassembly".

Must have had an OTA update that did not work, LOL.

You would think that Musk would have better Quality Control on a spaceship than on a Tesla. Oh well.

Wow, the end of the video mimics what we are seeing here.

It explodes and all the Elon Musk fans are still somehow “cheering success.” ?‍

 

[Guy]

Yes, saw that and just couldn’t understand why they were cheering! ?‍?

 

[Mach1E]

Yes, saw that and just couldn’t understand why they were cheering! ?‍?

Narcissism is contagious maybe? No such thing as failure?

Definitely a gap between what they believe and reality.

Maybe we just need to put on our Tesla fanboy lenses to understand.

Rocket test explodes = bad.

Put on your Tesla Fanboy lenses and the test was 95% successful!

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Yes, saw that and just couldn’t understand why they were cheering! ?‍?

because spaceX testing philosophy is different from NASA. SpaceX believes in frequent testing and learning from failure. they believe that they can advance quicker from failure than not testing until everything is perfect. Their goals for this launch was to clear the tower. Anything more than that is gravy.

they expect it to fail at some point. They got lots of useful data from the launch and will update their rocket and launch again very soon. If it was NASA they may not launch again in a couple of years.

if you don’t believe me, look at how many failed launches and landings they had with their other rockets Before they became successful. It’s par for the course at SpaceX.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Narcissism is contagious maybe? No such thing as failure?

Definitely a gap between what they believe and reality.

Maybe we just need to put on our Tesla fanboy lenses to understand.

Rocket test explodes = bad.

Put on your Tesla Fanboy lenses and the test was 95% successful!

depends what your goals are.

do you want to get there in 20 years but have no failure during testing?

or get there in 5 years but have failures along the way.

different philosophy. SpaceX believes in the latter. NASA believes in the former.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Space is hard.

Like, really, really hard.

The ego at the top of SpaceX is unfortunate because they push too hard to make it seem easy and it's not. I wish there was a better culture there (I know several people who used to work there).

I have zero love for all things Musk. But that ego doesn't really have anything to do with the rocket itself, and I will say that I feel good and I feel bad for the SpaceX engineers today. They did a great job on launching the first stage.

The separation issue the rocket experienced is unfortunate, though not surprising.

I'll say it again: Space is really, really hard.

Unfortunately, the last time an important SpaceX rocket blew up, the leader of the team was fired. I hope that doesn't happen this time, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does. Having a successful test in which the team learns something important should never be a fireable offense.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

because spaceX testing philosophy is different from NASA. SpaceX believes in frequent testing and learning from failure. they believe that they can advance quicker from failure than not testing until everything is perfect. Their goals for this launch was to clear the tower. Anything more than that is gravy.

they expect it to fail at some point. They got lots of useful data from the launch and will update their rocket and launch again very soon. If it was NASA they may not launch again in a couple of years.

if you don’t believe me, look at how many failed launches and landings they had with their other rockets Before they became successful. It’s par for the course at SpaceX.

This is inaccurate description of the philosophy at NASA. This is the philosophy at Congress, which controls NASA's budget, but it's not the philosophy at NASA.

 

[theduke]

because spaceX testing philosophy is different from NASA. SpaceX believes in frequent testing and learning from failure. they believe that they can advance quicker from failure than not testing until everything is perfect. Their goals for this launch was to clear the tower. Anything more than that is gravy.

they expect it to fail at some point. They got lots of useful data from the launch and will update their rocket and launch again very soon. If it was NASA they may not launch again in a couple of years.

if you don’t believe me, look at how many failed launches and landings they had with their other rockets Before they became successful. It’s par for the course at SpaceX.

Amazing how the haters spin it. It was announced weeks ago by SpaceX that if the rocket cleared the pad, they would consider it a success. It is literally version 0.1 of a rocket with twice the thrust of the Saturn V.

As you correctly point out, SpaceX approaches things like rockets with an "iterative" mindset. Build it, push it till it breaks, evaluate the weak points, rinse and repeat.

They would have not gotten to landable rockets in under 20 years with the traditional approach of trying to "get it all right in the first go". And it worked, everyone now is chasing them. No one else in the world has an orbital-class rocket that can be reused. (Blue Origin is not orbital, before anyone goes there).

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Amazing how the haters spin it. It was announced weeks ago by SpaceX that if the rocket cleared the pad, they would consider it a success. It is literally version 0.1 of a rocket with twice the thrust of the Saturn V.

As you correctly point out, SpaceX approaches things like rockets with an "iterative" mindset. Build it, push it till it breaks, evaluate the weak points, rinse and repeat.

They would have not gotten to landable rockets in under 20 years with the traditional approach of trying to "get it all right in the first go". And it worked, everyone now is chasing them. No one else in the world has an orbital-class rocket that can be reused. (Blue Origin is not orbital, before anyone goes there).

NASA went from ~0 to landing on the Moon in less than a decade. SpaceX is not the disruption its ego likes to pretend.

Reusable rockets were in use by the Space Shuttle. Reusable isn't all that innovative. About the most innovative thing I've seen from SpaceX is the relatively soft-landing capability of those reusable rockets, but they're still standing on the shoulders of the giants at NASA and ULA.

Again, the engineers at SpaceX are doing fantastic work. The ego at the top is in their way. They would be doing much, much better if they had a sensible leader who built a healthy culture.

 

[theduke]

NASA went from ~0 to landing on the Moon in less than a decade. SpaceX is not the disruption its ego likes to pretend.

Reusable rockets were in use by the Space Shuttle. Reusable isn't all that innovative. About the most innovative thing I've seen from SpaceX is the relatively soft-landing capability of those reusable rockets, but they're still standing on the shoulders of the giants at NASA and ULA.

Again, the engineers at SpaceX are doing fantastic work. The ego at the top is in their way. They would be doing much, much better if they had a sensible leader who built a healthy culture.

Landable, reusable, that is innovative. Space Shuttle just dumped the SRBs into the ocean, and then had to spend months refurbing them. They were completely disassembly for the refurbs. SpaceX can turn one around in a week.


I have a few contacts at SpaceX. I don't get the mumblings from them that you are reporting, but I'm sure there are different sub-cultures of people there.

 

[Scooby24]

Not a good day for the Techno King. Looks like his rocket had an
"unscheduled disassembly".

Must have had an OTA update that did not work, LOL.

You would think that Musk would have better Quality Control on a spaceship than on a Tesla. Oh well.

low blow my man.

Try, fail, learn, try again, rinse and repeat until you get it right. This is just a part of the process.

Not an Elon fan..but this isn't really a fair take.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

low blow my man.

Try, fail, learn, try again, rinse and repeat until you get it right. This is just a part of the process.

Not an Elon fan..but this isn't really a fair take.

I mean, the ego at the top basically begs for low blows since he spins everything all the time to be a success no matter what... According to that ego, this ship was supposed to have landed on Mars by 2016 (then 2018, then...). Even though I feel badly for the engineers, I have zero compunction about mocking the CEO.

Sponsored