/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12575041
I'll never get the #teamspace mentality of hoping every rocket and space program goes well.
Fuck Boeing.
Fuck Blue Origin.
Fuck China.
Fuck the ESA.
Fuck SLS.
Fuck Roscosmos.
Fuck NASA.
Fuck the shuttle.
We need Apollo-era NASA and SpaceX. We're lucky to have one.

>>12565096
and then...

>>12497426
Don't think of it as "The Saturn V could have done in 27 launches what the Shuttle did in 135" but instead "The Saturn V could have done five times what the Shuttle did for the exact same price."
>>12497433
>The Saturn V could have become the American Soyuz.
>22x LEO capability per rocket
>2.5x total mass sent to LEO
This >>12497462 guy is right, that's an insult to what the Saturn V would've been even at it's worst.

>>12088243
Keep in mind that I didn't wanna discuss that and my statement was, that SpaceX doesn't try to build the most complex rockets, but rather the most economical ones, which is revolutionary in the industry, based on the other guys statement that China "couldn't steal it"
But hey, let's derail...
What you suggested, that would be oldspace during cold war, from what I can tell, the Gvt even is conflicted about if they want to help SpaceX or crush them, so I doubt that they are under any state sponsored security. I dunno about PMC tho, but the streamers on youtube don't seem to get harassed too often and the only sec I see to close the roads are local law enforcement. So I doubt that security is off the charts tight.

And it would be horrifying it this anime chick would suddenly ignite and separate on her ascent, exploding off limbs and torso on the way until only the brain remains. I mean that would be gore as fuck. It's just a terrible concept.

>>9928739
This glorious bastard never had a launch failure, we spent millions and millions developing it -- and then we just ashcanned it for the most expensive and dangerous way to get to orbit ever devised.

Yes. I'm mad.

>>9242966

If they'd tested it, it would have worked" is a nonsense statement. IF they'd had a test-stand big enough to fire the whole engine assembly together, they would have identified the problems, though likely losing an assembly test stand each time, and had a chance to correct some of them -- or, alternatively, they might have concluded that having that many engines multiplies the chances of catastrophic failure in such a way that it makes no sense to waste time and money trying to close them all out, and it makes more sense to reduce your variables and build fewer, but more poerful, engines.

>/sg/ - Space general
Thread 1

there's a lot of space discussion on sci but I feel that it's time it was all consolidated into one thread so that us space enthusiasts can have something of a community here

Thread topics:
>Launch vehicles and spacecraft
>Astronomy and astrophysics
>Manned and unmanned missions
>Future tech
>Past / present / future of any space agencies and companies
>School and work in space-related fields
>Stupid questions
>Space in media / entertainment

To avoid a shitstorm, I'd like to stay away from topics like the EM drive, FTL, and UFOs (although valid discussion about SETI / ayylmaos is fine)

Feel free to give suggestions for things to add to the OP in the future