A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.
DataIsBeautiful is for visualizations that effectively convey information. Aesthetics are an important part of information visualization, but pretty pictures are not the sole aim of this subreddit.
A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.
A post must be (or contain) a qualifying data visualization.
Directly link to the original source article of the visualization
Original source article doesn't mean the original source image. Link to the full page of the source article as a link-type submission.
If you made the visualization yourself, tag it as [OC]
[OC] posts must state the data source(s) and tool(s) used in the first top-level comment on their submission.
DO NOT claim "[OC]" for diagrams that are not yours.
All diagrams must have at least one computer generated element.
No reposts of popular posts within 1 month.
Post titles must describe the data plainly without using sensationalized headlines. Clickbait posts will be removed.
Posts involving American Politics, or contentious topics in American media, are permissible only on Thursdays (ET).
Posts involving Personal Data are permissible only on Mondays (ET).
Please read through our FAQ if you are new to posting on DataIsBeautiful. Commenting Rules
Don't be intentionally rude, ever.
Comments should be constructive and related to the visual presented. Special attention is given to root-level comments.
Short comments and low effort replies are automatically removed.
Hate Speech and dogwhistling are not tolerated and will result in an immediate ban.
Personal attacks and rabble-rousing will be removed.
Moderators reserve discretion when issuing bans for inappropriate comments. Bans are also subject to you forfeiting all of your comments in this community.
Originally r/DataisBeautiful
This is somewhat deceiving, as the drop only looks steep because of a single data point (falcon heavy) and an estimate.
One one side you have single-use rockets, and on the other side they're reusable, don't really look like a deception
Dude, counting downvotes doesn’t help, nor does going off on some political rant about Elon Musk. It does look like a graph that would be promoted by an Elon fanboy, but my observation had nothing to do with that. I said it looks somewhat deceiving because it makes a big deal of just one datapoint and one estimate. But I know nothing about rockets or space exploration, so maybe the underlying fundamentals are solid.
This comment was first downvoted, like, 10s after i posted it, thought it was by you so i mentioned it.
This post&comment were downvoted because of Elon Musk, and i believe they/we are mistaken, if i don't say it there's not a lot of people here who would.
Your observation is weirds because every datapoint on this graph is here to stay, it's not a measurement, i don't get it, you obviously don't believe that the curb is gonna go up, and at most i could be accused of stating something that everyone knew for years, not something that people find hard to believe in.
Chill. Most people liked your post anyway. Hiveminds are outside your control, so you gotta roll with the punches and move on. I’ve been at the receiving end of a lot more downvotes than this. Trust me, you get used to it 😂
I didn't know that it matters if it's reusable if it can't even carry a payload. Starship has launched multiple times. They have little to show for it. They have not carried any payload into space with starship.
Don't know if it matters to point that out but, as stated here, the Starship has a capacity of 100-150 tons, for a gross mass of 3.675 tons.
They've demonstrated that it's doable, succeeding 3 times and failing twice. Hence, they've demonstrated that they're able to carry a payload into space, feel free to learn that you were wrong in your assessment(, like me/everyone,) and to downvote this comment as well 👍
I really miss the space shuttle. That was really cool, and I don’t think we’ve built a vehicle that quite compares.
Would be interesting if it was adjusted for inflation
Spaceship (estimate)
An important detail is missing: whose estimate?
The chart seems to have emerged from an apparently famous report(, p.13, discussed there), whose taking its source from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an american think tank.
As for the estimated cost of Starship, it seems confirmed all over the internet after a quick research, with many articles(, e.g.,) speaking about an aim for a future below 10$/kg.
However, interestingly enough, the only contradiction i found came from wikipedia, since a capacity of 100.000-150.000kg for a current launch cost of $100.000.000 would imply a cost of 666-1000$ per kg.
I've probably made mistakes while checking all of this, so feel free to dive deeper in order to explain the differences between SpaceX's estimates and the wikipedia page.
I love such curve-fitting techniques. By 2025 we can launch 1t into space for a few cents, if we follow the purple line.
It's also absurd that the fit line dives down to be cheaper and earlier than an optimistic projection that will likely move further to the top right as time progresses. That's a chart with an agenda, not an analytical regression.
The curve would be even worse if the y-axis was linear b.t.w. 🤷
I think this actually is a linear regression plotted on a log y graph.
Which a linear regression is a bad choice for something that must be asymptotic at best.