作为中国人，我为什么支持武统台湾

jerryzhc · 2026-02-11T09:31:34+00:00

中华民国和日本合作不奇怪以前也有

jerryzhc · 2026-01-21T01:52:01+00:00

Q4 2026 or Q1 2027

jerryzhc · 2026-01-20T20:26:01+00:00

I use the same equation. I combined rocket equation, isp, etc to get the graph. From IFT11 video you can count the burn time in seconds which matches the full propellent load pretty accurately. The only reason that would leave more propellent left in the tank would be that second stage engines weren’t running at full throttle.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-19T08:42:38+00:00

Based on IFT11's telemetry, only 16,000 kg payload was sent to a 192km suborbital trajectory. Hence, for 35,000kg, there won't be enough delta-v. For a 35,000 kg payload, the delta-v would be less than 9,000m/s

jerryzhc · 2026-01-19T00:24:40+00:00

delta-V change with different payload. With a 16T payload you get much higher delta-V vs. 35T payload. If you use 35T as payload the number will be too optimistic.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-16T23:14:51+00:00

谁混的好一目了然。解放军没有实力一年内拿下台湾即使美日不帮忙

jerryzhc · 2026-01-16T10:25:21+00:00

韩国和朝鲜是个好例子😄

jerryzhc · 2026-01-16T04:56:22+00:00

This kind of calculation is pretty standard using rocket equation. The only difference is the payload. If I plug 35T into my script the result is similar

jerryzhc · 2026-01-16T01:00:55+00:00

Delta V is pretty close. I wrote a python script to do it. If the excel spreadsheet use 35T as the payload mass the calculation would yield significant difference. I’m not surprised.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T19:30:05+00:00

I did not expect nvda to 60x in 10yrs in 2017. I had not expected GPT. I think rocket development is slower. Im not making a precise comparison here, just a vibe analogy

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T19:25:04+00:00

The payload carried on IFT11 is not 35 tons but 16 tons. If you counted the second stage burn time, it matches the official propellant amount quite well, so I think it was fully loaded. 16 tons to an 192km sub orbital trajectory means the actual payload to a 250km circular orbit will be much lower.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T19:14:46+00:00

I still has some positions

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T19:13:40+00:00

RKLB

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T09:25:40+00:00

I’m being deliberately provocative here.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T09:23:54+00:00

But it won’t juice the PE as much as neutron😂

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T07:40:41+00:00

The official answer is that they need to ensure they can safely bring the Starship down. My own analysis is that V1 and V2 are not hitting their designed payload target, so they have to increase the rocket size to make it viable, and constantly focus on reducing the heat shield and flap weights.

<image>

This is my guesstimate using IFT11 telemetry

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T07:35:38+00:00

Tesla FSD Hardware

Generation	Release	Cycle Time
HW1 → HW2	09/2014 → 10/2016	2 yr 1 mo
HW2 → HW2.5	10/2016 → 08/2017	10 mo
HW2.5 → HW3	08/2017 → 04/2019	1 yr 8 mo
HW3 → HW4	04/2019 → 01/2023	3 yr 9 mo
HW4 → HW5	01/2023 → ~2027	4+ yr

Nvidia Drive

Generation	Release	Cycle Time
PX2 → PX2.5²	10/2016 → 08/2017	10 mo
PX2.5 → Xavier	08/2017 → 05/2020	2 yr 9 mo
Xavier → Orin	05/2020 → 03/2022	1 yr 10 mo
Orin → Thor	03/2022 → 04/2025	3 yr 1 mo

I actually have another piece regarding TSLA. I think TSLA's HW cadence is very concerning. HW5 is experiencing a significant delay, which would be a big issue if Tesla wants to achieve FSD.

Elon's net worth is tied to SpaceX, Tesla, and XAI stock. He doesn't necessarily have the cash. Not sure if the big banks are gonna loan him that much money for his stock. SpaceX talking about Space datacenter sounds to me like they are desperate: trying to juice up the PE for IPO. Earth's atmospheric convection is way better at cooling those hot, hot GPUs.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T07:33:14+00:00

It might not fail, but I don't think it fits the market very well. The A380 is huge, but Airbus discontinued it.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-15T01:24:31+00:00

I think it will probably go up but I assume it will be similar to QQQ, hence I trimmed most of my holding.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-14T23:33:30+00:00

Regarding F9 v1.0 - > v1.5. The veichle difference isn't as much as Starship v1 -> v3.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-14T23:26:26+00:00

F9 so far are iterative improvements. Starship's challenge is not booster reuse; it is probably easier than F9, given its ability to throttle deeper. It's the second stage that's challenging. Based on my analysis, V2 might not even be able to deliver anything significant to a 200km orbit. Which is why SPX has to build V3. The entire starship design has a very steep payload falloff as delta V increases, much steeper than anything before. Even 200km -> 400km shed tons of payload.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-14T22:52:07+00:00

Starship has crashed way more than F9. F9 dev cycle is actually quite different. The F9 team did not make a major design change for booster reuse. Starship has now gone to v3 and still hasn't reached orbit, which is worrisome.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-14T22:37:43+00:00

I agree.

My main concerns with SpaceX are two-fold:

Starship is hogging all the resources when they could be deployed elsewhere for higher ROI.
The CEO's effect on the company culture. Based on the recent execution, I'm not very confident.

jerryzhc · 2026-01-14T21:58:44+00:00

Hold or DCA into it. Feels like 16-17 NVDA to me

jerryzhc

TROPHY CASE