Archive for the ‘Spacex’ Category

‘Much more difficult to get into SpaceX, Tesla than Harvard,’ says Elon Musk – Business Today

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has claimed that the acceptance rate for jobs at his auto manufacturing company Tesla and his space exploration company SpaceX is lower than that of the world's most prestigious universities, such as Harvard.

While speaking on a Twitter space on Tuesday, Musk highlighted that the overwhelming demand for working at his companies has made the competition for positions particularly fierce. According to Musk, around 3.6 million people have applied for roles at Tesla. However, the number of available positions is estimated to be between 20,000 to 30,000, making the acceptance rate startlingly low.

The tech mogul compared this to the acceptance rate of Harvard University, known for its stringent admission criteria, asserting that Tesla and SpaceX are even harder to get into. With Harvard's acceptance rate hovering around 4 per cent, the comparison underscores the intense competition for roles within Musk's innovative enterprises.

"Around 3.6 million people have applied for a job at Tesla. And I mean, we would only add, like, say, 20,000 or 30,000 jobs. So the acceptance rate for Tesla is much lower, he said.

It is much more difficult to get into Tesla or SpaceX than Harvard. The acceptance rate is even lower. The acceptance rate is lower than the most demanding universities in the world. It's insane," said Musk.

Musk's recent decisions at Twitter were also discussed on the space. After acquiring the social media giant, Musk made widespread job cuts, reducing the workforce from 7800 to just 1500.

He explained that the urgency of the situation led to a necessity for swift action, which might have resulted in some employees being let go without comprehensive evaluations of their roles or contributions.

Musk stated, "Sometimes it gets a little late. Desperate times call for desperate measures. So there's no question that some of the people who were let go probably shouldn't have been let go because we simply did not have the time to figure out we had to make widespread cuts to get the run rate under control."

The tech tycoon clarified that the staff reduction was not a reflection on the employees' abilities or performance, but a requirement to quickly decrease both headcount and non-personnel expenses. Despite these measures, Musk disclosed that Twitter is still not breaking even, but they are close.

He added, "This is not to say that, hey, everyone who is let go from Twitter is, like, somehow terrible or something. It's just we have to, with very little information, get the headcount expenses and the non-personnel expenses down to where we're at least break even. And we're not quite at break-even yet, but we're close, and we need to do it fast."

Also Read:Does ONDC offer food cheaper than Zomato, Swiggy? Here's what we know

Also Read:Prices set to rise on ONDC as platform reduces incentives to seller-side apps

Read this article:

'Much more difficult to get into SpaceX, Tesla than Harvard,' says Elon Musk - Business Today

SpaceX Starship explosion spread particulate matter for miles – CNBC

SpaceX's next-generation Starship spacecraft atop its powerful Super Heavy rocket self-destructs after its launch from the company's Boca Chica launchpad on a brief uncrewed test flight near Brownsville, Texas, U.S. April 20, 2023 in a still image from video.

Spacex | Reuters

SpaceX launched the largest rocket ever built for the first time on Thursday from its Boca Chica, Texas, spaceport. The Starship spacecraft, designed to fly people on a Mars mission someday, lifted off the launch pad then blew up in mid-flight, with no crew on board.

Now, residents and researchers are scrambling to assess the impact of the explosion on local communities, their health, habitat and wildlife including endangered species. Of primary concern is the large amount of sand- and ash-like particulate matter and heavier debris kicked up by the launch. The particulate emissions spread far beyond the expected debris field.

As a result of the explosion, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grounded the company's Starship Super Heavy launch program pending results of a "mishap investigation," part of standard practice, according to an email from the agency sent to CNBC after the launch. No injuries or public property damage had yet been reported to the agency as of Friday.

SpaceX did not immediately return a request for comment.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, speaking publicly on Twitter Spaces on April 16 ahead of the test flight, acknowledged that a vehicle with 33 engines is akin to "a box of grenades," and that the Starship vehicle was not likely to reach orbit but was likely to explode.

However, Musk and SpaceX did not accurately predict that their launchpad would be destroyed, nor that particulate matter would rain down on residents and habitat as far away as Port Isabel, a town about six miles from the launchpad, and South Padre Island, a few miles up the coast from the site.

Images captured during the test flight show that the SpaceX launch pad also exploded, with concrete chunks from it flying in multiple directions leaving behind a giant crater underneath.According to Dave Cortez, the Lone Star chapter director for the Sierra Club, a 501c4 environmental advocacy group, "Concrete shot out into the ocean, and risked hitting the fuel storage tanks which are these silos adjacent to the launch pad."

Jared Margolis, senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, said thatin an environmental assessment which SpaceX completed to obtain a launch license the company told the FAA and other agencies that in the event of an "anomaly" they expected debris would fall within a limited, 700-acre area surrounding the launch site.

That would translate to a one-square-mile debris field, with debris emanating about three-quarters of a mile away from the site, he said, referencing SpaceX environmental site assessment documents that are public record.

In reality, following the test flight and explosion, people in Port Isabel reported broken windows in their businesses, shaking windows at their homes, and dust and particulate matter that coated their homes, schools and land unexpectedly, according to Cortez.

Port Isabel is a mainland town near the SpaceX spaceport, and across from the South Padre Island offshore, which also got a share of particulate matter, according to correspondence between researchers and residents shared with CNBC.

It's not yet known whether the ash- and sand-like particulate matter is dangerous to touch or breathe in and what effect it could have on soil health, Cortez and Margolis both noted.

One industry chronicler who reported locally on the launch, Lavie Ohana, wrote that the launch was also "one of the loudest" she had ever witnessed, "with shockwaves that just felt like getting punched over and over and over."

Margolis said the Center for Biological Diversity is worried about the effects of the noise, particulate and heavier debris on endangered species that make their home in the area, including the piping plover, red knot, jaguarundi, ocelot populations and sea turtles including the Kemp's Ridley, which nests on the beaches of Boca Chica and is one of the most critically endangered sea turtles in the world.

February through June is the nesting season for the Kemp's Ridley.

National Wildlife Refuge lands, which are very near the launch pad, are designated critical habitat for the piping plover, he emphasized.

Cortez added that Sierra Club members have been especially worried about human health impacts and how the aftermath of the explosion may limit people's ability to get outdoors, whether to fish for their dinner, enjoy the beach or take a hike in the many parks and protected wildlife areas close to Starbase.

The impacts of particulate emissions from the SpaceX launch won't be understood until samples are evaluated and the debris field measured comprehensively.

But in general, particulate emissions are regulated under the federal Clean Air Act and Texas state law.

Eric Roesch, an environmental engineer who has been tracking the impact of SpaceX facilities and launches on his blog, ESGHound, said that particulate emissions are associated with pulmonary and respiratory issues, and are considered a high priority pollutant by the EPA. Health impacts depend upon exposure time and quantity, as well as particle size, and contents of the particulate, he added.

Roesch has been warning the public for months that the FAA and SpaceX had not been careful enough in their environmental analysis to comfortably proceed with a launch of this magnitude. He said, "The possibility of a widely dispersed plume of emissions was not disclosed by the FAA or SpaceX, during the initial environmental permitting and approval process."

Margolis and Cortez both noted that roads had been damaged, with gates and cordons closed immediately following the SpaceX Starship test flight. That meant wildlife biologists and other field researchers could not immediately pass through to study the full scale of any damage that occurred in a nearby wildlife refuge area though some were reportedly on location by Saturday April 22.

One concern is that evidence of harm to endangered species could be removed from the site before regulators have an opportunity to assess it, Margolis said.

A newly hatched piping plover chick stands next to one of its parents, Monty or Rose, at Montrose Beach on July 10, 2021.

John J. Kim | Tribune News Service | Getty Images

Elon Musk wrote in a tweet on April 21, 2023, after the test flight: "3 months ago, we started building a massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount. Wasn't ready in time & we wrongly thought, based on static fire data, that Fondag would make it through 1 launch. Looks like we can be ready to launch again in 1 to 2 months."

CNBC asked the FAA what it will take for SpaceX to be authorized to conduct another test flight or launch of the Starship Super Heavy vehicle from Boca Chica, Texas.

The agency said in an email that a return to flight for the Starship Super Heavy will require the FAA to decide that "any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety."

Because they are still gathering information, the FAA and the Texas regional office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were not able to answer questions yet about any environmental impacts of the Thursday launch.SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment.

However, the FAA told CNBC via e-mail that the explosion activated something called an "anomaly response plan," which is part of a 2022 Programmatic Environmental Assessment completed by the company along with state and federal agencies, and that SpaceX has additional "environmental mitigations" they must complete before launching again. The plan "was triggered by debris entering adjacent properties," the FAA noted.

After completing the list of tasks in the plan and mitigations SpaceX will need to ask the FAA to amend their launch license, to gain clearance for another test flight.

The Center for Biological Diversity attorney, Jared Margolis, believes the FAA requirements will be minimal and easy for the company to fulfill, but not ultimately effective in safeguarding local residents' wellbeing and endangered species.

He explained, "We are not against space exploration or this company. But while we are looking to the stars, we should not readily sacrifice communities, habitat and species."

More:

SpaceX Starship explosion spread particulate matter for miles - CNBC

Watch SpaceX’s powerful Falcon Heavy rocket launch on 6th mission April 27 – Space.com

Update for April 26, 11:40 a.m. EDT: SpaceX is now targeting Thursday, April 27, to launch its sixth Falcon Heavy mission carrying satellites for Astranis and ViaSat.

SpaceX's powerful Falcon Heavy rocket will launch for the sixth time ever Thursday (April 27), and you can watch the action live.

The Falcon Heavy is scheduled to lift off from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida at 7:29 p.m. EDT (2329 GMT), carrying two satellites toward distant geostationary orbit.

You can watch the liftoff live here at Space.com, courtesy of SpaceX, or directly via the company (opens in new tab).

Related: SpaceX's 1st Falcon Heavy rocket launched Elon Musk's Tesla into space 5 years ago

The primary payload on today's mission is ViaSat-3 Americas, a 14,000-pound (6,400 kilograms) broadband satellite that will be operated by California-based company Viasat.

The second satellite flying today is Arcturus, a communications craft that will be operated by San Francisco-based Astranis Space Technologies.

"Although it only weighs 300 kg [660 pounds], the mighty communications satellite has the ability to provide data throughput up to 7.5 Gbps for ... Alaska and the surrounding region," EverydayAstronaut.com wrote (opens in new tab) of Arcturus in a description of today's flight.

The Falcon Heavy consists of three strapped-together first stages of SpaceX's workhorse Falcon 9 rocket. The central booster is topped with an upper stage and the payload(s).

Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 with a memorable test flight flight that sent SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk's red Tesla Roadster into orbit around the sun with Starman, a spacesuit-clad mannequin, at the wheel.

The burly rocket has flown four more times since then, most recently in January of this year, when it launched the classified USSF-67 mission for the U.S. Space Force.

The Falcon Heavy's three first-stage boosters are designed to be reusable. However, none of the boosters will be recovered on today's mission, presumably because they won't have enough fuel left over to maneuver themselves safely back to Earth for a vertical touchdown.

For more than five years, the Falcon Heavy was SpaceX's most powerful rocket. But the company's gigantic Starship vehicle took that title with its debut liftoff on April 20, a test flight that reached a maximum altitude of 24 miles (39 kilometers) and ended in a commanded explosion high above the Gulf of Mexico for safety's sake.

Starship's 33 first-stage Raptor engines generate 16.7 million pounds of thrust at liftoff, according to SpaceX (opens in new tab). That's more than three times more than the Falcon Heavy produces, and nearly twice as much as the second-place vehicle, NASA's Space Launch System megarocket.

Editor's note: This story has been corrected to state that Starship produces 16.7 million pounds (not tons) of thrust at liftoff.

Mike Wall is the author of "Out There (opens in new tab)" (Grand Central Publishing, 2018; illustrated by Karl Tate), a book about the search for alien life. Follow him on Twitter@michaeldwall (opens in new tab).Follow us on Twitter@Spacedotcom (opens in new tab)orFacebook (opens in new tab).

Original post:

Watch SpaceX's powerful Falcon Heavy rocket launch on 6th mission April 27 - Space.com

Space Force: Weather iffy for SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch from Kennedy Space Center – Florida Today

SpaceX launches Space Force Falcon Heavy mission from Florida, lands at Cape Canaveral

A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket launches the Space Force's USSF-67 mission from Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Sunday, Jan. 15, 2023. The rocket's side boosters landed at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station while the center core was expended.

SpaceX

Space is important to usand thats why we'reworking to bring you top coverage of theindustry and Florida launches. Journalism like this takes time and resources.Please support it with a subscription here.

---

Update: SpaceX is now targeting no earlier than the evening of Thursday, April 27, for the launch of its three-core Falcon Heavy rocket from Kennedy Space Center. Originally slated to fly Wednesday evening, the company said more time was needed for data reviews. The roughly hour-long window to fly from pad 39A opens at 7:24 p.m. EDT Thursday.

The weather forecast remains roughly the same at 60% "go."

---

The Space Coast's recent spate of rainstorms is expected to continue through the week, potentially bringing iffy weather conditions to Kennedy Space Center ahead of SpaceX's next Falcon Heavy launch.

The three-core rocket, set to fly during an hour-long window that opens at 7:24 p.m. EDT Wednesday, is expected to face 60% "go" weather conditions at pad 39A. The Space Force on Tuesday said the potential for thick and anvil clouds were listed as the primary concerns.

"The main weather concerns for a Wednesday evening launch have shifted to anvil clouds associated with ongoing convection to the west as well as any lingering cumulus clouds," Space Launch Delta 45 forecasters said Tuesday.

In the event of a delay to Thursday, conditions look roughly the same: 60% "go."

Rocket launch schedule: Upcoming Florida launches and landings

SpaceX Starship: Here's what caused the Starship explosion and how it's different for Florida

3D-printed rocket: Relativity Space abandons first 3D-printed rocket for bigger, more powerful Terran R

Spectators hoping to see Falcon Heavy's two side boosters return to land at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, however, should take note that Wednesday's launch will not include any first stage recoveries. Due to the weight and destination of the ViaSat-3 Americas commercial communications satellite, there won't be enough fuel left over for the boosters to return. That includes the center booster, which will also be ditched into the Atlantic Ocean. This will mark the first time Falcon Heavy flies with the deliberate goal of expending its boosters.

It launches on time, Heavy will become the Space Coast's 20th launch of the year.

Beyond Falcon Heavy, meanwhile, SpaceX is also targeting Friday, April 28, for the launch of a payload for Luxembourg-based SES. The mission flying from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station's Launch Complex 40 is targeting an hour-and-a-half-long window that opens at 5:12 p.m. EDT. After liftoff, the rocket will target a drone ship landing in the Atlantic Ocean.

For the latest, visitfloridatoday.com/launchschedule.

Contact Emre Kelly at aekelly@floridatoday.com. Follow him onTwitter,FacebookandInstagramat @EmreKelly.

Continue reading here:

Space Force: Weather iffy for SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch from Kennedy Space Center - Florida Today

Every time a SpaceX rocket explodes, I wonder if we should tax the rich more – The Guardian

Opinion

The enormous expense of these rockets could have been spent on addressing the many crises that we face on our fragile planet

Tue 25 Apr 2023 09.02 EDT

One strong argument in favor of heavily taxing the super-rich is that billionaires so often seem to have profoundly misguided ideas about how to spend their money. They waste it on solid gold toilets, or like the Sacklers and the Russian oligarchs supporting Putins war they use it to do harm. Most commonly, they fund wildly expensive vanity projects that gratify their egos while solidifying their position as masters of the universe who are socially, economically and physically insulated from the rest of us.

Among the most ambitious and widely publicized of these programs is the spaceport, SpaceX, that Elon Musk has built in Texass Rio Grande Valley, not far from the Mexican border. Musk founded Space Exploration technologies in 2002. His stated aim is to produce rocket ships capable of transporting a hundred passengers and large amounts of supplies and equipment into outer space to explore the moon and eventually, Musk hopes, to colonize Mars. The first Falcon 1 rockets were tested in 2006. Twenty-six rockets have been launched in 2023 alone.

The project made headlines recently when, on 20 April, Starship, the largest rocket ever made, exploded over the Gulf of Mexico, 4 minutes after take-off. Journalists and onlookers followed the countdown with a kind of breathless excitement and the so-called rapid unscheduled disassembly didnt seem to matter all that much to the press, to Musk, or to his workers.

One kept hearing that success was not really the issue for Musk, that indeed failure was success in that it was (allegedly) a positive sign of progress. One could watch footage of SpaceX employees cheering the launch, their exuberance undiminished when the rocket blew up. Even some of Musks critics seem fascinated by the scope and hubris of his ambition to create a spaceship that would be reusable, like a plane, without a rockets expensive and annoying tendency to disintegrate on contact with the earths atmosphere.

Several weeks ago, at a party, I met a young woman whose family lives near Brownsville, Texas, not far from the launch site. She told me that SpaceX was, for local residents, a highly controversial and divisive project. It had brought new jobs to a poor and underemployed area, but now people had begun to complain because the land around the launch pad was littered with chunks of metal, shrapnel and engine parts that hadnt made it into orbit.

Though conservation groups have noted the negative effect on local flora and fauna and the fact that the noise and light of the launches threaten the areas delicate ecosystem, the FAA issued a 2014 report stating that the rockets posed no significant environmental risk. This conclusion seems, at best, counterintuitive, given that what fails to go up must come down somewhere. When the largest rocket ever made plunged into the Gulf of Mexico, surely that must have come as something of a surprise to the fish.

Yet that possibility remained largely unexplored and underreported by major news sources until 21 April, when the New York Times ran an article about the havoc that had been created in the wake of the latest launch. Windows were broken in Port Isabel, Texas, 6 miles away from the site. And the surrounding area has been covered with a layer of dust, grime and debris.

It does make one wonder how the FAA reached its conclusion, and who signed off on the project. In some areas, including the rural county where I live, it can take months or even years for homeowners to get a permit to build a garage for their car. But apparently it is permissible for a billionaire to pollute a small city and to cause a number of native species to flee a particularly lovely section of the Rio Grande Valley in search of a quieter and less disruptive new home. F Scott Fitzgerald said that the rich are different from you and me; I suppose its naive to observe that the rich also seem to have different zoning laws.

Those fresh-faced (and mostly young) people employed by Musk, cheering and high-fiving one another when the rocket launched what do they think will happen to them? Do they believe they are destined to hang out with the boss on Mars? Will it dim their enthusiasm when they discover that Elon Musk has used them to arrange his interplanetary exit, along with 99 of his closest friends, when our planet is enduring the catastrophic effects of the climate crisis a disaster to which Musk and his minions will have contributed?

It deducts from the fascination of watching the rocket go up and then down to think about where those machine parts and all that rocket fuel are going. And its an additional buzzkill to contemplate the fortune flaming out in front of our eyes. Its money that were there some greater oversight on how the super-rich amuse themselves and extend their domain could have been spent on, lets say, eradicating poverty, on education, on housing and healthcare, or on attempting to solve any of the crises that we are facing, right here and now, on our fragile and ailing planet.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

Read the original post:

Every time a SpaceX rocket explodes, I wonder if we should tax the rich more - The Guardian