Who will apply for work at Tesla in Tulsa?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Engineman1960

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
845
Reaction score
776
Location
Broken Arrow
I think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves,. In order to apply for a job at the Tesla Tulsa Truck Plant, the plant, first has to be built in Tulsa !!!!!

I guess we are in the running for a plant, but that remains to be seen.

OPPORTUNITY -- Thats what built America -- You don’t have to work at Tesla, to make money -- Landscaping; food service; light bulbs; seems today companies contract out most of their building services; plumbing; heat and air conditioning; cleaning; even printing (someone has to service the copiers).

I would love to see banners on transport trucks (probably won’t see this, plus they would use the train system), reading destination Los Angeles, California; Orlando, Florida; New York City, New York and Detroit , Michigan.

Buts the best part is a decal that reads assembled in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Would I apply for a job at Tesla; why not, you can always tell them no Thank you, I have something else going on.

My mother always told me. “If you don’t count on something, you will never be disappointed!”
 

TerryMiller

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
18,739
Reaction score
18,438
Location
Here, but occasionally There.
Having driven 18-wheelers in my past, I just have to question the actual feasibility of an electric truck. I get it that they can gear one well enough to pull the load, but the logistics of charging lots of trucks seems hard for me to take in. If one travels, they notice that a lot of truckers pull over into roadside areas to spend their sleeping time instead of being in truck stops. Thus, if one isn't charging their batteries as they sleep, how much time during the day (when they could ordinarily be driving) are they then having to stop for a recharge, thus wasting time?
 

SMS

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
15,311
Reaction score
4,259
Location
OKC area
It's sure going to be nice to not have to hitch a ride to space on Russian rockets from Russian soil...

The Dragon, the space shuttle replacement made in partnership with NASA by that guvmint money sucking a-hole Musk's company SpaceX, is due to conduct a manned launch next week, from Kennedy Space Center. Thanks in part to SpaceX and that guvmint money, we are once again maybe going to be able to show our kids American astronauts launching into space, from America.

I can't fathom how anyone can twist that around for a good old OSA bashing, unless you want to cry about money wasted on the space program.

By comparison SpaceX got $2.6B for the Dragon program while Boeing received $4.2B for their version called Starliner...and Boeing is not ready for a manned launch yet.

Who's going to pile on Boeing for taking that $4.2B? Anyone?

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/20...cecraft-faces-its-biggest-test/1571590000905/

Here's a good website with a searchable subsidy tracker. You can see what types of subsidy (for those who want to quibble about what a "is" is) and what sources (fed, state, local etc). Tesla (listed separate from SpaceX) is 13th on the top 100 list with the bulk of it's subsidies coming from state and local tax credits. Boeing is #1 followed by a host of energy companies and the Big Three automakers.

It was interesting to see a Taiwanese company at #5. You can also follow links that match political contributions of listed companies.

https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/top-100-parents
 
Last edited:

SMS

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
15,311
Reaction score
4,259
Location
OKC area
With all said in respect to space travel or exploration, I remember the words of one of the astronauts: Something to the effect of, "And to think we are going to be going into space based on the work of the lowest bidder."

Very true, but in this case with a commercial enterprise low-cost doesn't automatically equal low-quality.

SpaceX, like other modern companies, achieved cost reductions through efficiency and innovation. They moved as much production as they could in-house and they shed NASA's old way of doing business which involved layers upon layers of contractors and sub-contractors, with each layer tacking on cost-plus pricing and cumbersome supply chains. That alone saved hoards of cash.

Modern, informed, business practices can achieve major cost reductions and actually improve quality because you have more control over the product.

That's why they are probably going to beat Boeing into space, for less money, and Boeing had a head start.
 

JD8

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 13, 2005
Messages
32,899
Reaction score
45,980
Location
Tulsa
That's why they are probably going to beat Boeing into space, for less money, and Boeing had a head start.

but....but...... DId BoEiNG uSe tHEir OWn mOnEY?!!!

I mean, they may have to ask the government for 60 billion again, but whatever, that's different.
 

Hobbes

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
8,737
Reaction score
749
Location
The Nations
Very true, but in this case with a commercial enterprise low-cost doesn't automatically equal low-quality.

SpaceX, like other modern companies, achieved cost reductions through efficiency and innovation. They moved as much production as they could in-house and they shed NASA's old way of doing business which involved layers upon layers of contractors and sub-contractors, with each layer tacking on cost-plus pricing and cumbersome supply chains. That alone saved hoards of cash.

Modern, informed, business practices can achieve major cost reductions and actually improve quality because you have more control over the product.

That's why they are probably going to beat Boeing into space, for less money, and Boeing had a head start.

Reminds me of the clash between the corporate cultures at Microsoft and IBM.

In the waning days of MS-DOS Microsoft and IBM formed a partnership program to develop the next generation of personal computer operating systems, 32 bit OS/2.
Teams from both corporations would hold regular meetings to hammer out architecture and API calls together.

The developers at IBM proceeded slowly and methodically at a near snails pace.
Before long the developers at MS were ready to start writing code.
The corporate culture at both companies was so different that the collaboration ultimately fell apart altogether.

That is how Windows95 was born and OS/2, which eventually turned out to be a fine OS, failed.
Something happens at large organizations that impedes innovation and gives smaller companies room to exploit opportunity earlier.
 
Last edited:

stroker-c10

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
877
Reaction score
58
Location
Broken Arrow
Excuse me if I looked over it but just curious, does anyone have any data on the number of engineers currently in Tulsa vs currently in Austin? Might be a strong variable I would think in favor of Tulsa; however, I don't have any information to base this on. Thanks.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom