• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

War in Israel

Status
Not open for further replies.

Random8145

Registered User
Contributor
Elon is smarter in an engineering sense, but that's it IMO. From a business sense, he is not very smart and he is incredibly thin-skinned and vindictive. He also had better watch it. The majority of his massive net worth is tied to the valuation of Tesla, but the company is likely very overvalued. It is worth more than the other big automakers combined I believe, yet sells only a small fraction of the cars. The new "Cyber Truck" I find absurd and a real risk to the company. If he isn't careful, then if/when the market eventually corrects, he'll go back down to being worth a measly few billion.
 

Hotdogs

I don’t care if I hurt your feelings
pilot
My DoD organization is a part of the Starship test plan. Fun fact, SpaceX wanted to splash Starship on our range at PMRF. That was the original plan. We looked at their range safety plan and rejected it. DoD and NASA has a set of range safety standards that ensure that we don't hazard aircraft or surface vessels.

FWIW, In my experience, PMRF was one of the biggest pain in the asses to conduct any flight or live fire event (Especially compared to the lower 48). Got it, it’s a test range, but frankly some DoD rules are fucking stupid. Only inherently made worse by local civilians who try to find the fastest way to “No” and should’ve been canned a long time ago. I’ll chalk that up to island culture.

I don’t think PMRF is a good sample to judge the safety culture of SpaceX, especially considering NASA and DoD think they’re safe enough to launch our astronauts into space. Regardless, Elon is definitely a loose cannon as a CEO and entrepreneur.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
FWIW, In my experience, PMRF was one of the biggest pain in the asses to conduct any flight or live fire event (Especially compared to the lower 48). Got it, it’s a test range, but frankly some DoD rules are fucking stupid. Only inherently made worse by local civilians who try to find the fastest way to “No” and should’ve been canned a long time ago. I’ll chalk that up to island culture.

I don’t think PMRF is a good sample to judge the safety culture of SpaceX, especially considering NASA and DoD think they’re safe enough to launch our astronauts into space. Regardless, Elon is definitely a loose cannon as a CEO and entrepreneur.
The safety standards ensure we don’t kill someone, which the end user doesn’t really care about in the grand scheme, because it’s not their responsibility. NASA uses the exact same standards that we do. It’s not so much about the safety of the vehicle, as it is planning for what happens if something goes wrong, and where the debris can go if a vehicle explodes 800K feet up in the air.
 

Average Monke

A primate with internet access
Because he controls Starlink, which is of strategic importance to Ukraine and Hamas, what he says matters.
Are you arguing his shitposts and Starlink are fundamentally interconnected? If so, I am not following that logic.
 

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Musk is at least largely responsible for PayPal, Tesla and the current EV boom, Neuralink, Space-X, reusable rockets, StarLink, and space tourism. That's off the top of my head. But yes, he's also made mistakes and has a big mouth, so I'm sure the man is just a lucky idiot.
 

Hotdogs

I don’t care if I hurt your feelings
pilot
The safety standards ensure we don’t kill someone, which the end user doesn’t really care about in the grand scheme, because it’s not their responsibility. NASA uses the exact same standards that we do. It’s not so much about the safety of the vehicle, as it is planning for what happens if something goes wrong, and where the debris can go if a vehicle explodes 800K feet up in the air.

Fair. I guess the issue is with PMRF ranges ability to support SpaceX operations based off of their requirements… not that they’re an inherently unsafe organization then, correct?
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Fair. I guess the issue is with PMRF ranges ability to support SpaceX operations based off of their requirements… not that they’re an inherently unsafe organization then, correct?
No, they're inherently unsafe. A good example: SpaceX's approach to range clearance is issuing a NOTAM and NOTMAR, hoping that everyone will get out of the way. That never works. We always have to chase merchant vessels out of our hazard areas - every single time. This takes time and money that SpaceX wasn't interested in investing. On that basis, we declined their request to operate here.
 

JTS11

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
No, they're inherently unsafe. A good example: SpaceX's approach to range clearance is issuing a NOTAM and NOTMAR, hoping that everyone will get out of the way. That never works. We always have to chase merchant vessels out of our hazard areas - every single time. This takes time and money that SpaceX wasn't interested in investing. On that basis, we declined their request to operate here.
Sounds like a similar attitude towards public safety with Teslas and their autonomous driving capabilities.

 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Sounds like a similar attitude towards public safety with Teslas and their autonomous driving capabilities.

Also worth noting that they still plan on crashing Starship into the Pacific Ocean with zero meaningful range clearance efforts. I hope they don't hurt someone in the process.
 

FLGUY

“Technique only”
pilot
Contributor
Also worth noting that they still plan on crashing Starship into the Pacific Ocean with zero meaningful range clearance efforts. I hope they don't hurt someone in the process.
What do the other entities that deal in this “industry” like NASA typically do in the same situation? Pay for the extra range clearing efforts that you mentioned?
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
What do the other entities that deal in this “industry” like NASA typically do in the same situation? Pay for the extra range clearing efforts that you mentioned?
Yep. Depending on the volume of seaspace, we bring in 4-6 "pouncer" aircraft - usually P-3/P-8/C-130 - a few days before the test flight. NASA's problem for a space launch is a little less complicated than ours is for a BMD test because they aren't crashing multiple large missiles into each other 150 KM above the earth, but NASA has to account for what the instantaneous debris field looks like at any point along their vehicle's trajectory in case it goes off-nominal and they have to terminate.
 

Hotdogs

I don’t care if I hurt your feelings
pilot
No, they're inherently unsafe. A good example: SpaceX's approach to range clearance is issuing a NOTAM and NOTMAR, hoping that everyone will get out of the way. That never works. We always have to chase merchant vessels out of our hazard areas - every single time. This takes time and money that SpaceX wasn't interested in investing. On that basis, we declined their request to operate here.

Also worth noting that they still plan on crashing Starship into the Pacific Ocean with zero meaningful range clearance efforts. I hope they don't hurt someone in the process.

…so idiots not following well established procedures for safety are SpaceX’s fault? Makes total sense… or better yet, block off the entire airspace for a recovery operation. They made a cost-informed decision to operate at a range or facility safely. Sounds like PMRF couldn’t provide the necessary requirements for their operations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top