/sci/ - Science & Math

Scrapheap rocket is kino.

Amerishits are utterly delusional and believe this is real.

In the meantime real space rockets take real people to space and back.

You better hope that scrap to not hit the news or the world will laugh its ass of.

>>10236130
We don't even know if it's actually the StarHopper or not; it could just be a mock up/model for testing or even just a quirkily designed water tower which Elon is trolling everyone with, it seems like the kind of thing he'd do. We know the Starship will be built out of advanced steel alloys, pic related doesn't look like it is.

>>10236139
Talking of "real space rockets"; someone on Reddit says that pad 39A's TE has gone into the hangar, which is a major sign that the DM-1 booster will soon be rolled out for the fit checks Gwynne mentioned.

>>10236151
>We don't even know if it's actually the StarHopper or not; it could just be a mock up/model for testing or even just a quirkily designed water tower which Elon is trolling everyone with, it seems like the kind of thing he'd do. We know the Starship will be built out of advanced steel alloys, pic related doesn't look like it is.

Starship will be, but there's no real need to build the guidance and control validation unit out of anything fancier than thick pieces of boilerplate with loose tolerances.

Pic because it made me laugh.

You guys realize that’s a shop, rite?

nah that's the starship grasshopper for sure. just looks weird since it's bare metal right now. The complicated bits will probably be already assembled in a disk-shaped "unit" (engines, computers, etc) that they lift into the bottom and integrate

>>10236433
if it is good enough for USS Enterprise, it is good enough for BFR

You cannot make rockets out of steel. Rockets are extremely sensitive to structural weight and only advanced light weight materials may be used. Any redundant weight penalizes performance and by doing so reduces payload and drastically increases cost.

This is a total circus. Space vehicle being welded in the open back yard somewhere? Such ugly disgusting PR campaigns preying on the ignorance of the general public should not be legal.

>>10236482
wew

>>10236482
reduced payload is counteracted by making it the size of the Saturn IV
cost is counteracted by being cheap

>>10236482
Tell that to the Atlas booster, which was nearly SSTO, and built out of stainless steel back in the 1950s.

>>10236486
Googled that. It's an early 60s design from the earliest days of rocketry.
Size doesn't counteract bad materials and engineering, it just makes things worse as big rockets are outrageously expensive and difficult to make.

We've moved to advanced alloys and complicated manufacturing with great effort put into mass optimization and squeezing every single bit of performance available and for a reason. Steel and backyard do-it-yourself is an insult to everyone.

>>10236482
Preach it, brother. Only the most lightest of rockets, made in the cleanest of clean rooms and using the most efficient hydrogen and solid engines are fit to be used for the glorious purpose of US Space Exploration. All this is just a transparent attempt to redirect funding from hardworking people and their extended families at NASA and Boeing and towards Mr. Musk. But I say true Americans will not stand for this capitalist!

>>10236505
>Size doesn't counteract bad materials and engineering

Size makes payload fraction increase, so yes it does. Make your rocket big enough and you can make it out of lead.

>>10236505
>he doesn't realize that it's delightfully unintuitive
how sad

>>10236505
Didn't you hear that Starship will be made out of a advanced 300 series steel alloy which also includes nickel and chromium? The only similarity between it and the Atlas is that steel is present...

>>10236507
Now this is a real patriotic American! Down with the capitalist embezzlers like Musk undermining our national security international relations and public interests!
!!!USA!!!USA!!!USA
USA!!!USA!!!USA!!!

>>10236505
>We've moved to advanced alloys and complicated manufacturing with great effort put into mass optimization and squeezing every single bit of performance available and for a reason. Steel and backyard do-it-yourself is an insult to everyone.

Sea Dragon didn't happen because there was no market for large payloads into space, and that 1960s design called for 8mm thick sheets of stainless steel assembled at a shipyard. You're confusing how things are done with how things can be done.

>>10236526
I love how you can tell these kinds of posts are coming from Russians and other kinds of shill solely based on the hour they're posting.

>>10236530
it's early on a Sunday for me m8

>>10236130
Earth is flat

>>10236526
fuck off commie

>>10236531
it's 10 goddamn AM, hardly even early dude

>>10236151
>We know the Starship will be built out of advanced steel alloys, pic related doesn't look like it is.
Hey retard, Elon specifically said Starship is going to be made from 300 series stainless, the superalloys he was also talking about are for use inside the turbopumps only, that's why they need to be able to withstand hot oxygen rich gas at 12000 psi.

He also confirmed that what they're building is the hopper vehicle. It doesn't have to be anything fancy, it's probably never going to go more than a few km up and come back, it's only meant for validating Raptor control response in flight.

>>10236537
it is when you're keeping your body on -2 hour time to avoid being fucked over when the semester starts back in a different time zone

>>10236541
don't forget testing the wing control surfaces

>>10236482
It's the strength to weight ratio, dumbass.

>>10236526
Damn right, бrother!

USA!!USA!!USA!!!
SLS!!SLS!!SLS!!!!

>>10236439
>https://twitter.com/Robotbeat/status/1076553768760676353
The bottom part is supposedly real.

>>10236516
Atlas itself was a 1.5 stage vehicle that could achieve orbit with a manned vehicle on top, BFR is a two stage vehicle so it will have much higher margins.

>>10236541
300 series stainless steel is an alloy, google it; I never said it was a superalloy.

>"These grades of stainless have chromium (approx. 18 to 30%) and nickel (approx. 6 to 20%) as their major alloying additions."

>>10236553
the nosecap is real too, you can see it in those photos and Elon's stated that the hopper test article will be shorter than the real deal

>>10236547
>don't forget testing the wing control surfaces

That does not seem to be on the agenda with this unit. The scrapyard engineering suggests they expect to crash the thing before getting it right.

The weak interest from usaf and nasa somewhat worries me. No gubment money for Mars mission aside, whats the chance they'll make things difficult with bureaucracy like planetary protection?

>>10236130
Is this one of the ocean landing ones? If I'd bet minor amounts of money Elon's going to be really upset when everything STILL CORRODES.

>>10236561
private launch facilities
who could stop them?

>>10236559
It's still shopped in if you get my meaning. But sure.

>>10236561
The USAF is more skeptical than most organizations, and like congressional offices, the space wing is loaded with officers looking for a private industry exit plan with defense contractors. NASA is walking a tightrope between the influential senators hell-bent on making SLS happen and its ever growing cost and schedule delays, and SpaceX promising to do it better/faster/cheaper.

>>10236547
This one won't do that, the wings in this case are just legs.

Think of this hopper as being like Grasshopper, and the next one they build as a Falcon9 R-Dev equivalent. The 2nd hopper will be much prettier and be much closer to the actual final Starship both in dimensions and in design. That second vehicle will be the one that does supersonic high altitude tests, this first one will do simply up-down, up-translate-hover-down, etc flights.

>>10236566
>Is this one of the ocean landing ones? If I'd bet minor amounts of money Elon's going to be really upset when everything STILL CORRODES.

Ocean landing ones? I'm not sure what you mean. The only vehicle SpaceX produces that is meant to go into the water is Dragon.

>>10236558
300 series is not a new or advanced alloy.

>>10236566
No part of BFR goes near the ocean. The Booster never even lands on a drone ship, it always has the margins to go back to the launch pad every time.

>>10236576
*cough*

>>10236582
>300 series is not a new or advanced alloy.
300 series is a group of allies distinguished by their primary constituent components. There's considerable room for developing new types within the family, but it's also not the place where SpaceX is investing their metallurgical R&D. They're spending their metallurgists and foundry workers on oxygen tolerant single crystal superalloys that work at high pressure.

>>10236587
That's why I said *meant* to go in the water.

>>10236586
I'm as gung-ho for BFR as anyone else, but the land-on-launch-clamps idea for Super Heavy seems like one of those things that will be initially dropped in favor of something a bit simpler. don't you think?

>>10236582
300 is the structural stainless steel they're using
it's cool stuff but not super
they developed a new superalloy for use in the Raptor engine

>>10236593
I figure they'll lose a few vehicles trying to figure stuff like this out, which is, again, probably why they're using scrapyard engineering for the hoppers.

>>10236586
I want to see them launch from Texas and land the booster in Florida desu

>>10236576
>The only vehicle SpaceX produces that is meant to go into the water is Dragon.
What do you mean by *into* the water? I mean is it one of the ones that has parts that land on an aircraft carrier type thing in the ocean. Corrosion will get you without submersion.

>>10236567
Nations are responsible for whatever private companies do in space.
The roadster caused butthurt with the protection people, there were some strong statements from nasa's planetary protection office.
A private company all on its own financing a real Martian mission, and succeeding, will strongly impact NASA's prestige and potentially negatively influence traditional aerospace contractors.

A lot of sides at play, and that's without geopolitics.

>>10236586
>No part of BFR goes near the ocean.
Coolio.

>>10236591
>>300 series is not a new or advanced alloy.
>300 series is a group of allies distinguished by their primary constituent components. There's considerable room for developing new types within the family, but it's also not the place where SpaceX is investing their metallurgical R&D. They're spending their metallurgists and foundry workers on oxygen tolerant single crystal superalloys that work at high pressure.
yes I know all this, are you agreeing with me or not?
my original response was to some guy who claimed Elon said they were building BFR out of 'advanced steel alloys' but I pointed out that no, they aren't, they will just be buying off-the-shelf stainless steel and using that.

>>10236602
They are right to be concerned. I don't think the NASA comments I've heard are unreasonable, nor are they that difficult to correct. It's really
>change paint composition and process
>put in place some h&s checks
>don't shoot crap into space for no good reason

>>10236593
It will have the margins to get back to land in any case regardless. As for actually landing in the clamps, that's a question of if they can improve their accuracy to the centimeter scale, which is what the high power gas-gas maneuvering thrusters are apparently for.

>>10236600
>What do you mean by *into* the water? I mean is it one of the ones that has parts that land on an aircraft carrier type thing in the ocean. Corrosion will get you without submersion.

The new vehicle is being designed for Return to Launch Site with both stages. No barges for spaceflight.

>my original response was to some guy who claimed Elon said they were building BFR out of 'advanced steel alloys' but I pointed out that no, they aren't, they will just be buying off-the-shelf stainless steel and using that.

I guess I am agreeing with you. Elon did say they're buying it from a commercial supplier, albeit to a custom SpaceX spec.

Meanwhile, in Boca Chica...

>>10236595
I know
Follow the reply chain to the one where I originally said that they are using regular stainless to build BFR and that the superalloys they developed are for inside the turbopumps only.

>>10236602
>A private company all on its own financing a real Martian mission, and succeeding, will strongly impact NASA's prestige and potentially negatively influence traditional aerospace contractors.
fuck em

>>10236549
Cлaвa Aмepикy!

CШA!!!CШA!!!CШA!!!
CКЗ!!!CКЗ!!!CКЗ!!!

>>10236614
Hmm, is that nose cap just for lifting or is it some fancy material other than SS? Doesn’t look metallic

>>10236582
>>10236591
>>10236595
And everyone else saying about how advanced or not it is... they should be careful about who supplies the steel, steel in general is/can be a very advanced product. You'd want good homogeneity with this, especially if they're welding it. It'll be interesting to see if that's a failure point as well, but it's a thin skin so a few issues ought to be mitigated because of that.

>>10236606
Your literally retarded, the guy who you replied to just stated that SpaceX are doing their metallurgy in house. So it's pretty obvious they won't be buying stainless steel of the shelf...they'll make their own specialised 300 series stainless-steel alloy for the BFR, which could be considered "advanced".

>>10236622
It's metal dude

>>10236622
The shiny parts are really thin, almost foil-like pieces. Since they'll need to lift the entire test vehicle from some point, the nose might be a little more structurally robust.

>>10236628
Elon says that their SS sheets come from a supplier, made to SpaceX’s specs. Other parts will come from SpaceX’s own forgehouse

>>10236628
>Your literally retarded, the guy who you replied to just stated that SpaceX are doing their metallurgy in house. So it's pretty obvious they won't be buying stainless steel of the shelf...they'll make their own specialised 300 series stainless-steel alloy for the BFR, which could be considered "advanced".

You're going to want to walk that one back, Anon.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1076609328239374336

>>10236628
They're doing their own metallurgy for their super-alloys that they are using inside Raptor's turbopumps
SpaceX is not fucking starting a factory to produce 300 series stainless sheet steel and tubes to build BFR.
Actually kill yourself.

>>10236602
Nationstates made it illegal for regular people to even ATTEMPT to go to space for the last six decades.
Nationstates are a poison that tried to monopolize space, prohibited access to space for two generations while they themselves went, and to this day requires a license to take a photograph with your cell phone if you manage to make it to space (still also illegal).

>>10236628
Eugh. That could be a mistake imo, I'm >>10236627

Don't underestimate how complicated fabrication of steel has become. And fewer and fewer places do decent stuff in the world. I'm not on top of what's happened with the US manufacturers tho, if it's gone the same way as the UK it might be the best choice but it's a crap choice unfortunately.

>>10236130

It's utterly incomprehensible that there are still people who are unironically doubt Musk, after he proved all the skeptics to be completely wrong, again and again. Anyone who doubts Musk at this point has to be a troll or a shill.
The image in OP isn't even real it's clearly photoshopped. This just shows the absolute fucking state of Musk critics. They have to make low quality shops as a last resort in their futile attempts to disprove and smear the biggest genius of our time. Doubting Musk ideas at this point is an equivalent of telling people that the Earth is flat.

>>10236602
The first thing that needs to happen is to defund NASA, everyone knows it's just a front for the Air Force/Space Force anyway, and an excuse to make private space travel illegal and create a perception that your country is "pro private space travel" at the same time.
Even now they're making sure only certain people are allowed to try.
NASA is and was and always will be a poison as long as it exists.

>>10236644
The shop isn’t done to be negative propaganda. It’s a useful representation of what the hopper will look like, from photos of the actual flight hardware being built. Just thought I’d say that.

>>10236628
I don't think they can manufacture such amounts though. Their in house work is likely only for raptor alloys and similar small scale applications, though who knows that might change. Now, can anybody tell me wtf is cryo treatment of steel and how will that play with the welds?

>>10236602
>NASA put shitloads of space debris in orbit so that it's harder for everyone else to get up there safely.
>them being anything but a scourge of humanity.
Government funded entities are always wasteful shit.

>>10236650
There’s a nasa report about SS cryo, lemme find it for you

>>10236602
>The roadster caused butthurt with protection people.
Wrong, the Roadster caused butthurt with the feds to the point that they forced Elon to shut off his livestream AND prohibited him from making a tweet about it, so it appeared voluntary.
The only reason Musk was able to make a livestream at all when he made that launch was because none of the right people in US government noticed.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/06/spacex-cut-falcon-9-iridium-next-livestream/

Immediately once they did they cut his life feed and also made him not make a comment about it, so it appeared voluntary.

Fuck off with your government should control space shit, that should be avoided at all costs, but it's looking like it won't be.

>>10236650
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660015958.pdf

>>10236650
You could make a lot of shitty stainless at a highish (but not necessarily prohibitively high) cost. You wouldn't be allowed to sell it as 300 series.

>>10236657

>space streaming licence

Government is cancer.

>>10236665
Elon applied for the license in advance and they purposely stonewalled it to take too long so his launch wouldn't have it.

>>10236674
>he did it anyway
madman

Hol’ up, let’s not rewrite history. The license was a routine one they had always applied for. In the specific case of that launch, the tiny licensing office just didn’t get to it in time.
Since then they’ve changed the licensing requirements and procedure, and further relaxations of rules are coming down the pipe as well. It’s not malice on the part of the government at all.

>>10236685
>the tiny licensing office just didn’t get to it in time
>government in charge of being efficent

>>10236694
yeah no shit, but it wasn’t malice that’s my point. The loicenses for video apparently took like 6 months or something crazy

>>10236644
>muskfags are so delusional nowadays that even doubting him is heresy
I love the fact that /sci/ absolutely despises csfags but at the same time adores a person who incorporates everything shitty about them

>>10236620
it's almost like they forget how dangerous space can be
if they protest just drop a rock on em

>It’s not malice on the part of the government at all.

>>10236704
it's really not.

>"The SpaceX application was received by our office four days before launch,” said Tahara Dawkins, director of CRSRA, at an April 3 meeting of the Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing here. She noted that, under law, the office has up to 120 days to make a ruling on a license application but undertook an “extremely expedited review” that was completed in three days, working very closely with SpaceX, an effort she called “unprecedented.”
>In order to get a license approved in some form in time for the launch, Dawkins said the government agreed to temporarily waive a number of requirements for the license. That, however, did not extend to permitting live public video from orbit.
>“With additional time to review and evaluate and, if necessary, elevate, we could have worked it out a little bit more and maybe allowed for live streaming,” she said. For future launches, “we’re hoping to get a better review of what that livestreaming is, and what potential risk to national security each one will have.”

https://spacenews.com/noaa-explains-restriction-on-spacex-launch-webcast/

>>10236704
you're right, it's just incompetence

Today on Boca Chica watch, the cone and upper fuselage of the hopper are about to be mated using a crane.

>>10236714
sometimes the two look suspiciously similar however...

>>10236704
Woah Starfire looks really anime there.

>>10236717
that's probably not the final starship "shape"? Wonder where the windows will go, and if mr anon here will end up being right

>>10236731
windows are an expensive vanity project in space
I bet at least one of Starship will have the big windows for cruise liner touristy shit

>>10236720
>I'd rather break my stuff multiple times than get it right
this sentiment is literally one of an impatient retard

>>10236717
light some candles and spread some rose petals

>>10236720
>it's wrong when the government does it but ok when beloved musk literally delays all of his projects

>>10236717
the big crane weights indicate that the whole karjuckel will be lifted over to the test zone as once piece. that'll be cool to watch

>>10236711
What are they checking anyway? If some super-secret government spy satellite does not get in the camera? They should just send info to SpaceX on times where they shoudn't launch.

>>10236661
>ultimate tensile strength increasing by ~50%

Either I'm retarded and easily impressed or this sounds amazing and quick googling shows it essentially beats titanium.

I found link to the previous study mentioned in the paper.
>https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a397053.pdf

If anons link them they should probably go together.

>>10236758
yeah, thus the counterintuitiveness. Take stainless steel, tweak it a bit, and then you have a fantastic spaceship building material. And we've known this since the 60s.

>>10236754
it's basically saying that you can't put spy cameras into orbit to spy on the government or military
they're using it to fuck with everybody instead of doing it properly

>>10236758
It beats regular titanium in specific strength but not titanium alloys. Stainless however is way easier to work with and way cheaper so it's a good choice.

>>10236790
plus you get side benefits relating to radiation protection and MMOD shielding

>>10236790
>>10236797
it also doesn't actually burst into fire when exposed to LOx

>>10236130
SpaceX should just develop a reusable second stage for the Falcon Heavy instead of this retarded shit.

>>10236803
>it also doesn't actually burst into fire when exposed to LOx
Russia uses titanium helium bottles submerged in LOx. Titanium is not extremely reactive with oxygen or anything but if a spark gets it going somehow it'll burn.

>>10236831
>bursts into a metal fire with just a spark
>not extremely reactive

>>10236657
Elon can't even live stream from his PR stunt thingy, but his drones keep thinking he will just colonize a whole planet on his own LMAO.

>>10236839
There's no gubermint on Mars to stop him.

>>10236852
there is no money there to finance him either

image upload died? was going to post a pic
can anyone else confirm

>>10236856
Mars Colony will be past-money society.

>>10236862
true communism
it might even work, being able to carefully select and manage the population

>>10236862
>can't do it on earth, literally paradise of the solar system
>somehow think a barren wasteland will improve on social issues and not make matters worse
the obvious fact that a mars colony is not feasible notwithstanding

>>10236870
Mars Colony will have the advantage of being composed only of intelligent and resilient people.

>>10236873
the engineering load of a directed economy will also be manageable with a small population

>>10236873
briefly. when rich people want to move they'll bring their rich kids and personal chef and all sorts of undesirables

>>10236699
we like people who get shit done, yes

>>10236461
This scene made me laugh. Especially due to the people welding it by hand. In the likely future everything would be done in space, with huge automated factories churning out starship after starship, with minimal human input for some of the more delicate installations.

>>10236879
>get shit done
you mean you like people who are good at marketing lmao
musk is literally the epitome of "more talk than walk"

>>10236720
That graph is ridiculous, lol

>>10236828
lol no

how high will the hippity hops be you ask?
>The tests themselves are divided into low‐altitude and higher‐altitude tests. The low‐altitude tests stay below 500 meters in altitude and last approximately 100 seconds. These tests will be run approximately three times per week during the initial portion of the program. The higher‐altitude tests can go as high as 5 km and will occur approximately once per week. These tests last approximately 6 minutes.
>Please note that SpaceX is also applying for an experimental permit from the FAA in order to gain permission to run these VTVL tests.

>>10236839
>Elon can't even live stream from his PR stunt thingy
he did it anyway, what does that tell you?

>>10236880
>In the likely future
you don't know shit, stop acting like it.
God I hate that faggot with the speech impediment, you know the one

>>10236870
>>somehow think a barren wasteland will improve on social issues

That is exactly what hard environmental conditions tend to do. Look up Cold Winter theory.

>>10236852
>gov seizes all assets
>arrests all employees and sentences them to 20 years unpaid labor for defense contractors
Enjoy eating rocks on mars, jellos.

>>10236900
Enjoy getting a space rock dropped on your head, dirty Earther

space for the spacenoids

>>10236906
TANSTAAFL

>>10236900
>>10236906

and so it begins..

>>10236898
look up the entirety of Africa you retard

>>10236919
Africa is an environmental paradise with no winters to deal with, and as such African people are coddled into never needing to do any careful long term planning to survive.

>>10236138
fpbp

>>10236906
Mother Earth's protective blanket of magnets will protect us. Our all loving Mother and her caretakers will keep us safe no matter what you monsters try to do.

>tfw my citizen credit just increased so there will be additional co2 footprint free onions rations tonight

>>10236749
Despite his delays, he has created a rocket company with cutting edge technology that flies an overwhelming amount of payloads, meanwhile in that time frame the government contractor has yet to put together ONE (1) heavy lift rocket.

>>10236925
someone doesn't know geography
also according to your logic people living in deserts and extremely cold regions should be more advanced

>>10236941
>Finland

>>10236940
>Saturn V
>SLS

>>10236946
What is this even supposed to mean?

>>10236941
People do not live in the desert, they live around the coast, rivers, or oases surrounded by desert. These are quite comfy places to live. Deserts themselves are not really habitable (well, not with low tech anyway).

>>10236946
happened in the 60s
hasn't happened yet
neither of those are in the timeframe of Falcon Heavy, which is the newest heavy lift vehicle
Starship Super Heavy, SLS, and Saturn V are also super heavy lift vehicles, not heavy

>>10236940
>cutting edge technology
like what
>overwhelming amount of payloads
factually false
>in that time frame
... of 16 years NASA and other space agencies have managed to land on another planets moon, take pictures of it, send multiple rovers to mars, manage asteroid return missions and even fucking land on them
meanwhile spacey has managed to build rockets where the first stage can land itself but the rockets themselves can't even send payload beyond gso, and a big one which can send dead weight on an inaccurate orbit around the sun.

>>10236963
>SpaceX man bad
>NASA good

what are these rods

>>10236963
>of 16 years NASA and other space agencies have managed to land on another planets moon, take pictures of it, send multiple rovers to mars, manage asteroid return missions and even fucking land on them

Small unmanned probes are nice and so on, but this is not how a 21st century space program should look like at all, and you know it. Spaceflight is in decline ever since the end of Apollo and would be in a very very sad state if it wasnt for SpaceX.

>>10236969
To connect the sheets of steel

>>10236969
>what are these rods
Space frame for the thin sheets I think. Basically its just there to shape the thing.

>>10236966
>I don't have a counterargument
>>10236976
>space travel should involve more humans because I like to dream about living in space one day

>>10236976
>if it wasnt for SpaceX
what exactly did spacex change again?

>>10236963
They have the fucking cheapest orbital class rocket that WORKS. Try beating that.

>>10236982
>what exactly did spacex change again?
Dragged the United States back into relevance in commercial space launch and began a downward trend in vehicles. They introduced booster recovery and reuse to a degree never before seen. They're poised to make spaceflight affordable in a way that we have never before seen. The payload building industry is only beginning to realize the potential business opportunities. Iridium is one of the first.

>>10236981
>Cherry picks and ignores shit
>Hurr you no have counterargument

>>10236997
>still can't launch humans to the iss
hmm I wonder why

>>10237003
>hmm I wonder why
NASA is very choosy about the vehicles they ride in, and as the customer, have been dictating specification. Demo Mission 1 with Dragon 2 is currently scheduled for January 17th.

>>10236982
>what exactly did spacex change again?

SpaceX is well on their way to realize the holy grail of rocketry - rapid reusability. This is where the Shuttle and countless others failed.

>>10236880
>n the likely future everything would be done in space, with huge automated factories churning out starship after starship, with minimal human input for some of the more delicate installations.
It makes me laugh that you expected to find some sort of realism in star trek, its worse than a cartoon, if you take anything that happens there even slighltly seriously you are a brainlet

>>10237003
Neither can any other American company and Russia is recycling their 50 year old technology and praying their slav convicts can manage to stay sober enough to put it together.

>>10236828
Spoken like a person who knows nothing

>>10236862
>Mars Colony will be past-money society.
Sure, its easy to get a post money communism or whatever if your whole soceity is composed of people with college level education that have been screened for every psyhcological negative trait. In that way it would be undoubtedly better.

the problem is what we do with earth in which at least 4/5 of the population are fairly undistinguishable from animals (they will cum unprotected into the hole even tough they know they cant support baby, they will kill another person just because they feel like it in the moment and most importantly they will not focus on concentrate on a task unless they are literally threateaned to starve if they dont do it.

>>10237014
>muskfags defend building rockets in the simplest ways possible
>at the same time hate on Russia for using the most reliable rocket design of all time
the hypocrisy has no limits lmao
>>10237008
>somehow magically achieve magic reusability from simple LEO payload rockets thinking the concept automatically scales

>>10237020
>t. Gopnik

>>10236963
>the rockets themselves can't even send payload beyond gso
>what is DISCOVR
>what is TESS

>>10237022
>success rate 97%
>1209 launches

>>10237026
also
>what is SpaceIL

>>10236963
>even fucking land on ((asteroids))
wow it's fucking nothing

>>10237034
MINERVA-II a cute. cute!

>>10237034
typical muskfag
a car in space is more amazing than landing on an asteroid

>>10237032
>JEWS
>ON
>THE
>MOON

>>10237031
>Hasn't gotten any cheaper since the day it launched
>Russian space agency still somehow on the verge of bankruptcy because drunk slavs can't stop embezzling money

>>10237038
If you're gonna list accomplishments, landing on an asteroid is not one of them. Rendezvousing is the hard part, the gravity is so low that for landing you literally push yourself towards the rock at 2 mm/second, get within ten centimeters, cancel velocity, and wait a half hour to drop the last bit. There you go, wow so fucking amazing. Docking in Earth orbit is a bigger accomplishment because you actually have to get lined up to a specific point.

>>10237037
The asteroids themselves are fine, it's the event of landing that is not impressive. However true to form ESA still managed to royally fuck up their landing attempt, good on them.

>>10237042
by your logic spacex literally has no accomplishments since everything is so easy lmao

>>10237020
>reliable
also boring and inefficient
well, usually boring

>SpaceX will never fly a rocket
>SpaceX will never reach orbit
>SpaceX will never land a rocket
>SpaceX will never land an orbital booster
>Falcon Heavy will never fly
>Boosters will never be reused more than once
>You are here
>Reusing boosters will never be profitable
>BFR will never be built
>SpaceX will never take people to the moon
>SpaceX will never take people to Mars
>SpaceX will never setup a Martian colony
>SpaceX will never use it's orbital advantage to declare RAHOWA on ULA for embezzlement of spaceflight funds as SLS still is not completed in the year 2030 and obliterate them as well as Bezos for the lulz using rocks dropped on them

>>10237048
Explain your logic for how landing on an asteroid is somehow more difficult than landing on a barge.

>>10237063
>rendezvous
>interpart communication
>delay
>unknown variables of asteroid surface
Vs
>low altitude reentry
>all variables observable, such as atmosphere, weather and landing location

>>10237063
even landing the space shuttle is more difficult than what spacex does

>>10237077
>unknown variables of asteroid surface

Now that's just disingenuous

>>10237060
These pol-greentexts where you post tons of strawmen arguments to make your predictions plausible are retarded.

>>10237081
how

muskfags have achieved a new level: they now claim that landing on other planets and asteroids is easier than rocket reentry from LEO on fucking earth

>>10237084
It's a fucking joke moron, besides you retarded fags screeching hurr never ever hurr fraud only to get btfo every single fucking time are even more retarded.

>>10237089
It is easier when you get unlimited taxpayer gibs and eternally extending deadlines to complete your project.

>>10237094
So who said that boosters cant be reused more than once? Do you realize Space Shuttle side boosters were reused dozens of times? The real question is how much is SpaceX saving, if any. Im not even going into the other much more obvious straw men.

>>10237096
>So who said that boosters cant be reused more than once?

A million screeching retards on this very board who are now notably silent now that a third flight has been achieved.

>Do you realize Space Shuttle side boosters were reused dozens of times?
>Reused

That's a generous way of saying torn down and rebuilt.

>>10237103
>That's a generous way of saying torn down and rebuilt
literally what spacex does as well

>>10237114
nope, nowadays hardly anything is taken out or replaced. boosters don't even leave Vandenberg or the Cape; they inspect them in the launch site hangers and that's about it

>>10237060
I had to google what rahowa is
sounds gay af

>>10237114
You can clearly see that they are not torn apart....

>>10237089
wait, which side do you mean by "muskfags"
I think we need to clarify things here

>>10237144
people who adore Elon musk
aka people who think a single lane tunnel for cars is a good idea
aka people who think nanotechnology is bullshit because musk said so
aka people who watched to much sci-fi and now think they will go to mars in the next 20 years because musk said so

boca chica update

at this rate they'll have fully assembled the hopper superstructure by like tomorrow

>>10237153
that's all just a possibility, you don't need to get mad about speculation
have fun

>>10237154
nice, it'll still be pretty big even though it's just a subscale test model
that's super cool

>>10237086
They're piles of rocks

>>10237170
>>10237167
exactly what I am talking about
deflect all criticism by either saying "hurr it's all just being optimistic" or acting completely retarded and calling an extremely rugged asteroid surface with a diameter of a few kilometres easy to land on because "it's just a pile of rocks"

>>10237153
Nanotechnology IS fucking bullshit. We are not even in the remote realm of possibility for that shit, nothing to do with Musk. If you think reusing rockets are bullshit then I fail to see how you believe in fucking nanotech.

>>10237114
No.

The SRBs were torn completely down to just an empty casing, they even scrubbed the old paint off. Every booster used new avionics, new separators, new nozzles, new gimbal assembly, and of course a fresh coat of paint on everything.

Meanwhile SpaceX is using spot cleaning on various checkup points, visual inspection, a static fire to confirm everything's good, and up it goes again. They *had* been significantly tearing down cores when they were developing Block 5, and the tore down their first Block 5 core to confirm the changes were all good.

>>10237169
>nice, it'll still be pretty big even though it's just a subscale test model
>that's super cool
Its only being built shorter than a real Starship; the diameter is the same.

I'm tempted to go drive out and see this shit.

>>10237182
No shit it doesn't fit when you clip off the edge of a section, learn how to use your program dickhead.

>>10237194
chill dude, was just showing what the next assembly step will likely be

>>10237181
a muskfag not knowing what nanotechnology is, why am I even surprised

>>10237177
it requires some precision thrusting so that you don't go flying off into space (again, but this time not on purpose) but the hard part is getting there in the first place

>>10237188
yeah, it's still smaller
height is a part of the size

>>10237199
nothing that can be called nanotechnology is currently feasible
there's some cool hypercapacitor stuff that might happen eventually, but that's it for nano-scale stuff
graphene is a meme

>>10237177
Okay let's get things straight, landing on an asteroid is hard, but it's a different kind of hard compared to SpaceX's rocket landings. Landing on an asteroid is like surgery, it's has to be very precise and accurate; however, there's a lot of leighway for correction due to the minuscule delta v requirements for movement and the ability for the spacecraft to abort to orbit at any time. Also, the spacecraft isn't flying blind, it scans every inch of the asteroid before attempting a landing. SpaceX's landings have no practical abort scenarios and little room for correction.

>>10236139
>looking at pictures of the the components being assembled
>not a real rocket
???

>>10237191
do it, and bring a telephoto lens

>>10237199
tell me what in your enlightened mind does nanotechnology mean?

>>10237199
There is no currently feasible way to develop nanotech materials outside out miniscule quantities in a horrendously expensive lab environment. Once you can show me a stick made of nanotubes I will concede the point, until then it is total vaporware.

>>10237177
The Japanese literally said fuck it and landed one of their probes on an asteroid because they ran out of shit for it to do and it wasn't a big deal. The probe was not even designed to land on an asteroid and it was fine. Why? Because there's negligible gravity which gives you literally dozens of minutes to react to any problem and no consequences for falling over beyond probably getting a crappy signal. You can abort a landing 2 meters away from an asteroid with a 1mm/s^2 delta V that takes a fraction of a second to apply. You can also hover 10 meters above the surface indefinitely looking for a good spot if the surface is REALLY rough.

The only probe to ever fail a landing on a comet or asteroid was that ESA probe with the retarded harpoons, because it fired the harpoons which launched it back into space and into the one place on the comet that wouldn't get any direct sunlight. That's par for the course for ESA landings though.

>>10237209
stop embarrassing yourself anon, read about some current applications
>>10237214
next you're gonna claim the atmospheric landing on was easier as well because the satellite scanned "every inch of the surface"
oh wait thats not how scanning works

>>10237219
Needs a 4chan post saying "BFR will never fly" shooped in there. Also the lack of tendies in the payload bay disturbs me.

>>10237227
it's a collaborative image, add to it whatever you want

>>10237220
>>10237222
>muskfags use their computers and don't know about nanoelectronics
do you know how small integrated circuits are you absolute regards

hint: less than 1000 nanometers

>>10237226
>next you're gonna claim the atmospheric landing on was easier as well because the satellite scanned "every inch of the surface"

His claim is that it was easier because everything happens way slower and you have essentially infinite margin to just abort and try again as many times as you want. The fact that you can pick a good site means that the actual surface roughness of the asteroid is irrelevant, you can avoid boulders and shit. Falcon 9 can't avoid stormy weather when landing, it has essentially zero margin, there are many many more complicated forces and millions of extra environmental factors to deal with, and everything it does has to happen very quickly. That's what makes it harder.

>>10237234
>way slower and you have essentially infinite margin
lmao
>can't avoid storms
absolute kek

>>10237232
>what is nanotechnology
>a cpu
good one, find me a single person who would ever guess this as the answer

>>10237234
>just do a few more laps around the earth, anon

>>10237232
It's a fucking stretch to call that nanotechnology m8. Again, when you have some real world applications of real nano materials such as Graphene then come back.

>>10237240
I don't like the definition of nanotechnology so I'll change it to keep aucking musk's cock
aside from that, do you denounce every scientific field which doesn't have that many application as it could in the future as "bullshit" simply to keep sicking muskys cock?

>>10237239
Not an argument.

>>10237239
>I have actually accepted my opponent's opinion as fact but an too embarrassed to admit that despite my own anonymity also I suck cocks

>>10237242
>it's a stretch to call technology in the range of 10-50nm nanotechnology

>>10237246

>>10237249
im just to lazy to explain to him why such a landing wouldn't have "infinite abort time" because I have still hope he's not that retarded

>>10237234
yes they can, they can just not launch if the weather is bad
F9 only takes a few minutes to go up and then come back down, they know exactly what sorts of conditions the rocket is going to be descending into

>>10237255
we don't need chicken tenders, anon, we have Cirno

>>10237219
I don't have one

>>10237261
still go do it
report back

>>10236880
That was the first ship. Ships after that were built in space.

>>10237258
just give up, there's no hope for them. they unironically gonna claim landing on the moon was easier than lending a light first stage booster next, because the moon has no atmosphere and there's "infinite abort time" since it's descending so slowly lmao

Glorious

report and ignore, dumbasses

>>10237246
i didn't even know musk ever said anything about nanotechnology, but i sure as hell know it's not a fucking thing that actually exists

>>10237265
What a fucking strawman. The moon has gravity, you can't just stop whenever.

>>10237267
For
>>10237255

>>10237271
I don't think Musk has said anything about it, I think it was Tony Stark in that movie earlier this year.

There is fairly poor nanotechnology at the moment, it's getting better. Anything that manipulates DNA is nanotech by def too.

>>10237020
>the hypocrisy has no limits lmao
whats the hipocrisy? that you stated a perfectly rational point of view that is absolutely 100% foolproof non hypocritical at all and then somehow act as if you didnt prove anything else than you being cluerless?

>>10237241
?

>>10237265
>False equivalence
The moon has much more gravity than an Asteroid; therefore, Armstrong wasn't able to hover 10m above the lunar surface and abort to orbit after the Eagle's fuel ran dangerously low, he had to find a landing spot once he had reached a low enough altitude.

>>10237258
DRONE SHIP LANDING
weather at the cape/Vandenburg can be a lot prettier than out at sea several hundred km away.

It has already been the case that a Falcon 9 has launched when it has been very stormy at the landing site.

>>10237272
the point is that there are other difficulties you retard
thruster failures, surface bounces, unknown surface anomalies which make the landing more difficult and could break parts etc.
no matter how you see it, the Rosetta mission was objectively more difficult than any of the falcon landings.

>>10237265
>landing on the Moon is similar in difficulty to landing on a body with <1 mm/s^2 gravity

nigger

>>10237295
You could literally pick up and throw a stone off Ryugu or Bennu and it would reach escape velocity...

>>10237283
ahem, you have "molecular" in your bio. that is 100% equivalent with bs

>something has to be compared to something else to make it better than the other thing except they're completely different in the first place
YOU'RE BOTH STUPID STOP ARGUING

>>10237016
>>10236828
The person who knows nothing is you. If you can reuse your launcher you dont need a super heavy lift capacity because you can assemble everything you need in orbit.

spacexman bad

>>10237294
>thruster failures
you have a dozen 10 N thrusters for maneuvering and any single one is enough to boost back away from an asteroid's gravity
>surface bounces
cancel all velocity at the moment of touch down to prevent a bounce
>distance to surface is not precisely known

Congratulations you've proven that landing a large booster using a single engine on a drone ship in pitching seas under high gravity is way harder than any asteroid landing could ever be. Fuck you.

>>10237294
>Thruster failures

Shit design and engineering, nothing to do with asteroids, next.

>Surface bounces

At what like 1-2mm/s? Note how Hayabusa had no problem with it because it's not an issue if you don't try to harpoon it like a fucking whale lmao

>Surface anomalies

Good thing it is approaching extremely slowly and has shitloads of time to make sure the landing site is fine then huh?

>>10237300
where'd you get that render, L2? don't see it on any of the NSF threads or twatter

>>10237309
I think you don't understand what surface anomalies means
also you're forgetting that all of that is happening with a fucking delay you absolute mongoloid

>>10237184
So just like what god elon is doing
Okay.

>>10237300
Yes
Which means once you're in orbit around one of those things you're moving sooooo slooooowly that you have plenty of time to make any adjustments or anything you want, and your biggest concern is actually just not bouncing off, which you can simply avoid by coming down even more slowly that you would in free fall.

>>10237315
Nice strawman.

>>10237304
white people vs niggers

ok muskfags answer me this, was landing curiosity also easier than a falcon booster? or any of the other interplanetary missions? because even if you try to discredit asteroid landings and return missions, other space agencies still have achieved 100x that of spacex.

>>10237324
don't bother they are delusional.

>>10237311
You fucking idiot lmao having no gravity is fucking awful because most of your thruster will be busy to keep your rocket vertical to the ground. On earth, gravity does that for you. Its not so hard for small satellites that can land on any site but landing a rocket on its landing legs is a nightmare.

>>10237303
I missed that instance of him being an insufferable twat. What a year!

HULLO has posted a new video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoegqRJKGE8

>>10237313
>surface anomalies
Enlighten me.
You can avoid any rough terrain, or at least pick acceptably rough terrain. An asteroid is not going to suddenly spew fourth a geyser, even comets don't do that. Space worms don't exit. So what exactly do you mean by 'space anomaly' that we wouldn't be able to dodge or otherwise spot long before we got within ten meters of the surface?

Also, Falcon 9 has to deal with shit like sheer winds and waves lifting and dropping the drone ship and what the fuck ever else can happen in an atmosphere so your argument that 'the surface might be anomalous' is pointless.

>>10237334
>Space worms don't exit.
Unless they need to eat, then they come right out.

>>10237330
Rocket landings are incredibly simple but economically not viable hence only spacex bothers for their own reasons.

>>10237344
Landing rockets on its legs on earth is not so hard because you have gravity but doing it in micro g is difficult but maybe that other anon thinks crashing small boxes into asteroids is the same thing as landing a 50m ship on it upright.

>>10237324
Must be nice to have 2.5 billion dollars to throw at a single rocket and probe.

>>10237354
It's even nicer if the agency who has all that money is giving you all their know-how for free.

>>10237312
No, just some photoshop from autism central (r/spacexlounge) apparently the render is a bit short compared to the real thing.

>>10237324
Curiosity-style landings are definitely more impressive than SpaceXs just because of the sheer complexity and amount of moving parts involved, but I can't think of any other planetary missions with such extreme landings. Venera 13 that landed on Venus was pretty hard-core, but that was more to do with the conditions in which it landed and not the landing itself. Huygens was a pretty leisurely landing due to Titan's thicc atmosphere, the only problems there were the distance and lack of information about the surface.

>>10237353
Good thing no one is trying to land a rocket on an asteroid then is it? Any missions to an asteroid with a full scale rocket will involve matching velocities and sending robot probes or maybe people out to the rock. Why would you even try to land a rocket on an asteroid? What a fucking stupid strawman.

>>10237334
>overdo the landing a bit because of a minor hill on the left two landing lags
>craft bounces up to 1km and starts rotating
>lose signal since you know, this is not a fucking piss easy earth landing
>land again, finally successfully (on rough terrain)
>there is a tilt preventing the solar panels from working fully
I'm sure you are smarter than the entirety of the Philae mission control combined

don't forget about the pressure of losing literally millions if you do one little mistake
anyone who unironically claims this was easier than landing a rocket back on earth is retarded

What's the new timeline for SpaceX?
>2019 - finish Starship hopper and do test launches
>2020 - start building BFR and Starship
>2021 - launch first BFR and Starship
>2022 - unmanned Starships land on Mars
>2025 - humans land on Mars

>>10237358
>Huygens was a pretty leisurely landing due to Titan's thicc atmosphere
there it is
I'm telling you, next it's gonna be the moon landing
they are already saying Huygens was easier

>>10237364

>>10237291
do they have footage of that? I'd like to see (sea) it
>>10237288
landing on the moon is much easier than spacex propulsive landing
Niel did it by hand after all
the hard part is getting to the moon
>>10237324
we aren't discrediting the asteroid mission, that was impressive, but the actual landing is kind of lame

>>10237364
move orbital BFR flight forward, move manned man on mars mission back
SpaceX will be frantic launching their 14,000 starlink satellites, and figuring ISRU hardware out

>>10237369
holy lek there it is

spacex booster landing is now officially the most difficult thing ever done in space travel

These threads are becoming unbearable. Why can we never just talk about SpaceX without all these fucking drones showing up?

>>10237376
omfg you are so easy to troll

>>10237376
>>10237365
Stop fucking strawmanning, that isn't what he said at all.

>>10237376
I hope someone somehow actually discovers/invents something insane like a warp drive in the next couple of years just so someone else can say "Well, it's no booster landing and they're no Elon Musk".

>>10237324
>was landing curiosity also easier than a falcon booster?
I'm the guy making the argument, and no, Curiosity was not easier than Falcon 9, and I never said that.

Asteroid landings on the other hand are a piece of piss compared to Falcon 9 Booster landings.

>>10237330
>having no gravity
There is gravity fucktard you just have to be careful not to accidentally bounce away at escape velocity. This means falling at millimeters per second and pulsing the thrusters to keep speed extremely low right at the final descent, but it's not difficult. You don't need thrust to stay on the asteroid at all numbnuts.

>>10237385
>Asteroid landings on the other hand are a piece of piss

>>10237388
yeah man because adding micro-thrust is totally easy man like believe me i like all tweets from elon that practically makes me an expert.

>>10237381
>hurr i was just trolling
I'm sure the other retards
>>10237382
>>10237385
>>10237388
are too

reactionless drives compared against propulsive landings and booster reentries are apples and oranges, you can't compare them
>>10237395
why you so mad lel

>>10237394
>Goalpost status:moved

>>10237395
Butthurt

>>10237361
>>overdo the landing a bit because of a minor hill on the left two landing lags
...
>>there is a tilt preventing the solar panels from working fully
Goes to show you don't know shit about what Philae was about. First of all it had retarded harpoons that fired on contact with the ground and did not stay embedded because it's made of grit. The recoil form the harpoons caused the huge bounce. When the probe finally landed and came to a stop it was stuck down in between the two lobes of the comet in the one are on the surface that got almost no sunlight. Hand it to the Europoors, they covered every face of their probe with panels and still managed to put it somewhere where the sun was blocked.

>>10237365
>they are already saying Huygens was easier
It was an entry vehicle with a parachute, wowee complex and difficult landing sequence alright!

>>10237402
There is no goalpost status you fucking idiot youre just a clueless retard. That super-precise thrusting is literally why its so hard.

>>10237403
Yeah what moron thought harpoons were a good idea? Shows the true intelligence in these space agencies.

>>10237384
>accidentally admits that nothing can top booster landings except literal scifi

>>10237402
>surgical precision with minutes of delay
Vs
>landing on a gigantic barge with predictable conditions that is so easy you can literally write a script for it and unless there is a technical or extreme environmental issue it won't fuck up

>>10237409
>said the anon shitposting from his mum's house responding to 52 other haters defending his favourite csfag Elon musk

>>10237407
Mate you just made up a random fucking strawman about tail landing a rocket on an asteroid that somehow has no gravity and needs a thruster to keep it in place the whole time. Someone called you a retard and then you shifted the goalposts.

>>10237416
There are only 28 posters in this thread retard, learn how to use 4chan next time.

>>10237410
>implying booster landings don't top all sci-fi including warp drive
It's already been said guys.

>>10237389
correct.

>>10237417
>m-mate lets not talk about my bullshit statements

Youre a clueless idiot and you showed now countless times.

>>10237394
>adding micro-thrust is totally easy
Yes, it's actually incredibly easy when your spacecraft's main propulsion comes from a set of 1-newton-thrust pressure fed gas thrusters that require a single valve to operate.

>300 posts
>28 posters

And the thread was semi functional while the posters were around 20. I always had the suspicion the shitposting was caused by one or two niggers and now its confirmed.

>>10237395
>I'm sure the other retards are too
>are too
>too

ooooh someone got trolled :^)

>>10237427
So do asteroids have gravity or not?

>>10237436
Microgravity you clueless idiot.

>>10237430
Here, I'll bump this shit thread full of retards up to 29 posters for you.

>>10237430
Every SpaceX thread is like this nowadays. It's a combination of shills, trolls, retards and fanboys.

>>10237407
>super-precise thrusting is literally why its so hard
It isn't though, you just use a really small engine.

>>10237438
>You fucking idiot lmao having no gravity is fucking awful
>No gravity

>>10237441
*every space launch/vehicle related thread

>>10237436
We need to talk about gravity if you're going to post here. Everything with mass (not just inertial mass but also mass from energy) is affected by gravity.

>>10237441
no, this is an obvious troll thread
there was a good thread up for the launch

>>10237445
Semantics lmao. Whos moving the goalpost again?

>>10237219
does India generate the methane?

>>10236711
>“we’re hoping to get a better review of what that livestreaming is, and what potential risk to national security each one will have.”
Any fucking student project can hitch a ride on some rocket now.
Maybe it's time for US to stop pretending that being in space makes you invisible.

>>10236897
Oisaac Ofur.

Stop responding to literal shills
They get paid by the (You)

>>10237403
the harpoons never fired because they used an explosive that doesn't work in a vacuum

>>10236561
i want musk to get to mars but i still think planetary protection should be involved

>>10237803
Planetary protection exists to suppress science and development
That soi bullshit needs to be torched and buried