/sci/ - Science & Math

Thread 13 btw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI5Jkvcf4TU&t=3

So when is the first "hop" actually gonna happen? As fun as all this launchpad assembly stuff is, I'm assuming we're still a ways off from it even going a few meters off the ground.

Not much to discuss now at least until the dome is on and we can start waiting for the engines and transport to the pad. Generals just invite shitposters and /sci/ lacks the board culture to deal with them.

>>10277023
yeah, I'm kinda pooped after 12 threads anyways

>>10277038
time to shit this thread up too, heh
>reminder the US government almost entirely finances spacex, "muh capitalism and privatisation is more efficient" is a fucking meme
>reminder the minds behind SpaceX are actually Mueller and shotwell and the company won't achieve its maximum potential until that fucking retard is gone from the company
>reminder that NASA literally saved SpaceX from bankruptcy but ungrateful streetshitters and pajeets still like to hate on it
>reminder that landing boosters is a party trick, SpaceX operates on marginal profits if at all, and "muh market share" literally is only true because SpaceX ist willing to accept any contract, however small it may be

>>10277066
>reminder that space is CGI and the earth is flat

>>10277068
>I have no counterarguments but I must reeee

>>10277066
>>reminder that landing boosters is a party trick
shure little boy
thats why nasa aplauds it and every single space agency in the world has expressed worries about it and taked measures based solely on that event

>>10277070
>I have no counterarguments
SpaceX's NASA contracts are capitalism and privatization. They do the same work that used to be exclusively contracted to Lockmart et. al., often for 1/4th of the price or less. Landing boosters isn't a "party trick," they already represent a 30% savings in launch costs just for the relatively primitive and rudimentary first-stage recovery. Why wouldn't SpaceX be willing to "accept any contract, no matter how small" if the customer is willing to pay for the full Falcon 9 launch?

Had no intention to participate in this one but this was just too funny
>https://www.universetoday.com/141076/the-spacex-starhopper-has-three-raptor-engines-on-the-bottom/
>News of the updated assembly – which included the possible integration of three Raptor engines – began making the rounds after a series of photos were posted on NASA Spaceflight’s board on Dec. 31st. These were taken by a member of the National Space Foundation (NSF) – who goes by the handle bocachicagal – and drew attention to the three nozzles that were apparent on the aft section."
>NASA Spaceflight’s board
>National Space Foundation (NSF)

I wish I could say this is typical media coverage of spaceflight, but the truth is they don't really put that much more effort into other topics.

>>10277077
>tfw SpaceX literally drops their rockets if the payload is too big
let me ask you this simple question: why don't they simply divide the payload into smaller parts and then recover the boosters if it's such a cost saver?

>>10277094
>why don't they simply divide the payload into smaller parts
Why don't they divide a satellite in 2? I dunno, what do you think?

>>10277094
>let me ask you this simple question: why don't they simply divide the payload into smaller parts and then recover the boosters if it's such a cost saver?
Because even if a payload was magic legos that could come together in orbit with no effort, saving 30% on recovery doesn't merit spending 200% on two rockets instead of one?

>>10277094
>why don't they simply divide the payload into smaller parts

>>10277097
>payload of 10 satellites
>no attempt of recovery because payload too big
sure is fun being retarded, eh

>>10277102
>>10277099
>spacex retards once again think the big payloads with no recovery attempt are singular satellites

>>10277104
>>10277110
>saving 30% on recovery doesn't merit spending 200% on two rockets instead of one

>>10277099
>saving 30% on recovery doesn't merit spending 200% on two rockets instead of one?
>what is ride-sharing

>>10277112
>saving 30% on recovery doesn't merit spending 200% on two rockets instead of one?
are you fucking implying it is impossible to efficiently distribute too heavy payloads equally between several launches, assuming they are divisible?

>>10277124
>>10277115
You're just fuckin with me, right? Lemme give you some real simple arithmetic here.

Launch one $90 million rocket. It's too heavy to recover. It cost you $90 million.

Split the payload and launch two $90 million rockets. It costs you $180 million. You recover the first stages, saving you $60 million. You just spent $120 million to do a $90 million job.

>>10277094
actually not even that, they sometimes don't attempt recovery even if previous successful landings had heavier payloads.
rly makes u think

>>10277129
>Launch one $90 million rocket. It's too heavy to recover. It cost you $90 million.
alright good job so far anon
>Split the payload and launch two $90 million rockets
and ride share. that's what the fucking point is. you double the payload and can recover.
$180 million. You recover the first stages, saving you $60 million
yes
>$120 million to do a $90 million job.
no, a 180$ million job

>>10277133
Those were all block 4 boosters before they rolled out block 5, they just wanted to throw them away.
Notice how they all had landing legs on.
On payloads that actually NEED the full rocket they take them off. (like the gps one last month)

>>10277135
>and ride share. that's what the fucking point is. you double the payload and can recover.
But you just split the hypothetical payload to save enough weight to be able to recover, if you double the payload again you still won't be able to recover

I just want a big comfy space ship like the consul's in Hyperion.
With cosy wooden and velour interior and shiet
Why is it so hard

>>10277140
30 million extra worth of payload is literally all you need to break even.
that's way less than twice the payload

>>10277146
That can be donem you just need to power it with nuclear explosions. They planned to include a heavy barber iron chair in the first project orion becuase of literally what you said

>>10277091
>Be sure to check out this video by “astronogamer” Scott Manley

What the fuck is this shit?

>>10277154
eceleb basedboys, erm I mean based SpaceX Fans like because they played ksp and thing they now know all about it

>>10277023
>Not much to discuss now
is NSF hoarding all the good stuff on L2? i heard they post lots of photos/content there that doesnt get released.

>>10277020
February, I've heard.

>>10277146
You'd need to be appointed space consul first which is no easy task.

>Thread already ruined

Abandon thread until further intel is received. Also considering signing up for L2 to share all the juicy paycuck stuff here, there is no real way for them to tie it back to your account right?

some light work going on at the launch area, no concrete being poured for a launch pad

>>10276978
Is that an official render? Is Super Heavy confirmed steel as well then?

>>10277281
It's not official and nothing's confirmed, but the final orbital performance of all launch vehicles is minimally affected by increases in booster dry mass, and SpaceX has a history of amortizing the cost of tooling and avoiding workforce redundancy by increasing component commonality. It would be surprising if the first stage was anything but steel.

yikes wtf

why does a pipe dream need 13 threads?

supposedly there are concrete dump trucks at the launch area? there's a video on fb but i dont have the link.

>>10277290
Is that a Bogdanoff?

>>10277290
Who is this thot and why do i see her in so many pictures

>>10277290
I fucking love down to earth cuties. Like, sure you know she's not a 10/10 but that is just nice solid 6-7 is the best. Nice but not perfect face. Ass that looks perfect in yoga pants. butprobably has a bit of cottage cheese, big hips but kinda boxy body, small tits but visible, a bit saggy.

I love this, i prefer this, this brings out the inner fuck animal in me

>>10277450
she has a 5/10 body but a 3/10 face dude

>>10277450

>>10277463
need better pics of the face

>>10277466
project much? what does that have to do with anything? what i said is an inner thought not something for a girl to hear.

>>10277466
Kek

>>10277262
Prepare for the disappointment of a lifetime. You think that us L2 members have raptor cad files and unreleased footage or videos from personnel in MacGregor. The reality is mostly Q Anon level of speculation of someone who heard from a guy that's cryptic and hardly useful with the occasional good helicopter photos of test sites. That's it.

>>10277466
>someone took the time to make this

I wonder if they were legit chuckling as they made it, if it was a commission, of if they were just ass blasted.

>>10277478
>what i said is an inner thought not something for a girl to hear.
>I have thoughts only neckbeards have, b-but that doesn't make me one, trust me

>>10277508
butthurt much?

>>10277511
No, just wondering. I wonder if I triggered you or not, without even trying.

>>10277518
>you're triggered h-heh

>>10277509
walk me trough this, whats beta about wanting to fuck a girl?

>>10277525
>someone took the time to make this pic

I wonder if they were legit chuckling as they made it, if it was a commission, of if they were just ass blasted.

>>10277466
>cartoon about a beta
>not acting like a beta

still no lift

>>10277631

>>10277450
>this brings out the inner fuck animal in me
Um no thank you.

>>10277489
>>10277262
I just signed up literally an hour ago and so far it's the same shit as the main section except there are more pictures from Boca Chica. There's a pretty snazzy picture of a hawk type bird also.

>>10277635
yeah of course you wouldnt go out with me if you know thats what im internally thinking, but its what sicnerely happens to me, what am i gonna do cant hide it.

>>10277633
So they are gonna use a crane to lift it and put it on top of the other part, why not keep lifting and take it 5 km up so they can test the engines? why not keep lifting all the way to mars. at this point nothing surprises me

>>10277633

-I've heard our next comission is gonna be a space vehicle.
-Get the fuck out of here Dave
-No man im dead serious 100%
-We make water towers what are you smoking
-Wanna make it interesting
-Sure, 100 bucks say youre bullshiting me.
-Easiest 100 bucks i ever made take a look at these plans
-Well ill be god damned

>>10277304
>>10277006
how are you all counting these? Is it new years?

Check em

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1082469132291923968

Holy shit! How exciting it must be to work aboard that ship.

>>10277745
the thread before the "nigga for real" thread was thread 11, just based it off that

>>10277797
Fairing parafoil needs better steering.

>>10277826
or the capt needs to be better at figuring out where it'll land

>>10277653

>>10277653
I bet this actually happened

>>10276740
Its literally a property of the materials. Steel has a fatigue limit and aluminum doesn't. This means that there is critical stress for steel which if not exceeded doesn't build up fatigue in the metal. By contrast, aluminum starts accumulating fatigue when put under the slightest repetitive loading.

>>10277633
I like this in a similar vein to how I like hotwings and boobs when I'm drunk.

>>10277167
HULLO SCOT MUNLEY HAIR

>>10278065
Okay, that's retarded. It doesn't mean there's no fatigue limit, it means there's no dominant mode in that range for cycles or stress.

>>10277011
Witnessed

>>10277290
Fuck she looks like a monster.
Is this "beauty" in america?

>>10278234
no, she's ugly as fuck

>>10278234
Yeah that's a 10 in the land of 56% mixed race mongoloids.

>>10278234
>>10278255
OBSESSED

>>10278257
My condolences for your genetic heritage anon.

>>10278234
>>10278255
What do you expect? Boca Chica is right next to the border after all...

>>10276978
Earth is flat

>>10277154
He's an astronomer and became popular for playing space related vidya.

>>10277653
Variation of this likely keeps happening in pubs.

>>10277653
A
FUCKING
WATER
TOWER

wow

Some forum fags are suggesting the booster should be shorter and wider instead, since the diameter limitations imposed by the carbon fiber tooling are now gone. That's good and all but the sls crowd will be happy they have the TALLEST most powerful rocket ever made. Not sure if the engineering benefits outweigh the immaterial losses that might not be so immaterial in the end.

>>10278443
That looks fucking retarded and we know SpaceX is all about the kino aesthetics.

>>10278471
>and we know SpaceX is all about the kino aesthetics

>>10277633
prickly pears in the foreground = kino
murrica

>>10278473
It's a thrown together test article, not a final product moron.

>>10278507
>SpaceX is all about kino aesthetics except when it's not

>>10277110
So you work for ULA?
Why else would anyone care so much about which boosters SpaceX recovers?

>>10278525
>d-dont question it
reminder that SpaceX ist literally the same company as ula with a new reusability twist and crazed man behind it. they both depend on dat sweet NASA money and as soon as NASA doesn't like it anymore it's gone

>>10278555
Except that part where ULA only exists on govt contracts and Russian engines

While SpaceX is actually trying to make launches affordable for non governments.

>>10278368
Isn't he an IT tech that's interested in space? Amateur astronomer if anything surely.

>>10278559
>Except that part where ULA only exists on govt contracts and Russian engines
are you implying that if NASA were to cut funding and contracts, spacex would survive more than three months?

>>10278573
It would survive longer than ULA since no one pays a billion dollars per payload except the taxpayer

>>10278555
Does ULA actually have any rockets at all?

>>10278574
>it would survive two months longer so it surely must be better

>>10278579
By definition, yes.

>>10277154
as far as youtubers goes he's one of those that are still tolerable to watch as it's just him talking to a camera about space related stuff. None of that over produced, scripted DUDE SCIENCE IS SO COOL XD crap that just goes on and on without getting to the point and stupid forced jokes.

>>10277399
Bogdanass

>>10277797
Tell Musk we need a bigger mitt.

>>10278443
At this point I doubt they want to make any changes
Only priority is to get it working, optimize payload later

>>10277066
t.communist

>>10278569
https://b612foundation.org/members/scott-manley/
>Originally from Scotland, Scott spent a decade in academia studying astrophysics and computational physics at the University of Glasgow and Armagh Observatory where he focused on small bodies in the solar system and specifically the probabilities of collision.
he also worked with some writer on plotting a comet's collision with the fictional planet, so he is technically an astronomer. its just that he works as a programmer.

>>10278164
There is no fatigue limit, it's a fact, go educate yourself before you post

Why is it called a hopper?

because elon hoppes fanboys are dumb enough to eat this shit

>>10277290
Imagine the stench.

>>10279157
the stench of stainless steel and reusability

COME ON YOU FUCKERS, why arent you posting, dont you realize this is historical history in the making
elon musk is one of geniuses the likes of plato tesla or butler. hes gonna take us to the future society and you cant even think as science enthusiast to ask something=???!?!?!

Ill give you a little tiny on little on now of a hinter of what you shoulder do, lets do yes do this:

10 quesitons
that i propose you

1)what is reusability going two?
2) what is the other companies going to do to not like have to compete. COuld you imagine the ceo of nasa sleeping in the streets? lol
3)Better materials tomorrow?
4)If stainless steel doesnt deform could that mean infinite flights out of one craft, like, imagine that, initial investment then literally only cost is fuel. 200.000 u$s of fuel ----> can take easily 50 people. 4000U$S ticket to LEO. AMAZING!!
5)HOw many other revolutiaonarie inventions is musk gonna create
6) Chinese reusability? is it done yet?
7)Neuralink Ai and tesla automated, how will it incorporate to mars futurology?
8) Cars, AI , grid infrastructure smart transportation improvation. what else does this genius mastermind has in store for us? thoguhts?
9)scientific education: i think the clue to elon musk spacex is bringing in the little guy into the equation, i mean that nazi guy who did shuttle was not democratic at all, and the soviets were also nazis, but this guy, come on, he lets us watch the updates, and we learn a lot. I think as an american that this is the rocket i want and for once the knowledge is open to the public
10) If the us authorizes safe nuclear fuel, could this get to another star?!?!


There i gave you 10 easy ones.

so
lets say there are 50 peoples lurking sci, if they call themselves science fans tehy HAVE to reply, if 50 peoples, each one thinks at least 5 answer to each of my questions, then thats 50 times 5 times 10 , no reason why not 250 answers should appear

>>10279227
"meh" bait, needs more about AI and the singularity

I guess we really did enter into a lull period where most of the work is being done on the inside of the hopper so we won't see many updates for awhile.

>>10279227
bait

>>10279294
wont stop the muskfags from clogging up the board with 120 more threads featuring mostly shitposts and artist's renditions

>>10279227

>>10278506
how are prickly pears kino

>>10279570
you've never been to Texas

>>10278972
Crack formation and propagation still happens, it's a babby-tier misunderstanding of the mechanics of fatigue mode failure. In fact the "cryo-formed" steel should be especially prone to crack propagation if it is what I understand it as.

Coming together

>>10279696
happening

>>10279696
So what else do they need to do to this thing to complete it?

larger res

>>10279696
>>10279703
>>10279705
So if I'm reading this right, that thing is basically just a shitty mockup to prove that an object of that mass and shape can even do the whole SpaceX VTOL gimmick at all? Like when NASA launched a balsa wood moon lander in 1966, only the dimensions and weight were important.

>>10279729
plus engine testing, pad equipment testing, new software testing, landing algorithm testing... not all of the F9 experience carries over you know.

>>10279729
>So if I'm reading this right, that thing is basically just a shitty mockup to prove that an object of that mass and shape can even do the whole SpaceX VTOL gimmick at all? Like when NASA launched a balsa wood moon lander in 1966, only the dimensions and weight were important.

The more important tests, I suspect, will be validating the robustness of the vehicle's guidance algorithms during differing engine-out scenarios.

>>10279572
nope, but I've been to the Canary Islands and there's loads of them there. Not particularly kino. Giant Canarian lizards /are/ kino though.

>>10279734
>>10279737
What I was getting at is the actual big grain silo rocket thing is not particularly sensitive or important and that's why it's so dodgy looking.

>>10279705
Now things are getting interesting.

>>10279729
Yeah Basically.
In aerospace terms its called a boilerplate, it has the same mass, shape and CoM, but most of the real systems (life support etc) are missing.
I suspect the thing they want to test the most is guidance, because its a completely different engine so falcon 9 doesn't carry over and simulating it is difficult.

>>10279742
>What I was getting at is the actual big grain silo rocket thing is not particularly sensitive or important and that's why it's so dodgy looking.
Gotcha. Yeah, that's the prevailing assumption.

>>10279705
Damn look at the dudes at the base of the rocket

>meanwhile Russia is making a real SHLV by 2028

>>10279742
yes, and the 5km flight ceiling also means it doesn't need to be able to withstand the full range of forces the orbital version will endure

>>10279751
Are they? Because it seems like Russia's dad works at Nintendo to me. They've had the exciting new super rocket that will BTFO America forever just around the corner since 1965.

>>10279757
yeah but then Korolyev died

>>10279705
>mfw the relative size of the people
Finally a vehicle meant to carry people that isn't car trunk sized.

>>10279705
something something your mothers dildo is ready

>>10279760
>tfw no korolev 2.0
ywn experiencing the murifats getting btfoed with limited resources and funding again, feels fucking bad

>>10279757

Imagine if this thing was contracted out to oldspace.

>2023
>the interim committee has confirmed construction of first test hopper to start in 2026

Fascinating to watch actual progress on this type of project

>the shitposter is a butthurt vatnik

So.... how do the workers get inside it? I can’t imagine they wouldn’t make it human-serviceable since they’ll probably be swapping out parts and other stuff

>>10279775
They are more like early NASA before the bureaucratic rot kicked in hence results.

>>10279775
You do realize though it was NASA's idea to outsource launches to private companies and NASA is the only reason SpaceX is still existing?

>>10279773
>6 sidemount boosters
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>10279790
Everyone knows that you retard.
But just because nasa paid for it doesn't mean they get the credit.

>>10279801
but if Elon does it he does get the credit amirite

>>10279801
But Elon does, for being literally the money and nothing else? Yeah okay.

>>10279803
Elon is not just money, he is a very compenent manager, good management being something other aerospace organizations lack, even more so than technical expertise.

>>10279801
It's a retard who has some misconceptions about public-private relationships. Forgive him. Might even be non-american in which case it's not even his fault - the poor soul was lobotomized by his corrupt government, or genetics.

At the current rate of work the water tower might be hop worthy in a month.

>>10279790
There are factions within NASA, some of them are opposed to privatization, some are supportive.

>>10279812
He's the marketing guy like Steve Jobs and nothing else. There are always some sheeple (like you) who become fanboys of such personas, speaks volumes about you.

>>10279821
>He's the marketing guy like Steve Jobs and nothing else. There are always some sheeple (like you) who become fanboys of such personas, speaks volumes about you.

He also makes critical technical decisions about the systems, and when people tell him something can't be done, he frequently does their job for them within his personally allotted deadline. Elon isn't a marketing man; that's Glynn Shotwell's job.

>>10279821
Tell me, would SpaceX exist in its current form (reusability and all that) without Musk? It would not. Hardly a marketing guy. You are an idiot and have the gall to call others sheeple..

>>10279829
>inb4 they are going bankrupt

>>10279821
>He's the marketing guy

You think Musk is marketing multimillion dollar launch vehicles to redditors, schizo?

>>10279838
literally this lol

He sells rockets to big boys who don't care about social justice shite

>>10279823
>critical technical decisions
kek
>>10279829
>SpaceX exist in its current form (reusability and all that) without Musk? I
no, because he provided the funding, same as NASA. they both deserve credit. the reusability idea is not even his, the management of the company is done by shotwell and the innovation by people like Mueller
>>10279838
>You think Musk is marketing multimillion dollar launch vehicles to redditors
absolutely. and you fell for it. you are now one of those people who are willing to pay several thousands of dollars to be ABLE to preorder a product of his.

>>10279838
No, he's marketing a space company to redditors so all the engineers go there and slave away for master musk at minimum wage.

>>10279838
>>10279847
>I don't know how marketing and a persona brand works
there is a reason SpaceX cares so much about it's online and social media presence, you know

>>10279773
nice ass burgers staging

>>10278596
This is what i like about him, he just gets on with it
Sometimes he plays bad games and I don't really understand that part >>10279786
NASA briefly got its head out of its ass after the Apollo 1 fire, then got sucked back in in the 70s

>>10279848
You're wrong, though.

>>10279871
>ur wrong

>>10279848
Bruh, you are talking to a wall. I'm a bit older and I remember well when back in the day all the Jobs-fanboys tried to convince everybody on the internet that you don't need a video camera function on your smartphone (one of the early iPhones wasn't able to record videos for some reason). Talking to these sheeple is completely pointless.

>>10279877
>no u

>>10279848
>kek

Mueller himself describes Musk making critical technical decisions about Merlin engine:

>We’ll have, you know, a group of people sitting in a room, making a key decision. And everybody in that room will say, you know, basically, “We need to turn left,” and Elon will say “No, we’re gonna turn right.” You know, to put it in a metaphor. And that’s how he thinks. He’s like, “You guys are taking the easy way out; we need to take the hard way.”

> So I drew it up, did some, you know, sketches, and said “here’s what we’d do,” and he said “That’s what we need to do.” And I advised him against it; I said it’s going to be too hard to do, and it’s not going to save that much. But he made the decision that we were going to do face-shutoff.

>And now we have the lowest-cost, most reliable engines in the world. And it was basically because of that decision, to go to do that. So that’s one of the examples of Elon just really pushing— he always says we need to push to the limits of physics.

Just a marketing guy my ass.

>>10279882
Projection level 5. Musk cannot be anything more than an overhyped e-celebrity in your world view, and any contradicting statements or evidence is a
>wall
to talk to.

>>10279888
Portraying himself as involved in product development is part of his brand you idiot.

>>10279888
Elon's actually pretty terrible at marketing rocket launches, he leaves that job to Shotwell. She was the one who had to calm the airforce and commercial customers down after Elon tried to cancel Falcon Heavy for the 3rd time.

>>10279897
Yes, you are a wall to talk to, just look at all the shitty SpaceX threads every day. Literally talking to christians about evolution is more pleasant than talking to you sheeple.

>>10279903
What a load of bull. The Falcon Heavy barely has any launches scheduled. It was a waste of money to develop it. If Elon wanted to cancel it, that was actually a good idea he had there.

>>10279902

It is not Musk speaking you idiot.

>>10279904
You dont deserve anything better than a wall as you have no actual arguments. Try that shit on NSF and you will be swiftly banned for trolling.

>>10279904
Now that's not a very nice thing to say about someone at all.

it's getting deep in here

>>10279911
>i don't understand how brand and marketing works pt. 2

>>10279888
If Steve Jobs said they need to make the iPhone look more elegant that doesn't mean he was involved in actual development.

>>10279921
>everything that contradicts me is marketing

how convenient

Fit checks continue.

>>10279931
dat shineyboi

>>10279927
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/18/saying-this-to-elon-musk-could-get-you-fired-off-your-projects-at-spacex.html

>SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has a history of setting sky-high expectations and taking over projects himself — something some employees have learned the hard way.

>According to a 2015 authorized biography by Ashlee Vance, the "absolute worst" thing that a SpaceX employee can do is tell Musk that whatever project or task he's requesting is impossible.

>SpaceX's culture values hard work and an ability to get things done, Vance writes. Employees who wait for detailed instructions, need hand holding or crave feedback could be in for some tough conversations.

>Employees who tell Musk there's no way to get the cost down on a project or say that Musk's deadlines don't give them enough time, could soon come to regret it. The CEO will simply respond, "Fine. You're off the project and I am now the CEO of the project. I will do your job and be CEO of two companies at the same time. I will deliver," Brogan BamBrogan, a former SpaceX engineer, tells Vance.

>Even more surprising, says BamBrogan, is that Musk manages to fulfill that promise. "Every time he's fired someone and taken their job, he's delivered on whatever the project was."

>>10279930
>he partakes in difficult decisions on board meetings, and says "do this cuz i like it", just like a true engineer :')
the fact alone that Elon is involved in the boring company besides SpaceX ist everything you need to know about his brilliant design decisions. THAT idea I'm sure he came up all by himself.

>>10279921
lol, in the next sentence he calls the Merlin engine "the most reliable, cheapest engine in the world". the whole thing is pure marketing. you think he is going to give you a realistic, self-critisizing run-down on SpaceX and the Falcon in that interview?

>>10279927
>article is about Musk making a critical technical decision about Merlin engine
>hurr durr he just made the fucking rocket engine more elegant

>>10279944
quoted the wrong post meant >>10279911

>>10279939
literally a biography elon let somebody write about himself.

>>10279931
how much shorter is hopper compared to Spaceship?

>>10279950
He wasn't involved into actually solving the hard way. He just said Mueller and the others need to go the hard way and not the easy way.

>>10279944
>lol, in the next sentence he calls the Merlin engine "the most reliable, cheapest engine in the world". the whole thing is pure marketing.

Barring the occasions where the vehicle structure has failed in flight, the Merlin 1D has never had an in-flight failure.

>>10279944
>lol, in the next sentence he calls the Merlin engine "the most reliable, cheapest engine in the world"

It is true tough.

>>10279963
Maybe the cheapest, but not the most reliable.

>>10279958
>He wasn't involved into actually solving the hard way. He just said Mueller and the others need to go the hard way and not the easy way.

Questioning the expertise of your engineers and telling them to do things a different way does not pay off unless you know what you're asking for.

>>10279961
>>10279963
>>10279964
Besides, that's not the point. The whole interview is a PR-stunt, but not that you sheeple would understand.

>>10279964
Name a failure the Merlin 1D had, I'll wait.

>>10279966
Yeah, he could bankrupt his company, like Tesla.

>>10279958
Determining the overall design is literally the most important job. You see, Mueller is a genius but there are just as smart people working in NASA and ULA. What sets SpaceX apart is not technical expertise, it is Musk management style. The big picture.

>>10279966
>does not pay off unless you know what you're asking for
lol
are you one of those people who believes when his CEO says "I know the greater picture, trust me it's the right decision" and then it works out?

>>10279974
There is literally nothing that is setting SpaceX apart. Falcon 9 is not a remarkeable rocket in any way.

>>10279974
>Musk management style

>>10279978
>are you one of those people who believes when his CEO says "I know the greater picture, trust me it's the right decision" and then it works out?

No, I'm one who thinks that it won't pay off or work out unless the CEO actually does know what he's talking about.

>>10279972
>Yeah, he could bankrupt his company, like Tesla.
Good thing for Elon that Tesla's not bankrupt then, eh?

>>10279981
>There is literally nothing that is setting SpaceX apart. Falcon 9 is not a remarkeable rocket in any way.
Well folks its official, an anonymous internet commentator has said that orbital rocket boosters that propulsively land themselves vertically and get reused are not remarkable in any way.

>>10279964
>Maybe the cheapest, but not the most reliable.
Merlin 1D booster engines have flown 585 times without failing.

>>10279981
>Falcon 9 is not a remarkeable rocket in any way.

Behold: the absolute state of anti-Musk morons.

>>10279909
Objectively wrong.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/10/spacexs-falcon-heavy-rocket-seems-to-be-a-hit-with-satellite-companies/

>>10279990
You are sheeple level 9000, no point in talking to you.

>>10279992

so a hit is a rocket that nobody buys launches for, i see

>>10279997
>3 satellite companies
>nobody
Just stop embarrassing yourself.

>>10279994
>You are sheeple level 9000, no point in talking to you.
Cool. Thanks for the (you)s.

>>10278972
Crack formation and propagation still happens, it's a babby-tier misunderstanding of the mechanics of fatigue mode failure. In fact the "cryo-formed" steel should be especially prone to crack propagation if it is what I understand it as.

>>10279994
>sheeple
conspiratard detected

>>10280007
>3 satellite companies
>more than half a billion in development cost
>>10280008
>>10280017
>blindly liking a person and all of his brands because "hurr he is le epic spaceman" is not being a sheep

>>10279956
>how much shorter is hopper compared to Spaceship?

>>10280032
Thanks for the (you).

>>10280032
Moving goalposts I see. 500M is still the lowest dev costs in history for any orbital vehicle of this class.

>>10280041
Also, compare that to New Glenn, which Bezos literally pumps a billion a year into...

>>10280041
it's not 500million retard, he didn't name a specific number, he said "more than 500 million"
in musk terms, that could literally mean anything up to 2-3 billion considering his way with words.
the Ariane rocket family was cheaper to develop btw.

>>10280058
More than a signed dollar.

>>10280058
>the Ariane rocket family was cheaper to develop btw.

Ariane 5 cost $7 billion dollars to develop.
http://www-users.math.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/ariane.html

>>10279862
it's not, there's no magic fuel lines
before you research those, building with that symmetry and staging (4 engines, then outer 2, then center) gets pretty close to the efficiency of asparagus.

>>10279994
>retard gets BTFO in every argument
>immediately turns to ad-hominem
Literally a >>10279984 class idiot.

>>10279909
>The Falcon Heavy barely has any launches scheduled.
With its current schedule it will completely destroy Delta IV Heavy's launch cadence record, even if it only launches once per year afterwards it will be equally if not more successful than DIVH. That meets the minimum reasonable requirement for a successful launch vehicle config in my book.

>>10280095
you sure like bootlicking faggot
>b-btfo because others say musk is great!

>>10279944
>he calls the Merlin engine "the most reliable, cheapest engine in the world"
Which is a factually correct statement.

>>10280137
the most reliable engine and rocket is Soyuz and it's engines.
>97% success rate
>almost a thousand launches
falcon literally doesn't have even a tenth of that and has already a worse success rate.

>>10280125
Actually you're BTFO because facts that you don't even try to refute except for replying with
>m-muh sheep
Also I'm aware I shouldn't reply to the retard but there it is.

Stop replying to him, he will just throw shit around forever and nothing you say will ever convince him to stop.

>>10280150
>Rockets from the Falcon 9 family have been launched 67 times over 9 years, resulting in 65 full mission successes (97%)

>>10280150
Merlin 1D has never failed once, that's 100% success rate
The only failure of any engine on Falcon 9 was the failure of a Merlin 1C on the second ever launch of Falcon 9 v1
Before you say it, yes, there is a very significant difference between Merlin 1C and Merlin 1D, including massively upgraded thrust, redesigned turbopumps combustion chamber and regenerative cooling loop, and more.

>>10280175
>this specific Merlin 29F v1.2 worked
>therefore 100% success rate

>>10280202
The by far most used version of the engine, which has flown hundreds of times whereas the previous versions combined launched only a few dozen on a handful of rockets, has a 100% success rate, yes.

three things are inevitable in life- taxes, death, and angry people on the internet who are pathetically obsessed with deriding Elon Musk and his companies.
I would laugh but they do get annoying after a while.

>>10280254
three things are inevitable in life- taxes, death, and angry people on the internet who are pathetically obsessed with praising Elon Musk and his companies.
I would laugh but they do get annoying after a while, especially when they create threads with absolutely no developments whatsoever on his projects

>>10280266
You aren’t helping your case. Do you always intentionally seek out threads with things that anger you, knowing all too well that you’ll just shit them up when you start posting?

>>10280271
Surely that would apply more to you m80. This is a general about the hopper thing which can include positive and negative and everything in between opinions on the subject. You seem to be getting annoyed if an opinion is not overwhelmingly positive.

>>10280290
I’m annoyed by blatant lies and unsubstantiated claims. Which is probably about 95% of the “debate” here. It’s easy to round it up to 100% :^)

>>10280298
Like soyuz having been launched thousands of times? And merlin not even having a tenth of that?

>>10280298
Holy shit dude just fucking ignore him.

Utterly supreme, ultimate, transcendental, wonderful, overwhelming, terrifying, beautiful, enchanting, paradigm-shifting KINO.

Literally cumming right now.

i smell kerbniggers

>>10280337
This isn't /vg/, ksp is not banned, there are no kerbniggers.

>>10279703
Put in the fuel tanks and pumps, unless they're already in. Also weld the whole thing together

>>10280332
>that window
how much are we betting on a reduction by 95%?

>>10280343
What ever happened to that general

>>10280343
We had someone posting deltav solar system diagrams for ksp a couple of threads back.

>>10280350
It'll probably be smaller or segmented, yeah, but it won't be subjected to re-entry, will it? So it's not like there's a fundamental problem that would limit them, except for it being expensive and impractical.

>>10280350
the earlier BFR17 renders has it actually as a bunch of smaller pieces. Should be doable.

>>10280350
I'm betting on 100% reduction, just fucking why? It's a huge weak point that can be achieved with a fucking camera and TV.

>>10280352
People kept posting bestiality porn and evading bans so all threads with the words kerbal in them get autosaged.

>>10279939
>Employees who tell Musk there's no way to get the cost down on a project or say that Musk's deadlines don't give them enough time, could soon come to regret it. The CEO will simply respond, "Fine. You're off the project and I am now the CEO of the project. I will do your job and be CEO of two companies at the same time. I will deliver," Brogan BamBrogan, a former SpaceX engineer, tells Vance.
>Even more surprising, says BamBrogan, is that Musk manages to fulfill that promise. "Every time he's fired someone and taken their job, he's delivered on whatever the project was."
genius hires people, gets angry when they arent geniuses too

>>10280366
he's not a genius

>>10280355
>>10280356
not even airplanes that have been around for literally more than a hundred years have windows that large. wanna guess why?
>>10280357
this, as much as Elon likes to boast about
>muh cost reduction
this rocket sure has some completely unnecessary elements.

>>10280033
>>10280332

>>10280375
T H I C C

H

I

C

C

>>10280372
>not even airplanes that have been around for literally more than a hundred years have windows that large. wanna guess why?

Because windows are heavy and take away from your available structural margins, and the views out of an airplane's window get boring quickly.

>>10280372
>windows
>unnecessary
?????????

>>10280380
Literally all the same points apply to rockets. Windows are fucking retarded.

>>10280383
>Windows
>Necessary

I would love to hear why they are necessary.

>>10280386
well it's a good thing you aren't part of the design team, good lord you probably measure a 9 on the insurability scale.

>>10280390
I'd rather not, you seem to only be here for the (you)s

they're moving faster than i thought. when is the first launch supposed to be again?

>>10280383
>>10280390
Reminder that Musk was fired from the CEO position at PayPal for having a massive hard-on for windows and trying to migrate everything to it every chance he got.

>>10280395
*insufferability

>>10280396
never.

>>10280395
>if I'm obtuse and act aloof it's the same as having a valid point

>>10280406
why are you here?

>>10280395
I'm not that fucking retard, I want this thing to work so bad but this is not the 1950s with pilots looking out windows and this thing will be entirely automated, windows only exist for people to look out of and 99% of the time all they will be seeing is blackness.

>>10280413
poking muskfags with a stick and watching them fellate their god harder.

>>10280415
nope you're still a 'fucking retard' though.

>>10280366
Isn't he meant to be """CEO""" of about 5 or 6 companies by now?

>>10280419
so you admit that you're trolling outside of /b/? Interesting.

>>10280421
Not an argument, a window is a redundant component in 2019.

>>10280386
>Literally all the same points apply to rockets. Windows are fucking retarded.

All of those points are about failing the cost-benefit analysis in a highly competitive, developed, and cut-throat air transportation industry.

>>10280426
I don't follow.

>>10280419
>come into thread
>call musk a fraud
>"no he isn't"
>how could this possibly happen?!?!?

Nobody even mentions musk until you come here.

>>10280427
Nobody except the pilots needs windows on a plane but we still put them there.
People like to be able to see things you know.

>>10280433
this is true. The shitposters are latching onto starship discussion because it's their closest vector to 'on-topic' Elon hating.

>>10280442
What are they going to look at in space?

>>10279939
Brogan bam Brogan is my old boss at two different start up companies with the same "engineer/ Bruce Wayne fantasy CEO" concept. Those two companies were investor bait. Just like bam Brogan is, just like Elon is.

>>10280380
>looking out from a window in an airplane upon the beautiful landscapes on earth for 20hrs max is somehow less interesting and gets boring quickly than looking into black emptiness for 95% of your journey to mars
the absolute state of

>>10280455
Nice strawman. It's not an argument in favor of windows on Starship, but an argument towards the economics of air travel that results in small windows, rather than the technical ability to produce larger ones.

>>10280454
>Brogan bam Brogan is my old boss at two different start up companies with the same "engineer/ Bruce Wayne fantasy CEO" concept. Those two companies were investor bait. Just like bam Brogan is, just like Elon is.

I'd never heard of him, but going by his twitter, he's a professional alarmist. Compare and contrast Elon's professional autism.

>>10280463
>these economics somehow don't apply to a supposedly reusable spaceship where literally every kilogram of weight savings and every inch of durable material is crucial

>>10280427
>>10280442
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAyJiNobfY8

>>10280465
Same business model being tried Elon just happened to float to the top. I worked for hyperloop and arrivo. I imagine this welded monstrosity never flies and is a pr stunt like 90% of the hardware created at both of those companies

>>10280448
Mars? Earth? The moon?
It's not exclusively gonna be used for interplanetary travel, and even then its nice to be able too see the planet you're coming to before EDL.

On the surface too.
Like what's the fucking point of going somewhere if you can't even look at it.
You're not gonna be out on eva often, i wouldn't want to live in a can for 2+ years, you might as well just live in one on earth, the only difference is lower gravity.

>>10280383
we don't need windows because we have linux now

>>10280473
>unironically comparing a window the size of two sheets of paper to a gigantic, observation deck tier monstrosity

>>10280482
>i wouldn't want to live in a can for 2+ years
but that's exactly what you're going to do. you won't have a pretty earth to look at like on the iss. small windows are more than enough. there is absolutely no justification for this thing aside from pretty pictures for marketing and pr

>>10280480
I can't tell if you're serious or not. you don't think it will fly?
hand over the drugs, dude

>>10280471
>these economics somehow don't apply to a supposedly reusable spaceship where literally every kilogram of weight savings and every inch of durable material is crucial

They aren't quite so critical in Starship. So long as the vehicle can make orbit and attain a minimum single-stage Delta-V, the mass ratio on Starship can be sub-par and still do its job via orbital refueling. If orbital refueling somehow doesn't work (and the Russians have been refueling space stations for decades), literally nothing in the architecture works.

>>10280486
>directly comparing the windows on a spacecraft 3 and 40 meters long

>>10280487
>but that's exactly what you're going to do. you won't have a pretty earth to look at like on the iss. small windows are more than enough. there is absolutely no justification for this thing aside from pretty pictures for marketing and pr

Don't underestimate the value of PR stunts to normies. A huge bay window view of the Earth alone is enough to sell this thing to a huge swathe of otherwise disinterested potential customers.

>>10280372
>not even airplanes that have been around for literally more than a hundred years have windows that large. wanna guess why?
Because the de Haviland Comet happened in 1954, so we stopped making square windows ever, even after 60 years of technological advancement.

>>10280487
>you won't have a pretty earth to look at like on the iss

For 3-6 months yes, even then you can at least see stars. For the stay on mars there sure is gonna be a nice view.

>>10280480
>Same business model being tried Elon just happened to float to the top.
"floating to the top" tends to happen when you actually deliver the desired product to paying customers.

>>10280503

>>10280504
The product and service of a bank is the facilitation of cash flow. When your business model becomes an impediment to your purpose, collapse is inevitable.

>>10280494
there are more than enough concepts with large windows, it's just that they are a fucking waste of money.

>>10280396
4 to 8 weeks, starting from a week ago

They took the top off.

>>10280522
Fucking dry fit tease man.

>>10280522
>paparazzi time is over, now take it off and get back to work!

thread 14 time?

>>10280522
oof

>>10280555
>When Pedro fucks up and doesn't measure his spacings properly.

>NSF is arguing over whether or not a reflection is actually a tear in the hopper
wtf, the quality of the forum wasnt that great but now it's become as absurd as flat earthers

>>10280605
Or maybe the sheets aren’t all the same because they bought used scrap

>>10280630
Sometimes their autism gets into a loop and you just need to put them in time out for a while.

>>10279937

>>10280630
At least they don't have one autist shitting up threads with hundreds of garbage bait responses.

>>10280033
Can't wait for the full scale tests next year.

>>10280522
un-happening

>>10280795
>un-happening
Nah, they just haven't put this pressure dome in yet.

>>10280487
>small windows are more than enough. there is absolutely no justification for this thing aside from pretty pictures for marketing and pr
It's not just a Mars rocket. It'll see plenty of use in Earth orbit, where the view will be spectacular. The first men on Mars will also use the ship as a home base, where they can look out over the alien landscape. The same will almost certainly happen on the moon first.

Anyway, even on the coast to Mars, there'll still be the stars to look at. They're widely acknowledged as one of the most beautiful sights on Earth, and the view is clearer in space.

When you're comparing it to aircraft, remember that the early jetliners emphasized comfort to sell it as a luxury experience, not just as a convenience. They wanted people to be excited about flying rather than calculating the cost vs. the time savings, and it worked.

In the long run, people are going to go to space mainly for economic opportunities, but for a while before that becomes the norm, people are going to go to space because it's awesome and fun and there are beautiful things to look at out of the windows. A big observation deck is a very relevant design feature.

>>10280898
exactly

>>10280357
dickwaving
tourists in space want to see shit with their own eyes

>>10280357
>achieved with a fucking camera and TV
Found the small-souled bugman.

>>10280432
have you read the rules?

if it does explode, it will certainly be a pretty explosion, that's for sure. methane deflagration, huge shards of stainless steel...

>>10280963
I'm excited
kerosene fires are cool too, can't wait for DM-A
they're using extra RP-1 as ballast

>>10280811
Is that what it is? How long has it been there?

>>10281138
>Is that what it is? How long has it been there?
That's the assumption, at any rate. They've had four pieces there since they were still putting together the thin sheets.

>>10280963
Funny you should say that. It kinda reminds me of the Hindenburg, with the wrinkly skin and framework.

Does bread work in space? Does it proof and rise properly?

>>10280555
I wonder why they put it on in the first place?

>>10281212
I'm not sure it's ever been tested
I bet you could make a delicious breadsphere

>>10281216
check the fit
it made Elon's dick hard
it made a senior engineer's dick hard
it made the crane operator's dick hard
dank pics to make the populace's dick hard
many reasons

>>10281212
the germans want to find out, apparently
google isn't helping me figure out if they did it or not

>>10281212
I have a feeling the bubbles wouldn't burst nearly as easily so it would be much easier to get volume.

>>10281212
It should rise more easily, rather than putting it into a tin you could just stick a ball of dough to a wall/plate and it will inflate into a sphere with one flat side where it contacted the wall.

>>10281226
First baking experiments are scheduled for Spring 2020.

>>10280427
>>10280386
Every manned spacecraft to date had at least one window. Spaceship will not be an exception.

>>10281428
yeah but then you have even more “end pieces”

>>10281224

when is this thing supposed to fly?

>>10281776
March or April

>>10281810
There's a misunderstanding because you can't say anything longer than a sentence in a tweet, that's when the press conference after the flights is.
He later said it'll fly in 4-8 weeks.

So now that Bezos is divorced will blue origin actually do stuff? Also will he find a grimes?

>>10281939
His ex-wife got Blue Origin in the settlement. She's selling it all to Saudi investors.

new
>>10282036
>>10282036
>>10282036

>>10280033
I'm pretty sure the booster won't be stainless steel