Back in 2018, I wrote a post about Tesla, how as a Silicon Valley company its digital tech was probably the best in the industry, but their automotive know-how was crap because cutting-edge CalTech Silicon Valley types look down on that sort of engineering as antiquated.

That’s how you end with shit like this:

Remember, these are the same people that are favorite to develop the Lunar Human Landing System (HLS) and be the first to get us to Mars.

I see shit like this and am afraid they are going to have the best computer control systems. most advanced and efficient engines, and will turn a crew of astronauts into slag during reentry because they overlooked something simple that NASA figured out way back in the Sixties but their team of Silicon Valley hotshots overlooked as obsolete and uncool.

 

Spread the love

By J. Kb

6 thoughts on “Why I am hesitant about the Silicon Valley space race”
  1. Those aren’t passenger seats. They’re insurance seats. They change the rates on the car from a two-seater sports car into a four-seater passenger car.

  2. Everyone I’ve come across (other than complete fan boys) says Teslas are built funny or weird compared to the real car manufacturers. They’re also a bitch to work on because of that.

    But … those are not the same engineers and not the same company as SpaceX. They both were founded by Musk, but that’s where the resemblance ends.

    Besides, NASA doesn’t do anything involving manned space without their engineers doing a series of design reviews. Nothing is in or on a Crew Dragon capsule without NASA approval. They know the insides of those SpaceX capsules to every last wire and every last screw.

  3. Keep in mind that it wasn’t Silicon Valley that built the Space Shuttle, or the Hubble telescope, or the Mars craft that burned up because the people involved mixed up metric with imperial units.
    All in all, my Tesla has worked quite well. I believe there are plenty of “real car” people involved. But unlike the products of “real car companies”, the computer stuff that the driver has to touch is designed well. My wife has a BMW; the user interface design of that car is at least half a century behind the Tesla.

  4. I had a friend with an Acura Integra back in the ’90s. The back seat on that was the same. My girlfriend at the time could sit straight, but she’s short. Like 5’2″ short. I’m not a big guy, under 6′, but I had to sit with my head cocked sideways and still touching the ceiling. Or sit slouched down in ways that would make a chiropractor faint.

    What Rob said above: those seats aren’t there for human occupancy; they’re there so the vehicle classifies as a 4-seat “passenger” car and not a 2-seat “sports” car, to make insurance cheaper.

    Most state DMV laws don’t look at horsepower, power to weight ratio, or top speed for that classification, all of which would make sense. They look at the number of seats. Four or more seats makes a “passenger” car, two seats makes a “sports” car.

  5. I think it was Road & Track magazine years ago, describing a type of layout called “2+2” (which means: two real seats in front, and two seats slightly larger than baby carriers in the back, found in some Porsches) with the line “…and the back seat passengers are left to find their own chiropractors”.

Comments are closed.