/sci/ - Science & Math

why the fuck is DM-1 still so far away?

Video of the site and activity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiylWgy_8y8

>>10345147
>Nose cone remains untouched, likely to be scrapped
Definitely to be scrapped. And the next one better be sturdier if the hopper is to fly without looking like R2D2.

>>10345151
Government shutdown and Boeing.

>>10345192
according to Chris the delay was independent of the shutdown

>>10345151
NASA are currently doing a Flight Readiness Review for DM-1, it's a big bureaucratic process that involves evaluating every part of the mission and vehicle; it also involves input from a lot of different NASA branches and international partners, which obviously puts the brakes on everything.

fact: starliner > dragon 2

>>10345198
>>10345195
At this rate the arabsat FH could launch earlier or risk being delayed waiting for DM-1.

ferrule installed

>>10345209
I think it's much more likely to be delayed than launch earlier, as the FH has a higher than usual chance of blowing up the pad, so NASA would rather not risk that before DM-1.

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1091040439820578816

The virgin clean room vs the chad clean trailer

>>10345256
makes me wonder, how will starship deal with payload integration. Horizontal? Vertical? Will they plop the payload straight in?

>>10345262
Either payloads will have to be designed without clean rooms in mind or the clean room goes in like a container and doubles as sat dispenser.

>>10345147
Why is this lunatic allowed to drive up the price of commodities for the rest of us?

>>10345292
there’s less steel in this than a small boat. What do you mean?

>>10345317
yacht owners are worse, I suppose
Does musk have a yacht too?

>>10345326
are you ok?

>>10345328
I'm fine.

You, one the other hand, are a repulsive bloated consumer?

And with this last trick...I'll make this damaged fairing disappear!

>>10345336
now the spooky stuff can happen

>>10345147
Apparently he does have a huge luxury yacht. And he logs 100,000s of miles per year on his private jet.

This Howard Hughes'esque mental illness would be funny, if his gluttony were not so absolutely revolting... I have more respect for the morbidly obese.

>>10345326
>yacht owners are worse, I suppose
fuck off back to plebbit, disgusting commie

>>10345326
>>10345334
>>10345343

OldSpace is SEETHING!!!

>>10345345
Not a commie.

I just find gluttony, in all its forms, truly disgusting. I don't think Musk's right to be a truly vile, bloated consumer should be taken away from him, I just think he should be derided, pitied, and shamed for it.

What’s the t- for the first test now? Elon tweeted that it might be 8 weeks since some day but I forget when

>>10345336
Ravioli ravioli, rebuild the tinfoiloli...

>>10345343
>Apparently he does have a huge luxury yacht. And he logs 100,000s of miles per year on his private jet.
And yet he still finds time NOT to take any vacations and work hundreds of hours a week.

>>10345364
January 5th he said it would be 4 weeks (this Monday), but maybe 8 weeks due to delays. So beginning of March is the original later deadline.

>>10345389
like 90% of those flights were between LA and Sparks. Make sense that he wants a high speed tunnel between them...

>>10345395
>Sparks
Marks and Spencers?

>>10345395
my bad, most are CA-CA. But a lot of them go to sparks/Reno

>>10345394
I think that'd be a target date, rather than a deadline.

>>10345348
>REEEEE
>PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN ME
>BIG GOVERNMENT STOP THEM NOW REEEEEEEEE

>>10345413
He reckoned they'd have everything up and running well within that time (that they'd be into firing and testing). I general though, yes you should read any Muskian deadline as a ridiculously optimistic target date.

>>10345336
>raptor shipped to stand for testing
>shed gets a veil
Hmmm

>>10345389
>And yet he still finds time NOT to take any vacations and work hundreds of hours a week
imagine unironically believing this

>>10345147
What exactly is the purpose of the wrinkly tin foil around it?

>>10345503
Musk works at least 100 hours a day, 28 days a week. That's a greater than factor of 16 improvement on just working 24/7.

>>10345416
Only thing we can be 100% certain of, is that he is indeed a VERY successful consumer.

>>10345523
the final version will be made of stainless steel. This reflects heat away, and also is quite strong at the temperatures experienced in EDL etc. it’s also cheap, easy to work with, and doesn’t require huge specialized composite tooling

>>10345535
>That justification for working with stainless steel

Lol

So what is the purpose of the wrinkly tin foil?

>>10345537
looks, I think

>>10345147
All our dreams end up shriveling into a horrible nightmare before withering away and dying. Accept the sad truth of life, Musk. Don't go broke buying snake oil from asshats, for all our sakes.

>>10345544
But it looks like a school project from a 5th grader

>>10345563
It'll probably be buffed out when it's done.

>>10345563
The hopper is a quick and dirty testbed
Looks are not a concern as it is likely to explode

>>10345604
So if looks are not a concern why are they putting wrinkly tin foil on it?

>>10345604
it's possible the world's largest tinfoil hat is a measure to make the rocket aerodynamically unstable on ascent and stable on descent, to better reflect the final product and allow more meaningful testing

>>10345620
>the world's largest tinfoil hat
kek

>>10345619
Go there and ask them?

At least two more launches won by Blue Origin, bringing the total to 10 for New Glenn. Already twice the number of manifested launches of FH and it hasn't even flown yet.
LMAO

Elon is tweeting again about the spaceship:

>It’s designed for 100 people on a Mars journey
>Tasty food!
>When do you foresee Mars Base Alpha being self sufficient?
>About 10 orbit synch windows, which are every 26 months, so self-sufficiency around 2050

>>10345648
>1st flight in 2020
lol their engine won't even be ready until 2021, the rocket itself won't fly until 2022, and that's being optimistic

>>10345651
>making up shit about your competition
Go back to r.ddit.

>>10345649
>Tasty food!
What did he mean by this?

>>10345649
>100 tons payload
>average weight of a person: 70kg
>average food consumption of a person: 3kg/day
>average travel time to mars: 240 days
>100 people * 70kg + 100 people * 3 * 240 = 79 tons

The payload capacity will be almost exhausted just by the people and the food they need to bring with them to not starve to death. But yeah, keep telling people you are transporting 100 people to Mars, Elon.

>>10345648
Imagine betting your entire constellation on an extremely ambitious and unproven rocket...that's a level of stupidity only Canada could achieve, OneWeb had the right idea with buying Soyuz launches (although it would have been more economical to use the F9, this was not possible due to the CEOs personal beef with Elon) for the first few batches and moving to New Glenn when it's proven to reduce risk. Personally, I'm not sold on the whole mega-constellation concept but at least Starlink will give SpaceX the experience needed to build future Mars comm satellites.

>>10345674
>Imagine betting your entire constellation on an extremely ambitious and unproven rocket
SpaceX, Starlink and BFR?

>>10345680
SpaceX are known for their iterative testing so I'm pretty sure BFR will have been tested plenty by the time it starts launching Starlink satellites. Also, I believe the plan is to launch Starlink satellites on the F9 first before BFR is phased in, so even if BFR falls into troubles they can continue launching them with the F9 while the kinks are worked out.

>>10345147
Where is BFR's launchpad?

>>10345674
Yes, stupid canada, why they not give launch contract to wrinkly tin foil rocket?! Wrinkly tin foil rocket very good and very safe, will fly.

>>10345713
Go away, Donald

>>10345671
You don't need to send 100 to set up the base. That is only after they have a place to live already built. The first mission will probably be around 10 or 20 people. They could also send a second unmanned rocket with equipment. It will probably take about 4 rockets to set up the fuel depot and housing. Then you need to set up greenhouses, at which point you are mostly self sufficient. Thats when you can start shipping in a hundred colonists.
More likely the 100 people will be moon tourists, while they only send specialists to Mars.

>>10345671
What is dehydrated food for 100, alex

>>10345734
what is how will they get back for 200, anon
he just calculated the duration to mars lmao

>>10345708
boca chica

>>10345740
>get back
>colonists
They aren't coming back

>>10345743
That's a concrete flat for a small test ship.

Where is BFR's launchpad?

>>10345748
how long do you think it takes to build a launchpad, anon?
how far away do you think Starship Super Heavy is?

>>10345747
>he unironically believes in the ebin colonisation meme
well, didn't expect much from you anyway

>>10345755
LC 39 took 4 years to build, and that was for a rocket half the size.

>>10345734
That calculation was just food and body weight. Obviously, each passenger will have a lot more weight with them like life support, a bed, clothes, probably work out stations unless you want colonisers arriving with serious health issues. All in all 100 tons payload restriction and 100 people going on a 8 month travel does not really work out. Sometimes I think Elon still thinks they are developing the ITS. Somebody should tell him the BFR has way less payload capacity.

>>10345762
this
even if you assume each astronaut only eats one kilogram per day and needs 5 kilograms of valuables (this excludes a bed, living spaces, literally all in an empty fairing lmao) you still get a total weight of
7tons+100*6*240=151 tons. literally 1.5x the maximum capacity of bfr. and these are my retarded overly optimistic Phoneposting calculations

>>10345775
maybe they’ll fly ships in tandem. One for people, one for supplies. It would simplify things with E2E: they’d already have the configuration ready to go

>>10345784
>it has a capacity of carrying 100 people!!
>(if you send an entire fleet with it)
anon, the infrastructure of the rocket alone couldn't sustain 100 people, it's simply too heavy, even if you outsource all the resources to another one. please stop being retarded

When Daddy Elon uplifts the Human species to live on the moon and Mars permanently how big can settlements get after 10-15 years? I can't wrap my head around the science and massive engineering it'd take for Luna and Mars to eventually have a city that rivals Tokyo, London, NYC, and Hong Kong.

I'd make a thread for this but /sci/ is too stupid to do any real thinking.

>>10345336
If that is intended as a wind break, I am going to laugh my ass off next time they get strong winds.

>>10345792
>I'd make a thread for this but /sci/ is too stupid to do any real thinking.
irony - the post

>>10345697
>SpaceX are known for their iterative testing
source?

>>10345794
They just don't want the public to see their shame when they take apart the ruined silver buttplug that couldn't even handle a little wind.

What a joke of a company.

>>10345726
No one will be setting up greenhouses you absolute moron. The weight of engineering challenges make it retarded. Everything will be done under grow lights in tunnels, the only thing on the surface will be solar panels and tubes for growing algae.

>>10345544
I would have guessed that, but it makes it look bad. The material under it, painted, would have looked better and been lighter.

Maybe theeeey're just doing a fast-and-dirty "how much heat is really reflected" test. Or maybe they're trying to make it look like a fake so people will underestimate it while Musk sets up a short sell or something? Or maybe it is fake and the real work is not being done out in a field somewhere.

>>10345790
Your calculations are bullshit, for a start they will be bringing dried food which brings the American estimate of 3kgs a day down massively, the transfer window is also on the order of 180 days, please revise your calculations.

>>10345668
Pickled okra added at 0:20

I wanna go to Mars now.

>>10345800
There are so many unsourced assertations in these threads, and they get ignored. We're getting the crap end of SpaceX marketting as far as I can tell.

>>10345718
You're not my supervisor.

>>10345649
>About 10 orbit synch windows, which are every 26 months, so self-sufficiency around 2050
Huh? That sounds wrong.

>>10345651
Reminder that Musk is not the one creating the Blue Origin deadlines.

>>10345817
2/3 of this thread are literal r.dditors

Are you really surprised at all the un sourced pro-spacex claims here?

>>10345809
>Maybe theeeey're just doing a fast-and-dirty...

I apologiz for using up all th "e"s.

>>10345734
They should also dehydrate the people.

>>10345826
Pushing colonization to fast will take care of that after they arrive.

>>10345822
What are r*dditors doing here?

>>10345800
>>10345817
Literally just read SpaceX's Wikipedia page, their entire history is just a bunch of rapid iterative progress; the most prominent example being the developments leading up to the first booster landing.

>>10345822
I am a little surprised if I'm honest. It seems like an odd place to either directly market to or to repeat marketting shit posted on reddit. You'd hope as well people would ask for a source on these things.

>>10345836
>simply derive it from first principles using their wikipedia page
No thank you, you cannot glean whether they employ "iterative testing" like that.

Btw I have intermittent minor nounal aphasia and had to look up "first principles" to remember "derive", and most of the links are some Musk bullshit about his new marketting term. He is seriously annoying rn,

>>10345822
>>10345833
Why are you guys avoiding typing the word "redditors"?

Will we ever have a thread free of this moron replying to himself?

>>10345852
It's a dirty dirty word.

>>10345833
>>10345837
>What are r*dditors doing here?
Doing their daddy elon's bidding
Spreading SpaceX propaganda and trash talking competitors FOR FREE

Personally, I think the amount of schizophrenics in this thread is far more worrying than the presence of redditor boogeyman you guys keep screeching about...

>>10345860
*boogeymen

>>10345860
Personally it'd be nice if you replied to posts directly so we can follow the fucking conversation newfag.

>Butthurt he is not getting (you)s

>>10345860
>I think the amount of schizophrenics in this thread is far more worrying than the presence of redditor boogeyman you guys keep screeching about.
Alright then. Why don't you leave?

>A bunch of infighting
Mars and the moon are destined for a nasty civil war.

>>10345892
Nobody here will ever step foot on the Moon or Mars.

Austin B is getting some HD drone footage of the launch pad area. Should be uploaded soon I hope

>>10345900
jokes on you

>>10345900
I reckon Aldrin shitposts sometimes...

>>10345903
Fuck off, retard.

Fuck all y'all cynical bastards non of you deserve to go to space.

>>10345910
Posting from space rn dumbass monkey boy. Ayylmao.

>>10345910
>"I'm building up my karma so daddy Elon will pick my fellow redditors and I to go to Mars with him :D"
Cringe.

>>10345917
>t.going to be left behind to die on a dying planet

>>10345914
Oh yeah, post a picture of a viewport.

>>10345924
>going from a dying planet to a long-dead one
Cringe.

>>10345924
>post a picture of a viewport

>>10345930
A dying planet means mass panic and unrest. Good luck on your Mad Max future.

>>10345931
That's the weirdest asteroid I ever seen.

>>10345941
>Mad Max
Cringe.

>>10345941
>That's the weirdest asteroid I ever seen.
>monkey baby doesn't know about spacekush

>>10345941
dankest*

>>10345853
Once the BFR flies, for he will finally kill himself

>>10345952
So, never then?

>>10345952
Is your reasoning something like:
>I samefag a lot, therefore people who disagree with me samefag a lot
>I will kill myself if Musk fails, therefore people who disagree with me will kill themselves if Musk succeeds

If so seek professional help m80.

>>10345671
>Eat recycled food
>It's good for the environment

>>10345961
you fail at logic hence ironically kys

2-4 more years lads
2-4 more years of the very same sperg spamming absolutely every single thread related to spacex 24/7

>>10345979
I asked a question, did it touch a nerve?

>>10345984
Get help.

>>10345984
Yeah it's pretty gay.

>>10345762
Habitable volume can be increased drastically witj inflatable modules. Say you have the normal 10m3 per person under normañ conditions. When the module is inflated its 100

>>10345984
Sure would be nice to have mods do their job for once.

>>10345997
>>10345984
Go back to r.ddit then, faggot.

>>10345995
Explain.

>>10345147
I can't wait for Elon's followers to commit mass suicide on that thing - similar to those comet worshiping cultists from a few years back.

how long until China starts building their starship clone?

>>10346007
they're probably doing it right now

>>10346019
They'll have finished it before SpaceX

>>10346025
that’s how the Disney/Pixar movie clone companies operate. They have a somewhat similar in theme and style movie out before the actual one, based only on the trailer

>>10346025
nah, chinks can copy things with staggering speed, but rockets are too explosive for them to do easily
getting their suppliers to stop sending them scrap will take them at least a year, and getting workers to make it to any standard at all, let alone the required level is going to take a few more

>>10346040
In my ideal world, the Chinese one somehow works and SpaceX's one fails spectacularly. Most comedic outcome imo.

>>10346044
>getting their suppliers to stop sending them scrap will take them at least a year, and getting workers to make it to any standard at all, let alone the required level is going to take a few more
The problem is that the quality of their steel is poor, their machining capabilities are actually really good. They can probably build something better than you could in the US if they had the design skills and the quality raw material.

>>10346044
China launched double what SpaceX did in 2018 and that will increase even more in 2019

Long March 9 is more powerful than bfr

>>10346005
Listen faggot how more clear you want me to be. Currwnt figures are with a rigid ship. Inflatables literally multiply your volume tenfold with 0 mass penalty

>>10346065
Sorry, when are you inflating the ship? And how does that affect the weight of the people and food and equipment on board? I think most people are criticizing how much mass it can carry as payload, not volume.

>>10345147
>SpaceX General
We should go back to having a "spaceflight general" instead.

>>10346088
Seconded.

>>10346088
Thirded

new drone footage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_4SmrPypTU

launchpad footage!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iA17KwTeqs0

>>10346152
>>10346213
go back to r.ddit

>>10346243
1) there isn't a reddit word filter.
2) This is mainly a SpaceX Starship discussion thread. These two videos are cool new views of the current Boca Chica facilities, which is relevant to the discussion
3) while someone has posted these to spacexlounge, I'm subscribed to ol' Austin B and got them off of my YT homepage
4) Why are you so angry?
5) damnnit you made me write all of this out

>>10346253
>there isn't a reddit word filter.
kill yourself mobilefag scum

>>10346258
what did he mean by this

>>10346263
reddit

new Elon info:

Q: "Are the large fin/flaps still part of the design and the way it’ll reenter?
A:
>Yes, ship needs pitch/roll/yaw control across wide Mach regime & angle of attack
>Will probably make booster legs/flaps same as ship, instead of like F9
>To be clear, I’m confident that a stainless steel ship will be lighter than advanced aluminum or carbon fiber, because of strength to weight vs temperature & reduced need for heat shielding


some person in the chain: "Better, faster, cheaper."
A:
>Yes. It’s very rare to find all three.

>...a stainless steel ship will be lighter than advanced aluminum or carbon fiber, because of strength to weight vs temperature & reduced need for heat shielding
glad we got that sorted out! There was some discussion as to if they took a dry mass hit or not with the SS redesign

>>10346253
>3) while someone has posted these to spacexlounge, I'm subscribed to ol' Austin B and got them off of my YT homepage
So you at least monitor spacexlounge, but also felt the need to be like a hipster about it or something and state that you got this shit straight from the source?

>>10346253
>>10346258
>>10346269
You said it three times and look what's fucking happened:
>>10346274
>>10346277

>>10346280
looks like reddit came back

>>10346280
>someone seethes over the reddit boogyman
>I check twitter because I haven't looked all day
>oh hey, Elon posted some stuff ten minutes ago
...these are related?

seek mental help

What the fuck is happening ITT

everyone shut the fuck up, happenings are happening:

>"Preparing to fire the Starship Raptor engine at @SpaceX Texas"
-Elon

it's a big boi. Gorgeous plumbing. Mueller must be rock hard every day working on it

>>10346300
>>10346303
Is this a real engine, or just subscale test article #3?

I made the plumbing stand out a bit

more tweets:
>"Initially making one 200 metric ton thrust engine common across ship & booster to reach the moon as fast as possible. Next versions will split to vacuum-optimized (380+ sec Isp) & sea-level thrust optimized (~250 ton)."

>>10346327
compared to this pic, it looks like they really did do some radical redevelopment

reminder, from September's moon presentation:
>"And this is the Raptor engine that will power BFR both the ship and the booster, it’s the same engine. And this is approximately a 200-ton thrust engine that’s aiming for roughly a 300-bar or 300-atmosphere chamber pressure. And if you have it at a high expansion ratio it has the potential to have a specific impulse of 380."
so now it's "380+" rather than "potential" for 380. Awesome!


Still flow staged combustion cycle still as well, according to Elon

>>10346327
Translation:
>we're broke as fuck due to squandering $6 billion in government funds and wasting money on starlink, so we can't afford to develop the vacuum version right now
>we haven't been able to get the high thrust version to work so we scaled it down once again
Reminder that Raptor was originally supposed to be 3000+ KN
LMAO

>>10346293
There is one sperg who shows up every thread and shits it up with bait and constantly replying to himself and everyone else, watch him reply to this. It's bretty cringe desu.

another tweet:

Q:
Still planning to use methalox RCS thrusters and not cold gas? If so, how do you get those to be quick enough to function as RCS?

A:
Cold gas thrusters only. Will use body flaps & main engines for landing orientation, so won’t need high thrust reaction control. Simplifies things considerably.

>>10346303
That is a fucken sexy engine senpai.

>>10346368
yep. Wonder how quickly they can pump them out of Hawthorn. Last year they were making something like one Merlin every two days

>>10346324
Real deal 2000 kN

>>10346331
It looks like there is a lot of extra diagnostic elements on the engine not surprising for development program.flight one will have much fewer pressure sensing lines

Q:
How many engines will be on SuperHeavy? Looks like the engine is to big to fit 31 of them on there.
A:
Still up to 31. Will probably fly with fewer initially in case it blows up.


so a sort of sub-thrust cheaper "test" article for SH too. Makes sense, considering the raptors are the big marginal cost components of the whole system

>>10346384
seems to me that it >>10346327 sort of stretched the plumbing further "around" the whole thing. the power pack is thinner too? makes it easier to squeeze more in a small area

>>10346385
You don't even know what "marginal cost" means, retard.

>>10346399
why not correct me instead of calling me a retard? The raptors are complex, finely machined devices with lots of parts. 31 of them • a lot of $ per is a big chunk of the "unit" cost for one Super Heavy. If they don't need the full thrust capability for initial orbital tests, why not remove a couple? As elon says is saves them a buck in case of some catastrophe.
How did I misuse marginal cost?

>>10346411
Explain what you think marginal cost is again, but without using rocket parts as your exemplar.

>>10346327
>reach the moon as fast as possible
old space btfo

>>10346423
the cost of producing one additional unit. This is like Econ 101 stuff. Why am I even talking to you? you're just here to antagonize

>>10346431
Is everything a conspiracy theory to you?

>>10346431
That's correct, but that doesn't seem to be how you're using it in >>10346411 >>10346385

Did you just google a textbook def? Because you seemed to be concerned >>10346411 that you did not know what it meant, and just copy pasting a google answer is not going to help you understand where you went wrong.

>>10346439
>he still hasn't actually provided his objectively correctTM correction of the post

>>10346437
it sure fucking seems like it

>>10346445
take your meds

>>10346439
wow, inverted gatekeeped spoon-feeding. Now that's a shitpost.

>>10345147

>>10346448
Eh?

>>10346445
Also eh?

let's just reset here and talk about cool rockets. Can't wait for the footage of the first test fire...

for those who have forgotten what it will look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7kqFt3nID4

>>10345671
>3kg of food a day
what kind of human beings are we talking about here

>>10346303
He
C H O N K

>>10346546
in microg you use 20% less energy overall or something like that. So 1800 kcal per person per day... on the other hand I've seen reports that you use 3500 kcal a day in space. so idk

>>10346324
Real, this one and two others will be powering that hopper they're building

>>10346303
just noticed the hand prints for scale

>>10346572
sure it's not pareidolia? they might be prints, but the fingers look weird

>>10346411
>why not correct me instead of calling me a retard
Wheredoyouthinkweare.png
Fresh off the boat from reddit?

>>10346385
It's not sub-thrust or a cheaper test article, it's just Raptor version 1, which lets them build the vehicle and start using it for missions that they don't need max performance for, eg Dear Moon and commercial launches.

>>10346559
Okay except he didn't say kilocal he said kiloGRAM. I couldn't eat 6.6 pounds of food in a day if I tried. Actually scratch that, I could but I wouldn't be happy about it.

For reference the most energy dense food molecules are fats and 3kg of fat contains roughly 23100 kilocalories.

>>10346575
The hand print was made by someone handling the engine as it dangled, and their fingertips dragged a little. There's actually at least two hand prints visible there. I think the reason it looks so yuge is because our brains are interpreting it as hanging very close to the background guy, when in reality it's much closer to the foreground guy. Also in the other pic when it's actually on the test stand you can directly compare it to the guy standing behind it, it looks to be around 1.5 meters across.

pic related

>>10346612
Yes they can all just eat fat and die of malnutrition. Before you post your first correction, yes they can also all die of prolapsed bowels from constipation or whatever because you want to feed them something with less fibre than emergency army rations.

Looking at typical values for hydrated onions beans they're only out by a little less than a factor of 2 assuming 3000kcal/day/person. For dehydrated beans it's a factor of 4 ish?

>>10346651
Obviously you can't expect to keep people alive if you pack nothing except jugs of canola oil. My point was that there aren't any foods that would be so lacking on calories that you'd need to eat multiple kilograms of them per day to survive, except for a few types of vegetables like lettuce, which you could actually get 'for free' if you grew them on the ship, which itself is unlikely. People on Mars missions are going to be packing a lot of dehydrated foods and probably a lot of supplement pills as well. Actually, screw pills, just pack bulk amounts of whatever essential nutrients we need. 100% vitamin C power exists, for example.

>>10346651
With a very low fiber diet you develop very soft, runny shits, not constipation. Your bowels move a lot more slowly though and that runs the risk of irritating your intestinal linings.

>>10346665
>With a very low fiber diet you develop very soft, runny shits, not constipation.
What's happened to you there is you've developed a partial bowel obstruction. Diarrhea is a very consistent sign of a partial bowel obstruction.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/a_to_z/bowel-obstruction-a-to-z

>>10346660
>People on Mars missions are going to be packing a lot of dehydrated foods and probably a lot of supplement pills as well. Actually, screw pills, just pack bulk amounts of whatever essential nutrients we need. 100% vitamin C power exists, for example.
Onions and other liquid diets are not nutritious enough my man. People die from trying to live off that shit.

>>10346681
I didn't realize soilent is in the word filter...

>>10346644
so it’s a tad larger than Merlin, but 2.2x the thrust? Nice

>>10345811
The transfer windows sure as fuck is not 180 days with shitty raptors.

>>10346681
Literal onions would probably be easy to grow.

>>10346303
>>10346300
That plumbing looks so insanely complicated, how much is one? 50 million dollars?

>>10346984
That's almost certainly way over. A Merlin engine is in the neighborhood of 1-2 million.

>>10346997
The merlin is also a very, very simple design. That's like comparing a Nokia 3310 with an iPhoneX. This looks more complicated than the SSME and those are 50 million a piece.

>>10346997
>>10346984
An interview with Tom Mueller pegs a Merlin at "some fraction of a million," but doesn't get more specific than that

>>10347003
Go and actually compare pictures of the two engines side by side. Also, old space costs vs new space costs.

>>10346997
Merlins are under a mil nowadays

>>10347003
wasn’t the total unit cost of the new SSME production something like 100 million? If you include all of the contract amounts for the production

>>10347018
SSME/Raptor, not Merlin/Raptor, to clarify

>>10347023
>>10347018
here's an SSME

>>10347095
SSME uses an extended nozzle with interesting geometry since its lit from Liftoff to an only slightly suborbital trajectory - about 400 meters per second short, if I recall correctly.

>>10345523
Mass and a rough approximation of the eventual vehicle's structure.

>>10345697
SpaceX wasn't known for it at the start, but I think their example has made customers willing to sign contracts with launch providers who are transparent with customers about their progress and potential risks.

>>10345805
>No greenhouses
They'll probably have greenhouses partly illuminated by mirrors to be able to stretch power resources as much as possible. Sure, dust storms will be a periodic issue but every extra watt you can squeeze out of the system is that much more safety margin you have.

>>10347095
The Raptor is unironically more complicated since its full Flow. But the really Bad Thing is that Space Shuttle had three of them IIRC. The BFR is conceptualised to have 38 of them. So with 50 Million a piece thats close to two Billion just for the engines. Even if you half that, almost a Billion for the engines is insane. Thats what a whole Saturn 5 cost.

Now at least we know why SpaceX is broke and the reason for this whole steel bullshit.

>>10347145
31 engines conceptually, and SpaceX knows how to build engines for a hell of a lot less than oldspace. It's probably closer to $5 million per engine, not $50 million like an RS-25 with its complex and tedious to manufacture stainless steel tubing nozzles. LH2 engines are a bitch and a half to build. Hydrocarbons are easy.

>>10347116
>*cuts off landing feed*
don't worry you guys, the passengers landed safely, it's just a camera failure

>>10347145
You're right, if Raptor was as ridiculously overpriced as a typical rocket engine BFR would be unaffordable. Good thing they designed it to be easy enough to mass manufacture that each one will probably cost no more than a million dollars!

>>10347158
$1 million is an ambitious price for that many precision parts. There are fundamentally more components in a staged combustion engine than a gas generator design, and the fundamental costs of precision machined metal parts still scale by weight.

>>10347145
>>10347018
Their cost is probably lower than that, partly due to the experience SpaceX has gained making the Merlin family of engines and also their focus on producing a large volume of engines. The cost is probably in the low $10s of millions, but probably not nearly to $50 million.
The latter is so self-evident that Blue Origin is doing it too, but moreso, with the BE-4 by selling them to other launch providers. Honestly, rocket engines are roughly on-par with modern turbines in terms of complexity and their prices are also probably comparable.
The cost is also not so bad, because like jet engines these are built to be run 100s to 1000s of times and at this point SpaceX is confident they can make engines with this kind of service life.

>>10347102
The interesting thing you mention is that its nozzle doesn't follow a perfect De Laval nozzle curve, instead the last few inches of the nozzle kinks inwards by a few degrees. This causes a shock front to form that briefly increases the exhaust pressure right at the nozzle exit, which keeps it stuck to the walls of the nozzle when firing at sea level and avoiding flow separation, which can easily cause a rocket engine to tear itself apart in a fraction of a second. This allowed RS-25 to have a much higher expansion ratio than would otherwise be possible at sea level, and made it better optimized for vacuum use, although it still was not as efficient as it could have been if it were completely vacuum optimized.

>>10347152
Its 31on the booster and 7 on the starship. The engines of hydrogen rockets are actually rather easier to build, since it burns very cleanly. What is Hard to do is the storage. You seem to Mix up some things up here. Also, as already stated, raptors are full flow, The Thing nobody bothered to build because they are so complicated and expensive to build. Now that is not so bad if you go for reusability, because then the high cost of the engine is distributed over many launches. But for SpaceX the issue at the moment clearly is that they dont have the money to build 38 raptors.

>>10347164
>Honestly, rocket engines are roughly on-par with modern turbines in terms of complexity and their prices are also probably comparable.
>and at this point SpaceX is confident they can make engines with this kind of service life.
thanks for the retarded stuff to show to my fellow aerospace engineers

>>10347163
I agree $1 million is ambitious, however SpaceX is actually in a position to take advantage of economies of scale due to the fact that a single BFR stack requires 38 Raptors in total. I know economies of scale is a meme here but it's true, the more of a single product you produce the less each unit costs individually. In any case the hard parts about Raptor were the development of the alloys required to withstand the 800 bar hot oxygen rich turbopump environment, and the design of all the actual plumbing. Now that the metallurgy is figured out and the pipes are fitted there's really no reason why they can't ramp up production to a high rate.

>>10347174
The main problem is materials. If SpaceX has solved the materials problem, they have the engines they need.

>>10347173
Your costs argument is an assumption without sound factual grounding. As for the LH2 engine production, the nozzles are not that easy to make. Valves for hydrogen are prone to misbehavior and take additional considerations to build well. Brazed tubing nozzles are likewise cost-prohibitive to produce, which is why SpaceX invested early on in machinery to build much less expensive regenerative nozzles.

>>10347177
kek

>>10347164
The Merlin is a complerely different kind of engine, and even for the Falcons, spe ding ~5 Million on the engines of your rocket isnt that low for a rocket of that class. Its also completely ridiculous to say that SpaceX will just magically reduce The price Tag by 99%. Thats so stupid. Also fyi, all Prior attempts for full flow engines werde abandoned because the individual building cost was projected to be beyond 100 Million.

>>10347186
>Also fyi, all Prior attempts for full flow engines werde abandoned because the individual building cost was projected to be beyond 100 Million.

Citation?

On an aside, SpaceX's vertical integration really comes into play with their engines. Each stage of subcontractors is profit margin on top of profit margin, and a lot of aerospace grade parts simply carry a huge bill (which gets passed up the customer chain) because they can.

>>10347173
>The engines of hydrogen rockets are actually rather easier to build, since it burns very cleanly
Hydrogen embrittles most metals, which means you're stuck with the alloys that don't become embrittled when exposed to hydrogen, and those suitable alloys are not the highest performing in terms of heat resistance, absolute strength or strength to weight ratio, which makes it harder to design an engine. You also need much larger pumps to move the large volumes of low density hydrogen through the engine, AND deal with far worse cavitation issues as hydrogen's very low boiling point and density keep working against you.
The fact that hydrogen doesn't coke up an engine literally doesn't matter whatsoever unless your engine is meant to be highly reusable or if you're trying to do staged combustion and can't figure out alloys that can withstand oxygen rich combustion. It was for both of these reasons the RS-25 was a hydrogen fueled fuel-rich staged combustion engine.

Honestly hydrogen gets you so much additional Isp just by being hydrogen that chasing an extra 10 or 20 seconds of Isp on top of that using a far more complex engine cycle is pretty much a waste of time. The J-2 engines used on Saturn V were as basic a gas generator you could imagine, the fanciest thing they could do was relight one additional time in flight, yet they got 421 Isp just because they were burning hydrogen.

>>10347177
Well they have clearly been firing Raptor prototypes and will be firing an actual flight engine shortly, so they must have cracked the code in terms of superalloys quite a while ago.

>>10347192
please stop I can only keep laughing this much

>>10347192
They did hire metallurgists and throw money at them for the sole purpose of building these engines.

>>10347186
The GE9X costs $41.4 million per piece, and every single 777X will have two of them. That's more than $82 million of engines on a vehicle that costs $394.9 million. $5 million worth of engines on a vehicle that is now priced between $50-60 million is an absolute bargain in comparison in terms of how the pricing balances out as a fraction of the vehicle's cost.

>>10347190
>Each stage of subcontractors is profit margin on top of profit margin, and a lot of aerospace grade parts simply carry a huge bill (which gets passed up the customer chain) because they can.
This. It doesn't help that they hire engineers and pay them >$80/hr to screw in one or two bolts per engine. Video related, a gorillion engineers bolt together an RS-25 engine using at least a dozen specially engineered cradles, jigs and tools, each of which was designed by another gorillion enigneers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtE_61ZR67Y

>>10347195
Laughing at what exactly?

>>10347190
>>10347175
>>10347158
This is so cringey and retarded. The cost will not magically drop by 99% because of tiny economies of scale. But the again, its The same promise elon made for Model 3s, and we all know how that panned out. And the Model 3, unlike The BFR, actually had significant economies of scale.

>>10347203
>reduce price 99%
Over what, exactly? The RS-25, an engine produced on a cost-plus contract, one that prioritized sophisticated reliability and specific impulse at all costs, and that was never once in its history optimized for cost?

>>10347191
In the engine The hydrogen is burned you absolute retard. How hydrogen behaves with metal is completely irrelevant. Jesus christ you are retarded.

>>10347203
Considering the number of engines total and how relatively inexpensive rocket engines seem to be compared to turbines it's probably going to be about $400-800 million worth of engines on the v1.0 Starship and Superheavy. It's not inexpensive, but it's lower than you'd think.
Consider also that jet engines like the GE9X have to run for potentially 24 hours continuously each go, and do that at least twice in a row with a short break in between before any kind of maintenance at all. While their combustion chamber environments are very different, extended operation has a quality all its own with sophisticated machines.

>>10347207
What retarded bullshit are you talking about again? The ssme was Assembled in-house 100%

>>10347203
>The cost will not magically drop by 99%

No, but it will drop by 80-90% due to economies of scale, NewSpace efficiency and no hydrogen to deal with.

>>10347214
>The ssme was Assembled in-house 100%

On a cost plus contract given to Rocketdyne.

>>10347220
Lol, thats so fucking ridiculous

>>10347121
So now as well as the engineering challenges and massive weight requirements to ship to Mars of huge fucking greenhouses you also are talking about huge mirrors. Greenhouses look nice but are an a grade retarded idea for Mars.

>>10347211
>In the engine The hydrogen is burned you absolute retard. How hydrogen behaves with metal is completely irrelevant.
and the dumbest post in the thread award goes to 10347211, what an achievement! hydrogen embrittlement was a major concern for SSME

>>10347121
It is much easier to just land more thin film solar panels and LEDs than to bother with building a pressurized greenhouse on Mars. There will not be any greenhouses until well after the colony is up and running. Mars will have plenty of power for both propellant manufacture and food production. A Mars colony is hard as is, we will not be doing to while starved for power.

>>10346303
That's not 1.3m diameter nozzle.

>>10347190
Thats not at all how it works. A supplier actually has economies of scale on its products because He is not supplying only your products but everybodies. Plus, He is specialized on it, and usually He is not the only supplier so he has competition to keep prices low. So he might add a 10% profit Margin on his price but that price will still be way, way lower what you can do yourself. There is a reason why you go to the supermarket and dont grow your food yourself.

Isnt exactly that the reason Tesla is doing so badly? Elon not understanding these simple facts, and just vertically integrated everything?

>>10347238
That is the way it works in mature, competitive industries, but not for aerospace suppliers. If you can get away with using non-aerospace grade, off the shelf parts, then great. But if not, it is better to do it yourself.

>>10347230
>huge mirrors
Ever heard of Auminized Mylar? It's light as fuck, and the environment on Mars will not weather it at any appreciable rate.
>>10347234
This is just trenches and a few layers of transparent plastic or glass, plus what amounts to foil mirrors that pack up very compactly. It won't be brought on the first mission, but once enough digging and equipment is on Mars it will almost certainly happen.

>>10347242
fuck, Aluminized Mylar

>>10347238
>A supplier actually has economies of scale on its products
no such supplier for rocket engine components, tough

>young private company developed the most advanced rocket engine using its own money and some usaf pocket change
>meanwhile rocketdyne struggles with simple rs-25 mods
What's going on this world?

>>10347245
Plain old corruption. Apollo is what happens when you give plenty of money to engineers and scientists to pursue a dream, and the vampires do not yet have time to latch onto the funding stream yet. But oh boy, did they latch on back in the 70s. Nowadays NASA and its cost plus suppliers are a jobs program first, space agency second.

>>10347245
>most advanced rocket engine
wrong
>using its own money and some usaf pocket change
also wrong

>>10347245
That's just the tip. If Starlink works then SpaceX will be the worlds most valuable private company on the planet by a few orders of magnitude.

>inb4 upbotes for the baitmaster

>>10347251
>If Starlink works
except it won't and any it person can tell you that
if satellite internet had so many advantages over disadvantages (yes, even leo one) it would have been done a long fucking time ago lmao

>>10347241
If there are not many suppliers, than i assume everybody is producing themselves, or the capital costs associated with these supplies are so big that it still is cheaper to pay the supplier (e.g. the supplier might you rip off, but you would have to invest billions into being able to produce it yourself, so it is still cheaper to let them rip you off).

>>10347249
>>10347251
It's startling looking at it from the side from -landing rockets, FFSC engine with spark ignition, Starship. On what are the traditional contractors betting on?
Lobbyism and anti-monopoly practices?
Elon's going to die or give up?
It's all a nightmare and not real?

>>10347255
>it would have been done a long fucking time ago lmao
Alright, let's review launch costs over the past 80+ years of spaceflight. Hmm, I can't possibly imagine why launching several thousand satellites for a single purpose has never been done before. /s

>>10347212
One could argue that air breathing jet engines need to deal with worse internal conditions than most rocket engines simply because the flame of the rocket engine is mostly isolated from the engine itself due to the use of film cooling, and ample regenerative cooling takes care of the rest.Jets on the other hand need to use the hot combustion gasses to directly drive turbine blades, which are difficult to cool even with internal air channels to help. Rockets that have oxygen rich combustion are the exception, including a bunch of Russian staged combustion engines and Raptor's oxygen rich preburner/turbopump assembly.

>>10347258
Fuck, ~60 years, looks like I need to call it quits for the night.

>>10347259
Not to mention debris ingestion doesn't happen with rocket engines. Their fuel and oxidizer is going to be much cleaner than what gets drawn into a jet engine even if they travel through "pristine" air. That air still has a small amount of dust and bacteria and all kinds of other crap in it.

>>10347214
Indoors =/= in house, you know.
>>10347228
>see Merlin 1D
Before you object, Merlin 1D out-performs all other gas generator engines of its type in terms of power to weight ratio and efficiency, yet is dirt cheap by comparison. Raptor will be similar, while more expensive than Merlin 1D it will also be orders of magnitude cheaper than any other staged combustion engine ever built.

>>10347245
Developing them bankrupted SpaceX. Rocketdyne is not bankrupt. Thats the difference.>>10347249

>>10347211
How do you get the hydrogen into the engine combustion chamber without it coming into contact with metal, anon. The pipes, valves, and most importantly the turbine blades and the impellers were all metal, and all had to be made of weaker, heavier, hydrogen-resistant alloys.

>>10347263
>bankrupted
Not even remotely.

>>10347237
It's not a good picture for showing scale. See >>10346644

>>10347258
even with SpaceX imaginary "1000$/kg" launch costs it's a completely retarded idea since cable internet would outperform it in anything bigger than yo momma's 1000 population village

>>10347250
>>most advanced rocket engine
>wrong
wrong
>>using its own money and some usaf pocket change
>also wrong
also wrong

>>10347270
>no u
the fact that NASA is literally 25-50% of SpaceX Investment forces already disproves your claim

>>10347265
not to mention you had high pressure hydrogen in an engine, which just makes all the problems an order of magnitude worse than just sitting in some tank

>>10347269
It doesn't need to have a huge amount of bandwidth. It just has to be able to handle international banking traffic, and have a lower ping than that fiber optic cable to be an earthshaking financial success.
Sure, Elon is hyping it as if we're going to be running online multiplayer over his system, but the threshold for serious money-making is way, way below his characteristically optimistic vision.

>>10347263
>Developing them bankrupted SpaceX
Wrong, SpaceX was bankrupt long before they developed Raptor

>>10347269
Starlink will have lower latency for >3000km connections than fiber, courtesy of higher sped of light in a vacuum

>>10347272
Money paid to SpaceX in return for a service is their money. As far as I know NASA has never granted SpaceX money just to pursue Raptor development, like USAF did.

>>10347272
It is pocket change from the point of view of NASA and government aerospace funding in general

>>10347242
>This is just trenches and a few layers of transparent plastic or glass

That is even more wasteful than building domes because a dome is a natural pressure vessel so your materials have to be even stronger and heavier than they already were going to be for domes. Seriously, it's going to be a tunnel boring machine that is one of the first things on Mars, it will be run until it is fucked to produce kilometers of underground tunnels. For producing food, by weight LEDs and solar film is so much cheaper to ship than whole fucking structures its not even funny. Greenhouses may show up waaaaaay down the track using local resources but that is a long fucking way off.

>>10347277
>it's raining
>internet is gone
whoopsie
also you retards probably don't even know that the majority of delay isn't created by distances but by router coordination and processing, which will increase about 10x if you send the entire traffic of a major city to three satellites

>>10347277
This, plus the likely initial customers being investment firms is why it's going to make money hands over fist. Not downloading memes at the summit of Everest or at Point Nemo, investment firms will slaughter each other to get at that latency advantage.

>>10347282
>also you retards probably don't even know that the majority of delay isn't created by distances but by router coordination and processing
Literally wrong. Distance is the main bottleneck. This is true even for online gaming, not to mention things like trading information.

>>10347281
Radiation is still a thing. It will be in window-walled tunnels for convenience and radiation protection until such time as a good optically transparent radiation shielding material is developed, particularly because you can't rely on Monsanto/Bayer to supply you with fresh seeds every year. You need to keep your crops as healthy as your colonists.

>>10347258
Learn about self moderation. By unironically responding to absolutely blatant and repetitive shitposts you are assisting them in making the threads worse. In the times before the overly zealous mods on some boards ignoring the retards and their threads was a very efficient way to deal with them and I'd argue a better one than waiting for a janny as it promoted board culture.

>>10347280
that's not even what we were arguing about retard

>>10347286
Half of the responses are the dude responding to himself.

>>10347281
I have to agree with you anon, trying to do greenhouses doesn't make any sense unless ambient pressure is close to Earth atmospheric, otherwise you're wasting a huge amount of resources building large vulnerable pressure vessels that would be more productive if they were twenty meters underground, it by LEDs, and required nothing more than a hole be dug and lined with a plastic sheet to keep the heavy metal salts out. With solar power you can convert what your panels absorb into the types of photons your plants absorb the best, and blast them with exactly as much as they can absorb as fast as they can absorb them, resulting in maximum productivity. You're right that there's no way sending greenhouses from Earth could be as mass effective in terms of kilograms of food per year per kilogram of cargo compared to using that cargo for solar panels and minimal furnishings to power underground farms.

>>10347285
Radiation on Mars is not an issue for plants, they are surprisingly radiation resistant. They can handle ~ 1 sievert per year just fine.

>>10347285
Cosmic rays don't matter to plants because they don't live long enough to get a high dose, solar charged particles can't even reach the ground because of the atmosphere, and UV light can be blocked by less than a millimeter of many optically transparent materials.

>>10347291
It may actually be multiple people, since SpaceX threads on /sci/ are being actively brigaded by redditors.

>>10347300
>When literal Redditors tell you to go back

Wew lad

>>10347296
The alternative to mirrors and windows is light pipes and parabolic collectors. Take a look at the Lowline Park project
>https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a22642/lowline-new-york-city-underground-park/
Parabolic collectors feeding light to selected plantings tens of feet below ground, keeping the plants there alive with no additional grow lights. It would take much more time to get to the point such lighting would be installed on Mars, but the spare watts of lighting are once again very significant for eventual colonies of any appreciable size to free up demands on limited electrical power.

>>10347300

>>10347305
spacex fans are everywhere, not just on reddit, but the only place where anti-spacex morons congregate is on that subreddit

anytime you see an over the top criticism of Musk or spacex, a socialist redditor is likely behind it

>>10347299
If it gets to the point that colonies rely on locally grown crops for a significant portion of their calories and nutrients, this is not going to be something they will be willing to risk at all. The habitats will be constructed mostly underground or buried with soil as shielding in the first place, pure convenience even favors keeping things mostly below-ground if possible.

>>10347309
>being a SpaceX Fan is literally the most Reddit thing you can be
>redditor tries to deny it by pointing to some retarded niche community

>>10347304
>limited electrical power

This is such a shit meme, compared to Methalox production, agriculture will barely scratch a few percent. Again, even with this new proposed idea you are having to import a whole shitload of stuff at massive cost to create this pressure vessel rather than simply using the tunnels that will already be fucking dug. Stringing up lights is not a difficult task.

>>10347314
>>being a SpaceX Fan is literally the most Reddit thing you can be
Aerospace professionals are some of the biggest SpaceX fans.

>>10347310
Yes, also applies to the vast majority of habitation. No reason to risk disaster by building a surface bubble dome when you can just hollow out a big cave underground, and keep digging downwards (and start new big caves off to the side) as you want more space.

>>10347315
>import a whole shitload of stuff
Apparently a few hundred pounds of plastic sheeting sputtered with an atomically thin layer of Aluminum is a shitload of stuff for vehicles designed to carry more than a hundred tons across the gulf of interstellar space.

>>10347316
>Aerospace professionals are some of the biggest SpaceX fans.
you don't know anything about aerospace lmao. the only engineers who would want to work for them are retarded undergrads

>>10347314
everyone and their dog is a spacex fan, but to NOT be a spacex fan, that requires a reddit edgelord

>>10347320
>a few hundred pounds of plastic sheeting
Are you envisioning a 6 foot diameter bubble dome? Your structure needs to hold up to an atmosphere of pressure differential, also very cold outside temperatures. 1/32nd inch thick plastic sheet will not do.

>>10347320
So your underground tunnels just magically gets the light from the mirrors? There is no requirement for huge sections of the tunnels to be opened to the outside and then resealed with large pressurised components?

>>10347324
those retarded undergrads are accomplishing things that you are not

>>10347324
Many engineers dont want to work for SpaceX due to work-life balance and underwhelming pay. Including me. But we are still very much supporters of what the company is attempting to do.

>>10347331
I sent a satellite to space, what have you accomplished?

>>10347329
Dude, next thing you're gonna tell me is that parabolic mirrors need to track the Sun or something in order to effectively reflect light into an underground habitat and that it's not as simple as laying out some mylar foil across a few aluminum support tubes.

>>10347328
The mirrors are the same substance that was the Apollo LEMs' characteristic Orange-Gold foil insulation, though you'd have to ask someone else why they put the kapton surface facing out.
As for the windows, you can do that with multiple thin layers or by going the light pipe route. The light pipes are a little simpler, because then you just have to dig a parabolic pit, line it with foil, and erect a tower in the middle to the focal point.
Either way it's a lot lighter than you'd expect.

>>10347334
I sleep in a big bed with my wife.

>>10347337
Not the same poster you're replying to, but if the goal is just cutting electrical demand digging parabolic-shaped pits focused on light pipes is going to be a sweet spot in terms of complexity, labor demand, and payload mass.

>>10347338
>though you'd have to ask someone else why they put the kapton surface facing out
G O L D E N A E S T H E T I C S

>>10347337
What the fuck are you on about? I'm not talking about the mirrors you blithering idiot. I'm talking about the large pressurised windows that need to be built into the ceiling/walls of this design and will be heavy as fuck and need to be imported from earth at massive cost. Instead of just using fucking LEDs.

>>10347354
I'm the guy that is agreeing with you that using mirrors and windows to get light into greenhouses is retarded and impractical compared to just laying out solar panels and using LEDs, kek.

>>10347354
The alternative is it's looking ever more likely we're about to finally make a fusion reactor that's worthwhile. The german Stellarator is really promising, and the american SPARC reactor is also very promising. Based on their progress with their prototypes and early testing (without the cooling systems being ready for testing beyond a few seconds at a time) it looks like the failures of earlier fusion projects were due to insufficiently sophisticated means of controlling the reactors and modelling the reactions.
If fusion really does end up working in either of those designs, toss all those mirrors out the airlock. Toss Al Gore out after them, because at that point he's exactly as useful too.

>https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1091148397443084289

And some people laughed when Steel was suggested as the "heavy metal" candidate.
It won't be much heavier than CF or AL. It might be lighter.

>>10347373
>heavier than CF or AL. It might be lighter.
ok this is retardation gone too far lmao

>>10347359
Kek OK sorry for sperging at you you fren

>>10347366
Stellarator is retarded, fusion reactors will need maintenance and Stellarator is lol pull the whole thing apart to fix one problem and there is no way to make it simple because it is inherently complicated as fuck. SPARC on the other hand, yeah that does look promising, I don't know how they plan to extract the tiny amount of Tritium from the salt flow for recycling though but that is the only gripe I can really pick with it.

>>10347373
Mass fractions get wonky once vehicles get beyond a certain size. The proposed Sea Dragon alternative to Saturn was intended to be a steel rocket too, and its first stage might have even been durable enough to survive a parachute splash-down for later reuse with similar work to it as the STS solid boosters.

>>10347300
There's also the occasional butthurt vatnik or shitskin.
Very noticeable on flag boards.

>>10347300
>Literal Redditors

Fucking hell. Is this Thunderf00ts personal army or something?

>>10347366
Fusion is not a miracle technology, it is much less power dense compared to fission and requires a large amount of energy to start up. It also produces radioactive waste and a very large neutron flux, much higher per megajoule of energy than fission, which irradiates the entire interior cladding of the reactor. You also only get slightly more energy per kg out of fusion fuels than you do out of fission fuels, and you get way worse energy density in terms of joules per liter. I'm sick of popsci retards who keep misinterpreting fusion as free, unlimited, clean, no-problem energy so long as we can just get it running. In reality it will be extremely expensive to build and eventually decommission fusion reactors, much more so than fission reactors. Fusion reactors will be heavy and won't be able to run continuously for more than a few months, assuming HIGHLY optimistically that we perfect plasma containment physics. Fusion reactors will NEVER be able to run on regular hydrogen, they will always be either deuterium or deuterium-tritium fueled, even helium-3 will only ever come into the equation if we develop to the point that we have colonized everything out to the Kuiper belt and start mining it out of the atmospheres of Uranus and Neptune for use in fusion engines (the only application where 99.9% charged particle fusion products even matters). Fusion energy itself won't even be that cheap, modern fission is already at the point where the cost of uranium barely factors into the price per kW/h because so little of it is used, the cost actually comes from reactor construction and decomissioning debts/funds, respectively. The same will be true for fusion reactors, even if a single reactor can produce power for 100 years before being retired.

>>10347392
Many fusionfags think it doesn't need cooling radiators in space too leading to some overly optimistic performance gains with electric propulsion. The truth is what you can do with fusion you can with fission. VASIMR is an excellent example of overhype: once you take into account all the little details it doesn't look that good at all.

>>10347382
>I don't know how they plan to extract the tiny amount of Tritium from the salt flow for recycling though but that is the only gripe I can really pick with it.
They'll probably be constantly removing some of the hydrogen isotopes from the salt stream and adding 'clean' deuterium back in, then sending off the hydrogen they removed for isotopic enrichment, at which point the tritium produced gets fed back into the reactor. Neutron fluxes from fusion reactions are high enough to support this cycle. IIRC the liquid salt does double triple duty as the means of shielding the reactor itself from the vast majority of the neutron radiation, as the primary method of removing heat from the reactor to generate power, and of course as the tritium breeding blanket. DESU the thorium>U-233 breeder cycle sounds a lot easier and more feasible.

>>10347300
I knew plebbit was cancer but this is ridiculous even nu/b/ is better.

>>10347384
>its first stage might have even been durable enough to survive a parachute splash-down
Probably, unfortunately no parachute that large being deployed behind a stage of that size could have possibly survived the turbulence forces. SpaceX tried more than once in their early days to mount parachutes on the Falcon 9 v1.0 rockets just to see what would happen, and they were shredded every time.

>>10347400
>The truth is what you can do with fusion you can with fission.
Exactly, and in terms of space travel fission is clearly superior, because it doesn't require megawatts of power to start up and weighs a hell of a lot less per watt of power. Literally every problem with fission power in space carries over to fusion power except fusion by its nature is extremely difficult to pull off and cannot be scaled down below a certain minimum size.

>VASIMR

Literally a scam, any electric engine looks like magic if you give it a magic power supply.

>>10347405
Unless I remember wrong some shuttle ET's were in decent condition after impact, so some velocity killed with parachute + steel should raise chances of survival?

>>10347392
>Fusion is not a miracle technology
It's not supposed to be, but it is easier to get fuel for than fission on a world with no fuel refining infrastructure.
>Fusion reactors will be heavy
Heavier than the 1-10kW fission models we're developing for space use certainly, but that might really just be us getting really good at making fission reactors. Again, keeping that fission reactor cheaply fueled requires warehouses filled with centrifuges either on Earth or on Mars, and before you get to that point you need an assload of other infrastructure, and after even more infrastructure.

It's relatively simple to extract water from the Martian atmosphere: our lander and rover measurements show that even in the thin atmosphere Mars regularly hits 100% humidity. A good compressor and a very cool dehumidifier is enough to extract an extraordinary amount of water without even breaking out a single shovel, pickax, or backhoe. Pair that with some simple tricks to split out the isotopes and there's your nuclear fuel, only one modest warehouse needed.

>>10347389
>>10347391
>>10347404
anon stop samefagging, everyone knows that you're a Redditor anyway

>>10347266
Yeah man, not even remotely! In fact SpaceX is filthy rich. That's why they aren't developing a vaccuum optimized raptor, because they are just top rich for that. I mean just imagine that, a rocket that is supposed to fly to other planets is not getting a vaccuum optimized engine. Thats how rich they are.

And just look at the highly profesional, not afraid of any cost way to build the hopper. Most companies would, you know, build it in a building using specific machinery to do so. But SpaceX is going the rich mans way of just stitching together with a crane. Oh the nosecone broke? Guess what, SpaceX is so rich they aren't even replacing it. Its not because they dont have the money to replace it, no, its because they are rich.

If you are still not convinced just look at starlink. That project has so much money going into it that surely it will be Operational in a few years, right? Oh what, there is not a single launch scheduled for it. Yikes!

If you are still not convinced, SpaceX is so rich they just laid off 20% of their employees.

Yes, thats how incredibely rich they are!

>>10347411
All of the Shuttle ET's were completely burned up by reentry heating at 99% orbital velocity, I think you're actually just thinking of the boosters themselves, which were already steel + parachutes.

Again, my point was that at the scale of Sea Dragon parachutes literally do not work, they just get torn up by the aerodynamic forces. The point of Sea Dragon was that it was ultra simple anyway, so it would actually make sense to just build new ones for every launch rather than spend the money and time trying to develop them into a reusable rocket, which would have to be recovered and towed back by a ship every time. Even in that case only the first stage would have any hope of recovery, the 2nd stage would be chewed up by reentry badly.

>>10347411
The alternative is picking either the first stage fuel tank or the engine bell as a crumple zone. If you can preserve the most expensive parts for reuse, tossing some of it would work out at least as well as the STS. That still wasn't great, but it wasn't as costly as building a new orbiter every single time.
This general concept paired with military contractors' skills is why ULA is going for helicopter-parachute recovery of first stage engines and avionics modules for the Vulcan family of rockets. They did that kind of recovery all the fucking time for old spy satellite film payloads.

>>10347417
Incidentally, this post's features are why plebbit sirens go out. Observe, and see the blebbitor unfamiliar with xis terrain.

>>10347427
reminder that plebbitors are literally number one SpaceX Fans. half of reddit-tier news agencies are primarily reporting about SpaceX as well

>>10347432
Tesla, too. Ever since competition for reality distortion fields faded around Apple, Elon managed to capitalize on it.

>>10347413
>It's not supposed to be, but it is easier to get fuel for than fission on a world with no fuel refining infrastructure.
You can literally just send nuclear fuel from Earth if you don't want to set up breeder reactor fuel reprocessing on Mars, fission fuel is energy dense enough that it can be worth it to do so. One metric ton of uranium would get you 24,000 gigawatt-hours of energy. No difficult isotopic enrichment of nuclear fuel would be necessary so long as they were using breeder reactors.Rather they'd be doing chemical enrichment by simply separating the fuel material (either U-233 or plutonium) from the breeder material (thorium or uranium, respectively), and that's a very simple process. No warehouses of centrifuges required, a chemical processing kit the size of a suitcase would be able to keep up to a breeder rated at hundreds of megawatts or thermal output. Once they did get around to actually mining up thorium or uranium or both, they're both quite common on Mars and the Moon, and thorium at least is pretty easy to extract. Neither metal requires anything beyond chemical processing either before or after it is loaded into the reactor.

100% humidity in a cold atmosphere at 0.6% Earth's sea level pressure is not a lot of water. In fact it's a minuscule amount. Deuterium enrichment from water is not as easy as thorium and uranium extraction from basaltic rock.

>>10347423
>They did that kind of recovery all the fucking time for old spy satellite film payloads.
Yeah, but they weighed about 1000x less than a pair of engines in a special detachable module would, and we don't have helicopters or planes 1000x bigger than we did back then.

>>10347427
>huehuehue everybody who laughs about Elon Musk is a redditor
>meamwhile at reddit "Elon Musk smelled his own fart" sits at 50k upvotes

>>10347438
The reason Fusion is more viable is not due to engineering, but politics. NASA anticipates it will be able to launch small reactors for Lunar and Mars missions, but if they rely on commercial providers more they will not have the same cover. Not even enough to build a proper breeder, unless it was a serious fucking military project.

Fusion will take over because of politics, and engineering. It's going to be much less efficient early on, but it will be safe enough to allow private groups to operate without much oversight, and it will simplify certain aspects of the fuel supply chain.

>>10347440
These companies don't have the culture to make a rash prediction. Their brand is slow, staid, reliable results. I expect that if they've concluded they should capture an engine and avionics module under parachutes with a chopper, they expect they can do it with something 120% as difficult to grab.

>>10347443
yes, everyone who laughs at Musk is a redditor, and the fact that rabid Elon fans also exist does not change this

the only place where people actually hate musk and spacex is reddit

>>10347451
>If I exclude all the places where people hate musk, like this one, only redditors hate musk
at least stop pretending to be retarded

>>10347455
sci does not hate musk, and is anyway brigaded from reddit

>>10347445
Unfortunately physics doesn't care about politics so any colonization efforts anywhere are going to be severely hamstrung unless we can push space fission reactors into reality.

>>10347449
>I expect that if they've concluded they should capture an engine and avionics module under parachutes with a chopper
Which is a big if actually. At the moment we have no reason to think ULA is actually taking their own partial reusability idea seriously or not.

>>10347457
On the other hand, it feels like sci might benefit from some of pol's example and ignore likely trolls aside from merciless counter-trolling. Go hard enough and the normies throw their laptops across a fucking room when the page loads.

>>10347461
A fair point. The one element they do seem to be taking more seriously than first-stage reuse is their evolved centaur 2nd stage. A stage that can power itself off of boil-off, that might even be reworked for wet labs and wet landers/trucks/ferries.

>>10347467
A flexible upper stage like ACES makes a lot of sense in a space economy where there's a lot of stuff going on, however at the moment I'm not sure if its capabilities will be used for much more than simple cleanup duties post-mission (burns to graveyard orbit, deorbit burns, etc). Talk of hooking up ACES stages to transfer propellant don't really make sense unless you imagine a lot of stages going to very similar orbits over a very short time frame. I'm pretty much just seeing ACES as a long duration, more capable Centaur successor, and all that crazy stuff they propose is just proposals.

>>10347457
>sci does not hate musk, and is anyway brigaded from reddit
yet we laugh every time he says or does something retarded unlike brigading redditors like you who keep saying " he didn't mean it like that". obviously the majority of people in SpaceX generals likes to suck his cock, but that doesn't mean that sci loves him. anyone who is a true /sci/entist already hates musk by the sole facts that he is a csfag and likes to shit on education and thinks "bro you don't need college just do startups"

You know these Kickstarters that promise some kind of cool technology while not having done any actual development, just some CGI and a well-done presentation Video that goes viral and before you know it they suddenly have millions in cash but never deliever on the technology, and if they do its not even in the slightest as good as they promised in the cool-looking presentation Video? That's musk, just magnified by a Million. If you dont realize this and think everybody who does realize that is a "brigading redditor" you might be seriously mentally challenged.

>>10347145
>The Raptor is unironically more complicated since its full Flow.
No OTP helium purging would save tons of mass and cost and FFCS does not need such systems

>>10346976
No one with IBS allowed on Mars

>>10347608
Look at this fucking retard. They literally have two plumb another set of preburner, Turbine, etc. That a full flow engine is way more complicated isnt even up for debate. You should really shut The duck up because you have no clue what you are talking about.

>>10345761
That's because it had nevah been done befow

Lol, literally at this moment there is a reddit post in the Front Page about elon musk saving The World with over 20.000 upvotes. Le evil anti musk redditors man

>>10345995
The issue isn't size, it's weight
>>10346357
I figured this would happen
>>10347003
Yeah but part of the Congressional requirements for SSME is that certain amounts of money had to go back to their districts

>>10347677
Oh yeah, because those three congressmen with affected districts hold all the Power over the other 600. Why the hell does this meme get repeated so often?

>>10347269
The thing is that you're servicing every single yo mommas 1000 pop village in the world

>>10346644
umm sweaty the average male height is like 5'9"

>>10347705
Not really though. The bigger the area you are covering the bigger your ping. If you really would have a global network the ping would be ridiculous.

>>10347713
False

RIP Columbia.
For the volume of flights planned Starships will inevitably fail, and some with people on board. How will the public react?

>>10347423
ULA is going for SMART since their staging is too late and their engines can’t throtttle enough. They literally couldn’t do a drone ship landing even if they tried with the current rocket systems

>>10347835
Depends on how the media wants them to react.

>>10347709
Plus an inch of boot sole and an inch and a half of hardhat, dumbass.

>>10347645
>knowing what's on the front page of reddit
Go back, go back, you have to go the fuck back