/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12394125
LMAO no-one tell him that boing and lockheed are buying into SABRE for their own skylon concepts.

>>11766633
>Implying the FAA would allow it to carry people in that state
It would have to be built by Boeing to be allowed to fly under those conditions. So no, I wouldn't.

>>11624704
>says he will sell all his possessions to save a company he loves because the local government are overreacting and strangling it to death thus exposing his passion for his life's work
>this is a bad thing
If his companies survive hopefully he will realize setting up in commifornia was a mistake and move East.

>>11328829
>>11328830
>>11329020
Eternal reminder that SLS/Artemis has a 51% success chance. It was talked about in a hearing called "Hearing: Developing Core Capabilities for Deep Space Exploration"
https://youtu.be/BnFj67C0G6I?t=1h11m44s

During this hearing it was revealed that Mr. Doug Cooke, Former Associate Administrator, Exploration Systems, National Aeronautics and Space Administration wrote an article called 'getting back to the moon requires speed and simplicity' Cooke states:
1. NASA is breaking the lander/gateway deliberately into multiple pieces to feed contractors who have built a deliberately under-preforming rocket so they can sell their own for commercial launches OR force multiple SLS constructions
2. NASA's current approach requires on average 8 launches (combining both SLS and commercial) VS a single Apollo launch for moon landing including construction launches of the gateway/lander
3. NASA's approach has 51% chance for an overall mission success. Not taking into account the launch vehicle maturity risk

>SLS will never fly
>Orion will never fly
>JWST will never fly
>We will never go back to the moon

Defund NASA.

JWST will never fly
WFIRST will never fly
SLS is just as overfunded, over-schedule and badly designed and constructed as Constellation.

Defund NASA

What is the likelihood of human immortality being achieved in the next ~50 years?