Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Eg: SKA - definitely cheaper on the ground.

Unconvinced. Because building the whole system, not some isolated dishes somewhere amounted to 1.3 Billion EUR, operating it up to 2030 adds another 0.7 Billion EUR. 2 Billions. Chump change for sure.

Now we can compare that with the JWST and typical cost overruns in american boondoggle style, or look at the latest shining star, EUCLID. Just 1.4 Billion EUR for the latter.

Then there was GAIA at about 740 Million EUR, with the orbiting article at 450 Million EUR alone, plus another 250 Million EUR for the data-processing org.

All of these with more or less conventional rocketry, and not co-orbiting anything for more easy maintenance and upgrading.

My gut feeling tells me we will have cheaper and more reliable access to space, with larger payload capacity, necessitating less 'origamics' for the space parts, and that chinese concept seems sound, too. Very much so, in fact.

How much that will cost I have no clue.

But again, if something like this is becoming reality, no matter by whom, some former assumptions about cost, feasibility (at all, because payload weight and dimension constraints are relaxed, needing less 'origamics') will have to be rethought.

That was my point, in general. Not limited to any special application.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: