Yes I understand that perfectly.

Heltok posts nutty promotional vid of something that won't happen for 15 years, if ever, and whose economics and passenger comfort metrics stink (even the Concorde couldn't survive despite its wonderful advantages), but it gets the nerd juices and "wow, that's so cool, Musk is GOD" juices flowing for people predisposed to cults.

I post hilarious counterpoint about the safety of rockets to highlight how far we have to go before we're whizzing around the world on rockets as an alternative to planes.

I mean, if you look at rocket economics and fuel use, it's cheaper and just as fast (and available right now if you wanted to commercialize it) to put people in Mach 3 fighter jets like a more modern version of the SR-71 blackbird, which is a mere $85,000/hour and can be gotten down to maybe $30,000/hour. The video is just pure horse**** designed to appeal to the cuckiest of minds.

Showing failures of an unmanned component of the flight -- and the landing of the rocket booster will always be unmanned and I suspect there will always be at least occasional failures -- doesn't say anything about the safety of rockets.

hahaha you're so triggered by Musk that you go bananas over a speculative video that is at best a minuscule portion of SpaceX's future business model. Obviously it's a PR video. Obviously it doesn't impact SpaceX's business plans in the near or medium term, and probably ever.

Did you even watch the video? 1:20 show a rocket landing. You can't get their 30 minute claim without a rocket all the way including landing. This is SpaceX's claim, not mine.
Thank you for agreeing that SpaceX are spinning pure undaulterated bull**** that has zero chance of happening..

A company puts out an optimistic long term PR video? HOLY ****, UNPRECEDENTED.

It's not optimistic, it's pure bull**** and they have to know it's bull****.

It's not even the company I have a problem with. Good on them. It's heltok posting it here as if it's something other than pure bull**** made for morons. Nothing to do with Tesla, nothing to do with reality, nothing to do with investing, he's just nuts deep in Musk-love and has it all tied together in one grand religion in his head. It's weird.

Nice attempt to walk it back. Everyone saw you get butthurt when I posted the failures video as a counterpoint, you rapidly responded with this:
Musk fanboys, coming out of the woodwork to defend their hero against any criticism, and the attention span of a fly.

If that's the level of the thread that heltok is bringing it down to (nutty company PR not even related to Tesla), I'm going to start posting nutty conspiracy theory videos that SpaceX is fake. They're about as real or possible as heltok's video.



You're welcome.

Now can we get this thread back on course?

Yes, please.

Never change TS

Did you listen to the talk? I liked it.

He said that 16 of the latest 16 landings have been successful, a decent improvement over the launches in the video you posted. Also these were done with a single engine rocket, with multiple engines the risk of catastrophic failure should be lower. That being said, I would not feel comfortable flying a rocket for at least a few more years. He thinks they can do it in 5 years. I sure look forward to watching SpaceX land ships on Mars even if it is in 10 instead of 5 years.

Imo pretty huge if true. Not sure what the exact consequences of this will be, but I like imagining a future with VTOL, Hyperloop, BFR city to city and self-driving electrical RVs.

What do you think is going to be the differentiator between cars when high performance battery packs with 400 mile range cost $5K? And then $2.5K? Because that's what the future is, and beyond.

Batteries and electric drives are very very different to IC engines. Imagine the highest end Ferrari engine was the lowest end commodity for use in a car. What would the differentiator be then? It would be all the other components of a car, which the majors have Tesla crushed in on quality per cost.

The simple fact is that you don't need/can't have faster than 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, and the lowest end will have this battery and electric motor capability. Range needs drops right off past a full day's drive, and often well before. This is a world apart from ICE, where very expensive high end engineering is needed to get quality performance.

What odds would give the bolded statement of being true?
I would love this future too. It's a wonderful vision. Charlatans sell wonderful visions - it's how they operate.

If that concept goes from vision to reality in 15 yrs I'd consider that a success. Wouldn't you?

For future reference, if people are going to post visionary videos in this thread what time frame should they be limited to? Only things that will happen in 5yrs, 2 yrs, 12 mos.?

So you're saying in the future there won't ever be any cars capable of 0-60 in less than 2.5 seconds?

Do you ever watch car commercials? Cars are loaded with bs performance features no one actually needs. That doesn't mean they're not constantly being refined and improved to sell cars to people who have no need for those features.

All batteries won't be the same. They'll make them different shapes and sizes, make them fit into cars in different locations to improve handling, braking or acceleration. Somebody will come out with a battery that moves within the car to increase traction, braking, and cornering. Some batteries will be optimized for longevity while others will be optimized for max acceleration and others still will be optimized for things we haven't yet considered.

There will be cars w/1 motor, cars w/ 2 motors, cars w 4 motors, carbon fiber motor housings, ceramic doohickies, titanium cables, flux capacitors.

I guess Ferrari, Lamborghini and Lotus will be put out of business within 5 yrs when every car has the same motor and battery since their interiors are **** compared to most BMW's?

Will Americans also give up their obsession with racing since every car will be able to go 0-60 in 2.5 seconds and can't go faster?

It is a very unspecified statement, hard to put probabilities to those and a lot of room for small people to misinterpret you to gain internet points. Also there is no specified timeframe. Please in the future clarify requests better. But I am a generous poster so here you go:

Elon was saying 2 rockets in 2022, so let's say he thinks commercial terrestrial flights 5 years later so say 2027 and give 3 extra years for him being overly optimistic and discuss that.

Say NY->Tokyo $600 according to google flights, let's say $1000 with some increased taxes on fuel by then. And he said about, lets say that it ±50%

So I would guesstimate p(2030 BFR NY-Tokyo <1500[2017$]) ≈ 0.2

Another recent Elon talk more relevant for TSLA:

I gotta say, TS clowning on musk fanboys is now essential reading for me every morning. Keep it up gentleman!

Ah yes posting a video of a flat earther.

Acceleration does not equal topspeed. An electric car today cannot go from 100 to 200 km/h as fast as an ICE. So there is a lot of ****ing potential.

It shows a lack of understanding of cars and what actually happens in the industry. I am no expert either but the mere fact that you think acceleration from 0 to 100km/h is the most important metric is showing.

Problem with Toothsayer is that he personally seems to hate Musk. Maybe Musk cut him off in traffic or he doesn't like his face? He suffers from pretty major confirmation bias, only focussing on data points that make Musk's companies look bad. Creating strawmen left and right. Then when his illogical argument gets refuted he just ignores it and moves on to the next strawman or weak point. That is how he concludes SpaceX is a fraud based on some wishy washy promotional video. Despite tons of companies making these bull **** video's.

I noticed that people who use the word cuck unironically cannot really see nuance. Everything is black and white.

ahahahahahahha you're pushing a video done by a Sandy Hook truther and flat earther. Incredible.

For the slow:

Uh yeah so you think a flat earth video is the same as a suborbital passenger rocket? Bro one is perfectly feasible and the other is literal nonsense.

Amazing.