/sci/ - Science & Math

>he bought stock in space
Lol

obsessed

>>10338165
i did, because i knew elon was the alpha chad scammer of the century after i saw his glorious previous scam work.

I dumped it for profit and now its all about to crumble once everyone sees they are actually never going to accomplish any of their lofty goals.

>mental asylums are inhuman places anon we should let the looneys roam free

>this is a functional spacesuit

>>10338178

>>10338178
WHAT
THE
FUCK
IS
THAT
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

>>10338185

the future anon, dont question.

>>10338178
>we couldve just used thinner and sleek modern designs? fuck, we were wrong the entire time!
every NASA scientist right now

>>10338178
Astronauts LOVE it.

Also just to be clear, i believe in space and a round earth. i just dont believe spacex is anywhere near to being able to colonize mars, let alone the moon..

when they canceled the moon mission. i knew.

i do think elon is a clever guy, and i applaud his scamming abilities, he really is successful at it.

>>10338195
>inb4 "stahp building rockets" and "but he landed boosters!!"

also very happy with his boring company returns, i will dump this very soon once people start to see that it will never pan out to his blade runner city marketing pitch.

love the guy actually. but god damn he cracks me up sometimes.

>>10338160
>You're telling me this is actually a prototype.
No. This isn't a prototype, at least not in the way you're thinking.
It isn't being built to function like the final craft will. It isn't being built to the size the final craft will. It's being built for testing purposes, probably to do hopping shit like the earlier test vehicles were.

>>10338178
Yep. Not a full life support EVA suit, but a pressure suit at least.

>>10338187
>thinking NASA would piss away money redesigning and revalidating suits they already have that work
Though you're basically talking about the orange suits they used on the Shuttle.

>>10338244
>but a pressure suit at least
tell me, are you blind or retarded

>>10338237
jesus christ, like they dont already know how to hop shit around. its literally their only fucking trick

>>10338160
You type like a southern retard.

>>10338269
no, actually I don't. but you type like someone butthurt about a personal inadequacy.

>>10338160
I really hoped SpaceX wouldn't follow Tesla's fate, but it seems like Elon's retardation is demanding another victim. Sad.

>>10338316
I just fucking hope they kick him somehow out of spacex after his retardation gets too much. at least they have decent minds like Mueller

>>10338244
>a pressure suit at least.
Pressure suits normally tuck the shirt in.

>>10338160
What a LARP, you can't even buy SpaceX stocks. The only way to invest in SpaceX is buying (NASDAQ:GOOG) (NASDAQ:GOOGL)

Yikes

>>10338568
I thought they gave workers stock options. Usually everyone who owns stock gets first dibs to buy and then someone else can buy it with private.

>>10338568
Not traded publically doesnt mean its impossible to buy shares.

>>10338160
Husky Musky bought a busky
Went to space inside butt plugsky
Took the gbp from normies
Left for uranus and bankruptcy

>>10338568
OP here, you're casual as fuck.

>>10338678
>Went to space inside butt plugsky
>Took the gbp from normies

kek

>>10338169
7/10, good in theory, but you forgot to account for the fact that many of the spacex supporters and some critics which frequent these threads have tried to check what how SpaceX's stock reacted to whatever news they saw here.

>>10338749
i dont have time for your schizophrenia, good talk

>>10338160
I know this is a troll thread, but for anyone wondering: it is a hopper rocket that will do <5 km altitude hops. The structure is entirely adequate for that. Actual orbital rocket will be built to a much higher standard.

>>10338244
if that's a pressure suit this is formalwear

>>10338791
>its a troll thread because the OP made a decent observation and I provided a hypothetical success of vehicle and speculation on future, not yet built, upgrades

sorry you bought into the scam

So if it works are you guys going to suicide or something?

>>10338811
nah i'll just accept that i was wrong. if a longshot happens that doesn't mean you were wrong to have reasonable doubt

>>10338195

It honestly makes no economic/strategic sense to be fixated on 'settling' (or even visiting) Mars with humans before you've even set up a moonbase. The more pragmatic, monetarily constrained Russians and Chineses - the latter of which will DEFINITELY be doing their own moonbase - both understand this.

>>10338811
anon, we aren't coping shills like you muskfags. we could literally care less if it fails or not, it's just funny to shit on people, especially if they bullshit a lot

>>10338820
>bUt MarS Is LiKE eArth

Just imagine being the guy who designed that fucking metallic blimp turd.

how good you must have thought it'd look while you were staring at in in CAD.

and then you meet reality.

yeesh.

>>10338160
>what the analfuck Is this trash-heap?

reminder that Apollo lunar module looked like this

>>10338820
I am sure if BFR becomes real it will be tested on Moon first, even establishing a base there. Going straight to Mars would be like trying to run before learning to walk.

>>10338857
>comparing apples to oranges and trying to pick the most unflattering pic possible
reminder the saturn v looked liked this

>>10338804
>the OP made a decent observation
"what the fuck is this trash heap", truly an observation worthy of a galaxy brain that is OP

>>10338872
are you implying it doesnt look like a trash heap?

>>10338871
What a beaut

>>10338872
>*what the analfuck

forgot that OP is a faggot

>>10338791
It won't though. SpaceX is in really deep trouble. FCC asked them to put 2213 satellites of their starlink constellation (which is half of its overall size) into orbit by 2024 or they will lose their license. SpaceX said it is impossible to do that. Why is it impossible to do? The satellites weigh around 500kg each, so around 100 Falcon 9 reusable launches should be enough. That's ~15 launches per year for 6 years. So how is it impossible? The only reason can be that SpaceX doesn't have the money to do it. If they don't have the money to put the actual thing that is supposed to pay for the BFR into orbit, how are they going to pay for the BFR? And how do they want do achieve orbital BFR flights by 2022 when they can't even put half the Starlink satellites into orbit by 2024?

Well, what does SpaceX say to these issues? Instead of 4415 satellites, the starlink fleet will have more than 12.000. Additionally, SpaceX will use the dragon capsule for space tourism and mass-transport people to LEO. So, their solution to their current problems are: Pipe dreams of the future. Very typical for Elon.

However, his scheme is crumbling. Investors both in Tesla and SpaceX don't trust Elon anymore. In the last fundraiser, the investors were willing to give SpaceX the amount they were asking for, however under one condition: Elon's share need to drop below 50%, effectively taking him off charge from the company. Elon declined, and SpaceX is now 500 million dollars short in cash it needs to continue BFR development. This gigantic shitshow with the hopper is completely down to the fact that Elon hopes he can create enough buzz to find new money sources, who do not want him out.

>>10338820
Agreed. As much as I like SpaceX, straight to Mars is pretty silly IMO.

>>10338967
>actually bothering to write a wall of text in a bait thread

Lmaoing at your life

>>10339086
he's only like 10% accurate in his statements too heueheeue

>>10338967
some googling suggests spacex is a bit more than halfway there for the funding for launching the first round of starlink sats

>>10339094
Any financial discussion about SpaceX is pointless speculation because they don't release their financials.

>>10339123
You can very much look into the finances of their NASA launches, since they have to make them public. SpaceX is btw the most expensive launcher for NASA, more expensive than Orbital or Sierra Nevada. So much to "reusability makes things cheaper".

>>10338889
sup elon u mad

>>10339199
Your actually retarded, we're talking about financials not contracts.

>>10339199
i think they're keeping their launch tempo down so they can charge the same high rates

>>10338866
they literally canceled the moon mission. that was the original plan sold to the public/investors/grant committee - as it made the most sense.

but they canceled it cause they knew they couldnt do it. so now they will build metallic dildos that can hop around and bribe news outlets and pay for youtube views/promotions for every little gay thing they do for the next decade while they slowly dump the liquidity of the company and elon starts another 3-4 scams in the meantime.

you heard it here first.

is spacex now even more of a scam than arca?

>>10338857
reminder they lost all of the telemetry data and refused to broadcast the raw feed, instead telling the news channels to record video of a projection on a screen.. for some reason.

>>10339264
>they literally canceled the moon mission

You do realise that DearMoon is the moon mission right? It was moved from D2/FH to BFR and expanded.

I've read russian analysis this shit is all fake nasa will never pay for something like that.

>>10339331
>It was moved
nuff said.

you make a plan you stick to it. delays are corporate speak for slow cancellations.

>>10339331
They also cancelled the "Red Dragon" which was supposed to land people on Mars. The ITS btw was also supposed to go beyond Mars, Mars was planned to do by Red Dragon. They completely cancelled everything they planned and are now feeding people off with promising the BFR will be the salvation, of which already the hopper is a complete shitfest. They will cancel the BFR, too, but of course they will already have the next pipe dream up their sleeves, and people like you will again eat it up.

>>10339374
lol

>>10338857
looks like a homeless tweaker's shelter.

I hope this ends with Musk killing himself in 2-5 years.
The world really doesn't need this piece of shit.

>>10338857
The lunar lander was actually a very well-desgined spaceship and highly efficient at its task. The hopper like the whole BFR is supposed to look "cool" and not be functional as it is never going to fly anyways.

>>10339354
By that standard every new rocket design built in the last 20 years would have be cancelled before completion.

>>10339438
*been

>>10338169
How is it a scam if he keeps delivering?
>electric cars that don't suck
>wtf this is a scam!
>private space launches
>wtf this is a scam!
>mass produced affordable electric cars
>wtf this is a scam!
>reusable rockets
>wtf this is a scam!
>falcon heavy
>wtf this is a scam!

>>10339468
>mass produced affordable electric cars
he has to deliver on that first though

>>10339468
>we need a 70% corporate tax rate on the rich
>but that would put our god musk out of business
>logic

>>10339374
>They also cancelled the "Red Dragon" which was supposed to land people on Mars

you are an idiot, case closed

>>10339471
what is your definition of affordable or mass produced then?

>>10339528
affordable would be the $35,000 Model 3 he has yet to produce.

>>10339468
>All these strawmen arguments

He sold people deposits telling them it will cost 35k, and then it became more like 55k, and he promises his shareholders continuously production numbers he fails to fullfill, and of course there is the very obvious scam where he tried to push the stock prices of Tesla by claiming he will buy all shares for significantly over market value.

SpaceX constantly changes its concepts and the FH is actually a good testament for that, as it was supposed to be the first step towards beyond LEO missions but now became an obsolet space craft with no missions.

I'm not even going to start of the complete shithousery that Solar Roof Tiles and the Boring Company are.

>>10339468
>electric cars that don't suck
you mean electric cars that look cool. his cars suck very much lmao, just ask ever fifth Tesla owner over 5 years
>private space launches
lol nobody doubted he could do private launches, SpaceX isn't the first company to do so
>mass produced affordable electric cars
in a tent lmao
they can't even produce more than 5k/week
still above 50k, "affordable" lmao
wanna know how many vw produces per day? about 30k. literally a rate 30 times higher.
>reusable rockets
well it's hard to argue whether it's a scam or not since SpaceX isn't willing to disclose any financials. so both claims that they are profitable or a scam are absolutely useless.
>falcon heavy
nobody said this would be a scam kek, this is the same retarded meme as rocket scientists thinking landing boosters would be impossible. people are just saying it's pretty useless since no payload needs that platform, making it a one time thing so far.

>>10338160
>prototype
Nah, it's a testing platform. That why they don't care about structural integrity that much.

>>10339438

huh? NASA has an infinite budget dude, the literal tax payer is an indentured servant to it, and with zero oversight, classified status, and lobbyist, they basically have a blank check. for the amount of money nasa gets, we should get more than a few rockets over the past 20 years, not that any of those rockets benefit us in anyway for years now. "science"

as for spacex, they have grants, yes. but nothing near the blank check NASA has, so yea.. delays like this dont signal anything good, more bad. like the company is on its last leg. all publicity, no actual results. but hey, the rockets go up and down. thats neato.

>>10339468
>that pic

dude, how is the brown skin coming for you. is it brown? or brown.

>>10339438
Most rocket designs in the last few decades did get cancelled before completion.

>>10338160
This is not even a prototype, this thing is a tech demonstrator.

So yeah, it looks like a shiny trash can...but let them have some fun, eh?

Looks like they're closing off the tent

Hmmm

>>10339925
>So yeah, it looks like a shiny trash can...but let them have some fun, eh?

>>10339929
ahahahahaHAHAHA

WHAT??? i wonder if they saw this thread.

my fucking sides dude holy fuck

>>10339956
what's funny about closing off a tent? They're probably getting to the point where stuff needs protection from the elements. Up until now it's been mainly structural work which can happen outdoors for the most part

>>10339959
>sir, theres a thread on a popular science forum that is teaming with activity, they all think this looks like shit, i think they know
>close the tent
>close the tent down
>shut it
>all the way down
>
>shut it down

>>10339963
you do realise this thread is being fed with info and pictures largely from external sources, like NSF? 4chins isn't the behemoth you seem to think it is

>>10339973
what does that even have to do with what i said. are you autistic?

>>10339989
if they cared about overall opsec of the starship program we wouldn't have had a billion threads about this. There's no SpaceX censorship boogyman or whatever.

>>10339946
Underrated post

>>10339996
maybe they realized not even the shills are defending the crackshack rocket

>>10340003
hmm? I'm 'defending' it. Starship is the most exciting thing to happen in space travel in forever.

>>10340012
dude its a literal dumpster fort in a drainage ditch

are you this saturated with s-oy?

>>10340018
It's hard to take you seriously you know. But ignoring you would only reinforce your hatred.... on the other hand it's less work for me. So yeah I guess I'll just ignore you :^)

>>10340012
not to mention the taxpayers are literally being forced to pay for something they never voted on..

are you actually a cuck? because you apparently think that is ok. i dont care if elon ACTUALLY mass produces the cure for cancer, if hes forcing people to pay for it without even having a choice

>>10339270
no, ARCA is still a shitshow, worse than Interorbital Systems.

>>10340021
ok dude whatever. just know that the only people who ignore are the ones who dont know how to respond.

>>10340022
taxdollars are paying for starship...?
There are local benefits from Texas and the Brownsville area for bringing in jobs, but that is common for any big project like this. Municipalities bid on the tax breaks and other things. In exchange, Boca Chica gets new fiber optic cables etc. It's been reported on thoroughly.

>>10340035
once again
> i dont care if elon ACTUALLY mass produces the cure for cancer, if hes forcing people to pay for it without even having a choice

>>10340027
why does someone have a responsibility to reply to an obvious baiter/antagonizer? there is zero useful discussion that any reasonable person could get out of engaging you.
It's better for everyone if no one feeds you any more (you)'s.
If somehow you're being sincere in your stupidity, then you've clearly won the petulant, child-like /pol/tard award. Congrats.

Now, no more (you)'s for you. shoo.

>>10338178
>when a /fa/ newfag goes to space

>>10340044
>he admires the constitution and bill of rights
>hes a baiter

just remember, when you are submitting your anus to a state enforced inspection in 20 years, that is your future, you chose it.

more concrete action

>>10338568
>what is private equity

>>10340049
wtf are you taking pictures?

>>10338178
mfw they're walking with a slight rolling gait like they're on the moon or something

>>10338258
They know how to hop a Falcon 9-like rocket around on a Merlin engine. They don't know how to hop a Spaceship like rockey around on Raptor engine.

>>10339374
>They also cancelled the "Red Dragon" which was supposed to land people on Mars.
No. It was going to be a demonstration on propulsive landing on Mars for a large capsule. It was canceled because it didn't make sense, landing capsules on Mars. The Spaceship idea flowed out of that.

What we are seeing is evolution of design, with Elon being very public about ideas he has before they get fully tested for viability, then dropped and changed.

>>10338967
literally any [credible] source for that mighty claim of yours??

>>10340954
For which one? The FCC bit?

>SpaceX will have to launch at least half of its constellation of Ku- and Ka-band satellites within six years of today, per the agency’s recently revised rules, or its authorization freezes at the number of satellites in operation at that date. The FCC in September relaxed its deadline, giving operators nine years to launch their full constellation, but even those rules are stricter than what SpaceX would refer. The launch-provider-turned-satellite operator asked the FCC for an okay to launch 1,600 satellites in six years — just over a third of its full constellation.

In fact, it looks more and more plausible that the whole Starlink thing was a literal scam to get in money for BFR development. I bet my money in a few years Elon will tell the investors "sry guys, we need all that money for BFR or we have no rocket to launch the satellites with".

>>10340907
They have too much over the wall engineering.

>>10338160
>I wish I could sell the SpaceX stock again that I already sold, I would feel better.
Where did you manage to buy SpaceX stock in the first place, seeing how it's not a public company?

>>10338967

>>10341308
This is always funny even if you remove the expendables.

>>10340954
Random shorting neurons due to reduced intake of anti-psychotics.

>>10340027
>ced to pay for something they never voted on..
there is nothing to respond to, you have yet to provide any actual argument, the only thing to do is to insult you

>>10341324
It's at least a somewhat realistic step-by-step plan for industrializing space unlike "WE JUST BUILD A MEGA CITY ON MARS MAN GONNA BE COOL LOOK AT THIS SHINY ROCKET"

>>10341308

>>10338160

I kinda get the aesthetic they were going for but all the wrinkles in that metal kinda ruin the effect.

>>10341332
No its not. At all. It just takes existing space activities and pulls figures out of his ass. Assuming it will be profitable even tough using expensive expendable vehocles.


On the other hand spacex plan is really unbeatable:Drastically reduce cost of space acces so that space mining tourism and scientific bases become profitable.

>>10339281
Reminder that you're a double digit IQ brainlet

What is it about these threads that attracts all the /pol/ retards?

>>10338967
>Elon's share need to drop below 50%
I'm laughing hard at this. Typical Musk.

>Why is it impossible to do? The satellites weigh around 500kg each, so around 100 Falcon 9 reusable launches should be enough. That's ~15 launches per year for 6 years. So how is it impossible? The only reason can be that SpaceX doesn't have the money to do it. If they don't have the money to put the actual thing that is supposed to pay for the BFR into orbit, how are they going to pay for the BFR? And how do they want do achieve orbital BFR flights by 2022 when they can't even put half the Starlink satellites into orbit by 2024?
I have no special information, but what I've heard/gathered is that he wants to throw man hours at the thing to make it go fasterer which the ex-google guys in charge are against, and also nobody wants to work on starlink. And it's complicated as all hell.

>>10339551
A 35k car is never actually 35k lol

>>10341505
SpaceX plans are completely retarded. They are building a completely oversized second stage because of muh 100 people in one go while having only 100 tons of payload capacity. Just the body weight of 100 people and the food needed to survive the trip to Mars is already almost 100 tons. And then you would land there and have 100 people without any food or any other payload with them because the rocket was not powerful enough to carry any. It's actually quite similar, but opposite to the Falcon Heavy, which is also a failed design. While the BFR has a way too big second stage for its payload capacity, the FH actually has a way too small second stage for its gigantic first stage. Both are failed designs though, and I really wonder why Tom Mueller et al are approving Musks stupid ideas.

>>10339551
>I'm not even going to start of the complete shithousery that Solar Roof Tiles
The solar roof tiles actually had a niche imo and was his best non scammy idea. It isn't an idea that would make him a billionaire though.

>>10341698
Solar roof tiles are bullocks because the smaller you make pv-modules, the less efficient and in the same time the more expensive to produce they get. Elon knew that they are far, far away from having the technology needed to actually meet the numbers he mentioned when he made them public, and still he started collecting deposits, and oh wonder, is failing to deliever. This was one of the scammiest things he has done because he knew exactly solar roof tiles development isnt anywhere near completion.

>>10341718
>Solar roof tiles are bullocks because the smaller you make pv-modules, the less efficient and in the same time the more expensive to produce they get.
There are niche historical areas/buildings use cases for such a technology, but they're not great no.

>>10341724
Yeah, but you need to understand just how far away they are to delievering what they promised. I mean, look at Tesla, kind of scummy how Elon announced they will produce 250.000 Model 3s per year although he probably knew the capacities arent enough for even half that, right? Now imagine he would have announced that in 2003 when he became CEO of Tesla. That's essentially what he did with solar roof tiles, go out there and tell gigantic lies he knows he wont be able to keep, not even a fraction of that. Now why did he do this? Because solar roof tiles is a part of Tesla, and by selling deposits for 1.000$ he created cash inflows for Tesla, which as we all know is nigh bankruptcy since years. The whole thing was a LITERAL SCAM to get money into his Model 3 production lines so he could up the capacities quick.

>>10341747
Oh, and btw, similar principles apply to boring company and starlink. Literal scams that are supposed to funnel money into his other companies by cheating people out of their savings.

What I don't understand is why they plan on making a massive starship able to land on a planet.
Why not make it so the starship sole purpose is to travel from planet to planet and deleguate the landing and launching of people, fuel and food to small spacecraft?
Am I missing something?

>>10341762
Yes.

>>10341762
People have to die there so Musk can collect on their estates.

>>10341762
The Starship is oversized for Cargo missions, too. 9 metre diameter and 100 tons of payload to LEO means no mission ever is going to use up even half of all that space. Just so you know: If you filled up the cargo bay with water, the payload capacity would be reached with only 10% of the cargo bay filled.

> bought stock
> private company

Hmmm

>>10341792
Surely genius inventor and philanthropist Elon Musk would not make such a mistake. After all, he achieved habilitenure in all physics after a few hours at Stanford.

>>10341308
lol, that pic.

imagine people thinking that it will take 30 years to go to the moon again, and still believing we did in the 60s.

>>10341802
yeah im still working on that

>>10338178
Here how a real space suit is made.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF01yyvT18Q

>>10341792
>If you filled up the cargo bay with water, the payload capacity would be reached with only 10% of the cargo bay filled.
Why don't professionals even comments on that fact?

>>10341826
Find out who was laid off recently and buy their stock.

>>10341802
>>10341826
>>10341840

itt casual city megaplex

>>10341884
wat?

>>10341887
let it happen

>>10341762
You are indeed missing something. Both Mars and Earth have an atmosphere suitable for aerobraking. Using this to directly land on the surface saves a lot of delta-v instead of braking into orbit and then launching some small stage to land. Small landers have limited payload capacity.

>>10341981
are you unironically retarded or do you think it's easier to aerobrake with heavier rockets

>>10341981
You don't need to brake in orbit. In fact, it would incredibely stupid to do so, as that orbit ship will bring you back, and you would need to accelerate it again. Obviously, the small lander would detach and then aerobrake using an inflatable heat shield or something similar.

>>10341993
You do need to brake into orbit unless you are talking about a cycler, which is a dumb idea for other reasons. Also, small craft means small payload landed on Mars. This would be very problematic. Any realistic Mars mission, not to mention colony, requires lots of heavy surface systems.

>>10341992
It is easier to aerobrake with bigger rockets. It roughly depends on density of the craft.

>>10341981
The thing is that we mastered small payloads compared to big ones.
It seems pretty inconvenient and highly risky to have such big structures land and take off everytime you want to deposit its content when you could use them as storage between planets and use small convenient aircraft whenever you have to load/unload them.
It seems pretty advisable to have your big precious expensive starship do one thing, and do it well, ie, travel from planet to planet, not land on them.

>>10342013
No problem with big expensive starships landing. Especially the ones made for it.

>>10342006
lmao

>>10342013
It just does not work that way. Planetary orbit is a DETOUR. It is not something that is on the way to planet surface. When you are arriving on a planet, you need either lots of thrusting to achieve orbit, and then you still need to land. Or you use aerobraking and go directly to landing, and now you saved a lot of fuel and landed 100 tons in a spacious cargo bay on the surface. Obviously the second way is lot more efficient.

>>10342004
Uh, so you think we are going to go there and just drop and industrialized nation on Mars? lol

Just considering the fact that any Mars mission will take 2 years, you can be sure as fuck that this century we will absoluetely not do anything besides keeping some habitats alive.

>>10342034
You need large payloads just to keep some habitats alive. Mars is not the Moon, you cannot send astronauts there in a small tin can.

>>10342027
It's a lot more efficient, sure, but it's also a lot more risky.
Imagine there's a problem while landing your big spaceship and boom. You lose everything.
While if you only interact with the planet via specifically design shuttles, losing one of them is less of a big deal.
Also, I'm no space expert but it must be common sense, we know better about how to land and take off small rockets than big ones.

>>10342043
The starship is the specifically designed shuttle.

>>10342051
except it isn't designed at all lmao
it's literally "we gonna do this and this in our rocket, we don't know how but trust us it will happen"

>>10342043
>we know better about how to land and take off small rockets than big ones.

On a list of technologies needed to develop for Mars, scaling up the landing tech is one of the simpler ones.

>>10342051
I disagree with that strategy, but hey. That's not my money.

>>10342066
except it is if you're american

>>10342038
If we can keep astronauts on the ISS alive with rather small-sized payloads, it will work for Mars, too.

Also, you know, you can assemble things. You don't need to bring down the truck or whatever as a whole.

>>10342038
>you cannot send astronauts there in a small tin can.

sure you can, just make sure you give limited media access to any live streams, never give them access to raw feeds.

make sure you lose/delete/destroy any concrete tangible evidence of your journey like telemetry data.

make sure and bring back samples of your destination that will only be noticeably fake under the most heavy scrutiny (like a museum finding a moon rock to be petrified wood)

you will have a great chance of success with these variables, as people like you will believe anything.

good luck sir.

>>10342066
If you are thinking of the Aldrin Cycler read on it its freely available. Starting at low mars orbit you looking at "simple shuttle" capable of 15km/s DV to it and back half of that done with cargo. Does that look simple? Keep in mind fully fueled starship should have about 9km/s.

>>10342083
ISS is resupplied every few months and does not need heavy ISRU systems. On Mars you will be alone for 2 years and you will have to manufacture tons of fuel to get back home.

>>10342096
>On Mars you will be alone for 2 years
Is that true? What is stopping us on earth from resupplying the colony with other rockets?
Mars orbits?

>>10342096
No, you don't, if you have an orbital taxi.

>>10338254
>>10338559
>>10338797
you fucking retarded niggers it is a pressure suit
what do you think spacex build it for?

>>10342115
You know when people talk about it's the same delta v to the moon as to Mars (despite that not actually being true)? You only have a low Martian delta v a couple of times every 15 years or so.

>>10342130
Investment monies from gullible schlubs.

>>10342130
PR stunt?

>>10342130
>build
marketing you retard

>>10342134
But surely it must last more than one year?

>>10342115
Transfer windows.
Unlike the ISS which is close for reasons obvious planets tend to move around and offer only the occasional chance to get from one to another using reasonable technology and reasonable patience.

>>10342143
If you are asking if you could send more than just one rocket to Mars in any given launch window: Yes, of course you can. You should note though that we have a limited amount of launch pads, and getting a launch pad ready to launch the next rocket takes a while, so we are limited by our launching capacities.

>>10342143
Why? A Martian year is a bit under 2 Earth years and the launch windows are when you have the Earth's aphelion and Mars' perihelion coinciding enough that you can fly from Earth to Mars at the respective times. You'll find then a year after a launch window Earth is already one orbit around the sun and Mars is over on the other side of the solar system.

>>10342156
>I'm retarded
the ideal travel duration is around a year. anything less or a suboptimal launch window and you have to redesign your entire rocket to provide more fuel

>>10342168
>how long it takes to get there is the same as how long is a good window for launching
So yes you are. Good self awareness.

>>10342205
the point is you can't go there quicker unless you literally build a rocket twice the size

>>10342223
You're having your own conversation. I'm explaining why launch windows aren't open on the timescale of a year.

>>10342025
not an answer

>>10342130
a photo op

>>10338178
>"The Right Stuff" - featuring tablecloth outfits.

>>10342130
It's a flight suit, something that a pilot of a fighter jet would wear, or also something somebody going in a Dragon capsule to the ISS can wear (and which in fact is its purpose), but not a space suit in the sense that you can do space walks in it.

>>10342659
its not even a flight suit lmao. they have to be able to withstand different pressures like pic related. literally anything like pic related is nothing more than a fancy outfit

>>10342735
>literally anything like the spacex design
fixed

>>10342659
i dare you to find a pressurized flight suit that has separate pants and shirts

>>10342735
you don't know what's going on in that joint in the midsection

>>10342746
yes you do? are you fucking blind

>>10342749
I see a shirt and pants section of the outer covering, and until somebody can show what's happening underneath them I'm going to disregard all comments, positive or negative, about the spacex flight suits

>>10342746
>joint

>>10342755
you do know how a pressure suit works lmao

>>10342756
blaze it

>>10342757
thanks for noticing

>>10342755
Yes. Maybe there's an actual pressure suit underneath the joke suit.

>>10342763
>>10342755
>>10342743
Well, since NASA astronauts are going to wear it I guess it has NASA's approval, no?

>>10342781
astronauts have a very low tolerance for bullshit, yes

>>10342781
NASA can't forbid a private company to use deceptive marketing, or else the entire bfr meme wouldn't exist

>>10342787
Yeah, but the Dragon capsule is actually going to transport american Astronauts to the ISS and that is what they are going to wear. So NASA must have approved of them, e.g. they are actual pressure suits, although I also find them silly/toyish looking.

it's not for EVA work you moron(s?). It's to avoid situations like Soyuz 11, and to prove clean air if there is a fire or something.

>>10342798
o rly

>>10342797
>is actually going to transport astronauts
yeah, they are actually "going to" since 2011 lmao. and that's not how it works, the suits haven't even existed back then
>>10342798
>anon still doesn't understand what pressure suit means

>>10342817
I know what a pressure suit is. It's not the same as an EVA suit. It's a step above shirtsleeves.

Both Boeing and SpaceX's suits do the same thing, SpaceX just went for a onesie style

>>10342821
>It's a step above shirtsleeves
he STILL doesn't get it

>>10342817
The flight is scheduled for this summer. The two guys in that vid wearing the suits are the two NASA astronauts that are the ones that are going to fly it.

>>10342831
are you trying to be dumb?

>>10342839
Really? They look embarrassed as all hell in them.

>>10342845
the astros say that they're quite comfy and have way more features and capabilities than the old shuttle orange suits. One astro said they preferred the Boeing one, but from what I've read the SpaceX suit beats it out overall

>>10342839
the first dragon flight was scheduled for 2012 lmao.

>>10342845
Yes, really. They personally remind of a Comic Con cosplay from a sci-fi anime or something. But yeah, its going to happen and based on that one can assume they are actually pressure suits.

>>10342854
What "functions" are those supposed to be? Integrated MP3 player?

>>10341792
>1000 cubic meters of payload volume capability
>water is 1000 kg per cubic meter
do you see the problem here retard

>>10342867
are you unironically retarded lmao
or do you not know how to do basic calculation

>>10342867
uhh so how are you refuting what he says

There's been some activity on the pad and few more tanks in place. We're probably a month or two away from hopping. Might even beat DM-1 the way things are going.

>>10342867
How do I downvote posts

?

>>10342854
supposedly the beoing one has a fishtank helmet so you can actually move your neck but that's all it has over the SpaceX suit

>>10341792
Hubble telescope has a volume of approximately 59 cubic meters and had a launch mass of 11.1 tons, so a density of about 0.18 tons per cubic meter, way less than that of water. In fact most launch vehicles are volume limited when it comes to what they can launch because most payloads are similarly low density.

>>10342898
so it actually has functionality and not just an ipad cover like the spacex one?

>>10342898
Presumably also it's an actual pressure suit and not a halloween costume.

>>10342931
It's the exact same thing (flight suit) as the SpaceX suit.

>>10342946
The spacex one looks very different to the mockups and is a two-piece. The Boeing one looks functional and not a costume https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FaOAsUR-o-U that's the first moving example of someone in the Boeing one with 5secs of googling.

>>10341687
You retard literally 0 iq. Because of factors too obvious to even discuss with you quick cheap reusability yes or yes needs to be big. No way around it

What is the difference between pressure suits and space suit. I guess it must be mostly heat.

Because a pressure.suit must be able to withstand exposure to vacuum else what is the point. But what is the difference between being in vacuum inside a ship or ouside. Only heat. But pressure suits look skin tight compared to the eva ones.so couldnt they just use a pressure suit outside while being shaded from the sun somehow. Literally what would be the difference if heat is not the issue

>>10342980
>is a two-piece.
It actually isn't, it's designed to look that way. It's a one piece that you climb up into through a zipper on the inseam of the legs.

>>10343024
>Literally what would be the difference if heat is not the issue
Pressure suits also have an umbilical so they're running on spacecraft life support, an EVA suit needs a backpack
Other than that you're right, heat management is the only major difference

>>10343046
this, it's the most fashionable spacesuit ever made

less scaffolding now

>>10343049
Why not operate in space with a pressure suit, a long umbilical and some sort of fancy high tech umbrella. Sounds like it would be much much easier. Also the gloves are much easier to use.

>>10343049
Why not operate in space with a pressure suit, a long umbilical and some sort of fancy high tech umbrella. Sounds like it would be much much easier. Also the gloves are much easier to use.

>>10343112
See early spacewalks, where they used umbilicals and shiny layers of cloth to reflect oncoming sunlight. Umbilical-less spacewalk capability is only really useful if you're doing a space walk across a large area, hence why astronauts on the ISS and Shuttle had backpacks as well as the Apollo astronauts.

>>10343049 #
Why not operate in space with a pressure suit, a long umbilical and some sort of fancy high tech umbrella. Sounds like it would be much much easier. Also the gloves are much easier to use.

Its a space hopper. It "hops" to below 5km altitude and then "hops" back again.

Ultimately it will be used to resupply base camps on Mount Everest. These base camps will then be used to reach the moon.

The space hopper can carry up to 240 extensions ladders, far more than any Sherpa could carry.

>>10343147
This makes the most sense.

the scientific sign

>>10343156

Yes. By far the most rational explanation offered to date. For a while I was worried that Musk might just be a ponzi scheme tier scammer, but now I am convinced he is genius.

>>10338967
this actually sounds correct.

>>10343192
it's mostly false

>>10339907
>for the amount of money nasa gets, we should get more than a few rockets over the past 20 years, not that any of those rockets benefit us in anyway for years now. "science"
NASA has done incredible things, too many to name, over the last 20 years.

>>10341818
if you fund 5 to 10 % of the us gdp into it we could go in a couple months.

money moves mountains, thing is there is no money, so we need more time.

you can take pix of the lunar landing site and contact the science equipment still functional on the moon to measure the distance of the moon. Are you implying robots put that there? or its fake too?

>>10343213
>you can take pix of the lunar landing site and contact the science equipment still functional on the moon to measure the distance of the moon
You can do the latter. The picture bit, what? You mean like you could send up a probe?

>>10338967
>dude to launch 2,213 satellites in 2,213 distinct orbits you just load them all up on a rocket and point them at the sky lmao

>>10343269
If you had enough payload capacity you could launch an entire inclination's worth of orbits in a single go with only minimal fuss

>>10343279
yes and it's not as simple as this moron is putting it -- "dude just divide the mass by the payload capacity"

>>10343201

lol, do you get paid by them? or are you one of those people who loves having their money taken from them without being asked, and applauds and smiles at purty space pictures on his facebook feed.

is that all it takes, all it costs, to hire you to be a shill to cheerlead their damn thievery business?

>>10343293
haha he's still fucking here

>>10343296
yes, nasa pays him well

>>10343284
Back of the envelope calculations are typically simplified m80. They don't have to present a full working itinerary/plan to make their point.

>>10343343
it's not a back of the envelope calculation of anything, he doesn't understand how orbits work, he thinks you can just lobs thousands and thousands of satellites up there in hundreds of wildly different planes with "only" a 100 launches

anyway, his point is "STOP DOING ROCKETS WTF I HATE SPACEX"

>>10339907
>NASA has an infinite budget

You just went full retard, friend. Never go full retard.

>>10339959
>They're probably getting to the point where stuff needs protection from the elements.

Part of it blew off and got wrecked. They are WELL past that point.

>>10340022
The public does not normally vote on government expenditures, friend.

>>10343503
There are only two orbital inclinations in the whole constellation, there's no reason you couldn't lob em all at once

>>10341505
>Drastically reduce cost of space access

If he can do it, great. He hasn't done it yet. And i have heard that song and dance before, pic related, so I'm going to wait and see.

>>10342021
You have no idea of whether there will be problems until after they land one.

>>10338178
Looks comfy

>>10343663
but many different longitudes of ascending node, clearly more than 100 if multiplied by the number of inclinations

>>10342043
>worried about reliability
>proposes more flight complexity and more distinct craft designs
i thought you wanted spacex to do fewer rockets, not more

>>10342038
go read your zubrin for fuck's sake

>>10339264
>elon starts another 3-4 scams in the meantime.

prove to me that Musk has been implicated in any sort of scam otherwise you are just blithering abject bullshit

>>10342923
This. Volume is usually the limit, not mass.

>>10338178
reminder that the helmet on the Boeing pressure suit for starliner is a flexible clear plastic

>>10343718
>go read your zubrin for fuck's sake

I read it and remain unconvinced. We are not going to send astronauts to Mars in a tin can, period. Zubrin is a great thinker but his payload estimates are on the edge of what is possible, and you cannot afford to do a Mars mission with such tight tolerances.

>>10343850
It is a well known troll from reddit. Disregard his posts.

>>10343909
don't "period" me you clueless cunt

the supplies in mars direct are generous and preliminary landers carrying -- guess what -- backup supplies are sent long before any human beings. something along the lines of mars direct is the only credible mars colonization plan, as nasa recognized.

>>10343850
let's look at the stages of a scam and compare it to one of elons companies, let's say solar roofs (technically Tesla but still)
>Step one: foundation work
I think this is pretty self explanatory. first preparations to make the thing look legit. presentations, mockups, etc.
>approach
a grandiose streamed presentation to convince the maximum amount of Tesla and musk fanboys to invest their money into the future
>Build-up
a few examples with individuals profiting from the concept, to show others "see, it's actually legit!"
>convincer
this is where Elons scams differentiate from regular ones. his fans are so delusional, he doesn't even need to give them a small opportunity of a cash in, they simply """believe""" in the product and are ready to invest several thousands of dollars to simply pre-order it
>the hurrah
suddenly people start to realise that their beloved roof panels won't arrive for a long time. Elon cleverly mitigates this by saying "well, we didn't expect that many requests" while in reality only about twelve have been installed
>the in-and-in
the conspirator, or in this case elon, puts their money (but not too much) to convince his fanbois that the scam is legit. usually this is done as investments, but since the goal of the scam, incorporating solar roofs for bailing out and boosting the share price of Tesla, has been achieved all he needs to do is "moderate" damage control and small infrequent haps of life signs from solar roofs.
gotta applaud him tho, it fucking works. the problems start to arise when in 5 years people realise that their roofs still aren't there and start to sue him, will be interesting to see it develop.

>>10343925
lol didn't read

i don't know about you guys but i'm really fucking angry about rockets and i spend my every waking hour writing angry posts about space travel companies

>>10343925
Nice delusion. People have been predicting one of Musk numerous ventures failing for over a decade now, and it has yet to happen. So the pattern you are implying is not there. Now it is quite probable some of them will fail. But anyone who thinks Musk is an outright scammer is a blithering moron.

>>10343930
yes, I didn't expect much from a retard blinded by sci-fi delusions anyway

>>10343936
it is the nature of the schizo to look for patterns everywhere

>>10343937
Imagine wasting you time trying to argue with us, do you honestly thing any of the fine folks in this thread are convinced by your lies and slander? gb2 enoughmuskspam, lmao

>>10343936
>numerous ventures failing for over a decade now
he had exactly two ventures up to the point of 2015-2016 where he started to come up with new retarded companies.
one of those ventures was on the brink of complete bankruptcy multiple times, admitted by musk himself. also I'm not implying that the companies in their core are scams, but particular features and products, namely solar rooftops, hyperloops, full self driving capabilities, 35k electric cars, etc.

>>10343939
what is enoughmuskspam?

>starts rocket company
>launches rockets
>acquires large market share
>gets investments from Bank of America etc

>takes control of a new EV company
>builds EVs
>acquires large market share
>gets investments from China etc, expands operations and grows YoY

>starts tunneling company
>gets deals from municipalities to build tunnels

>etc

sure is some """""scam"""""

inb4 he complains about solar tiles again, a tiny, tiny part of Tesla Energy and something which is being bogged down in testing.
Meanwhile Tesla beat revenue (only missed EPS by a bit) and Model 3 GAAP and non-GAAP gross margin remained stable at >20% in Q4

Get rid of the suits entirely. Shuttle astros might as well have never worn them at all during the entire course of the program.

>>10343946
permissions to build some tunnels does not equate to magically solving tunneling cost problems and a working product lmao.

>>10343952
>goalposts move
so is he a scammer or not? who exactly is he scamming? how does his scamming operation make more money than it expends? you do release that most of his money is tied into Tesla stocks right?
As Elon said, the two easiest ways to lose your fortune are to start a rocket company and a car company. Why the hell would you spend years struggling to survive as a car company to.... scam people in the end? what?
this idea that his ventures are bogus is literally flat earth tier

>>10343950
>muh beat revenue
delightfully counterintuitive market patterns

>>10343955
once again read my post retard. I'm not saying the whole company is a scam, just his new neuralink, boring and solar roof ones, and certain products.
also a scam that spends more money than makes is retarded lmao, why did you make that point

oh and btw musk didn't found tesla

>>10343925
>I think this is pretty self explanatory. first preparations to make the thing look legit. presentations, mockups, etc.

They have an actual space launch service that takes contracts to launch shit into space with working rockets and all the manufacturing and infrastructure needed to launch them, i don't see how it's all one big ploy trying to give the appearance of legitimacy

>a grandiose streamed presentation to convince the maximum amount of Tesla and musk fanboys to invest their money into the future

oh so are we talking about Spacex or Tesla now, a completely different company never founded by musk?

>a few examples with individuals profiting from the concept, to show others "see, it's actually legit!"

Falcon 9 family rockets has been launched 68 times, seems like it's well beyond the concept stage

>this is where Elons scams differentiate from regular ones. his fans are so delusional, he doesn't even need to give them a small opportunity of a cash in, they simply """believe""" in the product and are ready to invest several thousands of dollars to simply pre-order it

I swear i see this poster in every Musk related thread claiming it's all a scam and blithering other abject lies this actually giving me a headache thinking about this, i don't care if you are trolling, i just feel nothing but pity for how deluded you are to spew this amount of slander, just do everyone a favor here and stop posting, for us, please, i don't give a fuck, i genuinely feel sorry for you, its just for the people here who just want to have a discussion.

>>10343964
>b-but SpaceX exists, making your points about solar rooftops invalid
what

what is this solar rooftops scam thing? it's a scam to have delays in production? hardly anyone has heard of solar rooftops. it's not going to be a big investor draw or whatever. Why would someone who is already knee deep in government contracts and launching spysats delve into scamming people with... what, fake/nonexistant/whatever roof PV's? How does that make sense? Why would you sell people real CARS but then "scam" them out of solar panels? What? I'm honestly confused by how solar shingles or whatever could be classified as a scam
like jeez
what do you mean
It just doesn't seem like our angry anon here is being truthful. He's getting (you)'s out of it though

>>10343977
>what is the point of a scam
to make money
>if his company is why legit, why make scams
to make money, do you think most companies don't have scammy products lmao?
>delays in productions
yeah, 12 rooftops in two years after the announcement are "production delays"

>>10343985
>he's still--over a month later--really furious about rockets and wasting his time sperging to disinterested parties
get a trip so i can ignore you, twat

>>10343969
What the fuck are we talking about then? Here you are in a spacex thread making anti-musk rhetoric, first the subject is Tesla, a company that not only hasn't been founded by musk, but one he is no longer a chairman of, and on top of that you are talking about solar rooftops, another completely separate investment of Musk to spacex?

Seriously, what is even the endgame of these posts, to prove musk is a scam? In a thread which topic is exclusively on spacex and it's developments? Why can't you just talk about this in /biz/ or somewhere more relevant, why do you have to continually try and derail discussion on every spacex related thread? I'm not telling you to stop posting as an insult, i genuinely think you would be better off if you didn't do this nonsense and went and complained somewhere else, good you think musk is a scam, you are entitled to think that, you are not entitled to go around threads and try and shove it down people's throats, no for the last time, STOP. POSTING.

>>10343992
>accuses others of goalpost moving
>literally does it
kek

btw I'm sorry anon but you won't go to mars and won't see anyone in your lifetime do, only by China in a best case scenario maybe

>>10343995
prosecute musk reeee i'm really angry about rockets

no idea what you're on about with goalposts

please fuck off, no one's interested

>>10343994
>STOP. POSTING.
nah it's fun especially seeing you getting so buttmad and sucking cock so much even Grimes would choke

>>10343998
you're literally in a muskand bfr hate thread kek
so
>no i

STOP DOING ROCKETS

>>10344001
>no u
Phoneposting is hard

>>10344002
oh look some astronauts, something spacex will never send into space

>>10343999
>nah it's fun especially seeing you getting so buttmad

Now it finally comes out, you are merely wasting people's time 'trolling' by posting complete slander and blithering and think it's 'fun' when people call out your ridiculous hyperbole assertions, please do take the advice of the other anon here >>10343992 and get a trip so we can all filter your posts, it would improve the quality of discussion here markedly.

>>10344005
>less than 6 months away

>>10344010
3 months maybe, 6 months definitely
since 2012™
>>10344007
reminder: you are in a bfr hate thread, so please go back to your SpaceX general

>>10344015
>bfr hate thread
>makes posts critical of every single musk own company or startup

gee wiz, it's almost like, this is thread is a thinly veiled attempt at criticizing some random entrepreneur on a science mathematics and technology related board of all places

>>10344019
He asked why musk is a scammer/has scammy practices, I answered. stop getting so mad that people are criticising your "random innocent entrepreneur"

>>10344022
>He asked why musk is a scammer/has scammy practices
Wow, a question completely off topic for a science and mathematics board and clearly belongs on /biz/

> "random innocent entrepreneur"

literally never said such a thing

4chan better increase the max image upload resolution before it flies, I want to fit all of these in it

>>10344029
imagine caring so much you need to screen cap things to "prove the haters wrong" later

>>10344032
I'm being more productive than you

>>10344034
none of the claims in this image have been disproven so far

>>10342034
Do you know how long a century is? (it's a lot)

>>10344035
the point is the whole thing is posted when BFR is in orbit :^)

>>10344038
yeah you gonna have to wait for that one a bit

>>10344034
Imagine being this much of a shitsmear you fixate on a single person and try to deride him on an obscure siamese croquet forum

>>10344043
>Imagine being this much of a soiboi you fixate on a single person and try to suck him off on an obscure siamese croquet forum

>>10344040
tbf, some of the entries are time-dependent. I keep track of those separately. but, so far it doesn't seem like I'll have to exclude any of the... criticisms from the collage. That is, except for a couple about the windows or other small details :)

>>10344043
single person? I doubt the 250+ entires are from one person.

>>10344049
once again, no claims in pic related have been disproven so far
it's almost like you unironically believe in musk time despite every single time it happening about 2-3x later or not at all

Whatever the bfr will be or won't be it's still less of a shit show than the shuttle program and that's should be the take away.
+It's not like a weeb billionaire is going to give up any time soon. if trump can win on meme magic alone

this one is the "soonest" of the time-dependent posts iirc

>>10344052
this is true.

>>10344053
yeah you gonna have to delete that one in about three years kek

>>10344049
>single person? I doubt the 250+ entires are from one person.

Of course not all of them, but you shouldn't underestimate how much 'free time' so to speak these people have

>>10344052
>he thinks meme magic works in science
this is not politics faggot and musk doesn't even know anything about rocket design. reminder Mueller had to explain to him what engine shutoff is

20+ years from now how much would it cost for a personal cruiser just to do loops around the moon or something at high speeds.

>>10344059
the same amount it does now, maybe 20% less due to new trchnologies

>>10344056
>3-18

>>10344058
It doesn't matter. Musk could be a retard but if he has smart enough people around him guiding his hands that's all that functionally matters. If people believe that it can work and they try until it works that's all that counts he is a figure head. And you are entirely misunderstanding what his actual role is. Steve Jobs sold the world on apple memes while somebody else did the shit that was necessary.
There is a reason why bezos keeps shit hush hush because he doesn't run on meme magic.

>>10344059
honesly, probably a half mil or so

>>10344063
3-18 what?
he said in the span of three years retard

>>10344065
>bezos keeps shit hush hush because he doesn't run on meme magic
no it's because he isn't retarded and knows how to make a company highly successful and become the richest man in the process without being on the bring of collapse and bankruptcy several times and scamming people with overpromises

Dont you want to see it crash and burn? Anyone?!

>>10344071
What would such a smart eluqoent man lose from building a meme audience for the new shepard. That whole thing is meant to find a market with who exactly? You want to tell me blue origin build a 5 minute space tour vehicle and doesn't want to desiminate the rides to private actors. That craft is meant to be ready this year. He doesn't because he can't.
His goal is to what make space normalized? He is doing that how currently?

>>10344068
it was posted in 3-18

>>10344072
yes

>>10344072
once, just for the views
twice, but only if it starts world war 3 with China or something

>>10344076
so in 2 years then
thanks for correcting me

now that both the starship shitpost thread and the actual discussion thread are at their bump limits, what are we to do?

>>10344085
stop posting about this retarded cgi rocket until they actually build it

>>10344087
they are building it
in fact today they added a new ferrule sort of thing onto the side panel

>>10344092
they are building a sub 5km mockup
you don't post about every NASA pet project, do you?

>>10344094
I would if they involved big shiny steel rockets in the middle nowhere, Texas

>>10344099
no you wouldn't
at least be fucking honest

>>10344075
>building a meme audience
The fact that meme aufiences are retarded and are fueld by wishful thinking scifi bullshit and so on.
A serious and honest company does it's job.

>>10344112
Blue Origin has a fucking 5m space adventure and an engine they sell to someone else. It might make money but it ain't advancing shit. New glenn is more of a paper rocket than the bfr

>>10344075
The New Shepard is already boooked out for years, the New Glenn has more launches scheduled for 2021 and beyond than SpaceX does, and Blue Origin will also sell engines to ULA for their Vulcan rocket and potentially NASA for the SLS upper stage. Blue is doing really well. I think you are just overestimating the importance of reddit upvotes for a company that operates in such an extreme niche market as Blue does.

>>10344126
The engine is advancing shit, it is somewhat comparable to Raptor. But that is about it for BO.

>>10344132
>delusional

>>10344238
It's not delusional. New Glenn has 8 launches (all private) contracted and SpaceX has 7 (6 private 1 NASA). Additionally, New Glenn has also received an unknown number of Air Force launches worth 2.2 billion overall.

BO also has already contracted the deal with ULA and is hot favorite to get the deal with NASA.

As for the New Shepard, there are 400-500 customers basically on the waiting list, with 6 people per launch that's 70-80 launches.

>>10344271
>8 launches
More like zero
>unknown number of airforce
Aka zero
>400-500
Wow he made amazon employees sign up amazing.

>>10344271
>New Glenn has 8 launches (all private) contracted and SpaceX has 7 (6 private 1 NASA).

New Glenn has only 4 customers, 4 of those launches are with OneWeb. I don't know where you got the SpaceX statistic, they have far more launches scheduled than that.

>New Glenn has also received an unknown number of Air Force launches

The bidding phase for EELV 2 has not started yet, so this is impossible. They have been awarded $500 million funding for a launch vehicle, individual launch contracts have not been awarded yet.

>BO also has already contracted the deal with ULA and is hot favorite to get the deal with NASA.

What deal? What do Blue Origin have to offer to NASA? The only thing I could think off is the Blue Moon cargo lander being part of NASA's medium sized lander program.

>As for the New Shepard, there are 400-500 customers basically on the waiting list, with 6 people per launch that's 70-80 launches.

This is an outright lie, Blue Origin have not disclosed this, they haven't even disclosed their prices for NS launches. Also, at their current launch cadence, it would take them 32 years to complete 80 launches.

Your good at making bullshit sounding convincing...

>>10344331
>New Glenn has only 4 customers, 4 of those launches are with OneWeb. I don't know where you got the SpaceX statistic, they have far more launches scheduled than that.

If you read closely you can see that I was talking about 2021 and beyond. BO has 5 launches for One Web and one each for their are three customers, that's 8 launches. SpaceX has 7 for 2021 and beyond including the dearmoon mission on the BFR which may or may not happen.

>>10343650
prove me wrong. wait you cant, maybe you are the retard.

dunning kruger is a bitch.

>>10343656
wrong. the neo-public of the 20-21st century do not normally vote on g-ov spending because they are cucked.

to not be able to vote on where tax dollars is goes is the definition of ty-rany.

and if you aren't at least attempting to break up hot words with hyphens and whatnot to avoid skynet listing you more than you are, i question you intelligence.

>>10344417
Talking about 2021 and beyond is pointless, most the launches that will occur then haven't even been awarded or listed yet. The launches contracted to BO are different because their dependent on when NG launches, not industry cycles; they were originally 2020 launches and could be 2022 launches depending on when NG first launches.

>calls it starship
>it is not purposed for leaving the solar system

I guess thats similar to the advertising for the lincoln continental.

>>10343914
no one here goes to reddit, friend. and you just outed yourself as a redditor. if you werent a shill, you would know that this is not exactly the best way to convince people here. go use low IQ arguments/persuasion tactics elsewhere.

>>10343939
>you time

>>10343238
>>you can take pix of the lunar landing site and contact the science equipment still functional on the moon to measure the distance of the moon
I have never once seen a picture of the rovers, from earth, only a piece of shit plot of land with a crater

>>10344810
You can't view the rovers from Earth because they're too small. You get screwed by the diffraction limit.

>>10344325
>Wow he made amazon employees sign up amazing.
Considering how many Tesla employees "bought" cars I think there's a lack of perspective in making that point.

>>10344850
so we can see galaxies on the edge of the universe, but we cant see a fucking go-kart on the moon.

SEEMS LEGIT AS FUCK DAWG I BUY IT

>>10345009
galaxies are very large
go-karts are very small

>>10345032
your IQ is deficient if you cannot surmise the relative sizes of both from the extreme difference in distance.

the rover would be orders of magnitudes larger than a galaxy on the edge of the universe.

why are you on /sci/?

>>10345388
If you can make a telescope with the necesary resolution to make out a car on the moon from the surface of the earth there is a nobel prize waiting for you

>>10345440
its called the hubble telescope and a literal lens adjustment

but that would be antisemitic to use the hubble in that way to see local objects.

>>10345493
>can't see distant galaxies from the surface of the earth
>need to be in orbit to do so
>can't see tiny object on the moon from the surface of the earth
>need to be in orbit to do so
hmmmmmm

>>10345499
but that actually makes sense.

not using the hubble for the moon doesnt. obviously they do NOT want us to see the surface in such detail. there is NO reason why they shouldnt do this.

>>10338178
Oh no no no no no.