/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10347605
Not even Tony Stark could build a tunnel that only fits one car and requires elevators to enter and exit.

I sure remember when the tin condom around Stark's "rocket" got blown off by wind.

>>10347641
It was very important plot point in Iron Man 4: Stark CON 1

>>10347605
its a fucking rocket engine

>>10347605
this board is so dead. why am i still here

>>10347605
He is incredibly smart. Jim Cantrell can attest to that.

>>10347680
he's so smart he even knows that nanotechnology is bullshit

Lol, this picture shows how chamber pressure scales to size and thrust. An engine half the size of the BE-4 can equal it's thrust by having just under twice it's chamber pressure.

>>10347716
Imagine being this clueless but still shitting up every thread 24/7

>>10347728
>no argument

>>10347730
Elon himself said they are aiming for 2kn thrust and 2,5 is for future Iteration. You are comparing future generations of raptors with first Generation BE-4. BE-4s are also pretty cheap to produce which is why they won the ULA contract. Raptors are so expensive they bankrupted SpaceX.

>>10347716
are you unironically retarded or are you not even able to research basic facts
the be-4 has 1.5 times the thrust of the raptor

>>10347735
Plus nozzle diameter doesn't mean much. But the again we are talking with The possibly most retarded anon on sci, so yeah.

Reminder neither the US nor USSR managed to build functional FFSC engine and it was widely considered impossible and probably still is by certain people whose heads safely lie in dark moist places.

>>10347747
Getting pretty desperate for an achievement there m80.

>>10347747
Another clueless idiot. The full flow Part means you need to plumb in another preburner which is very complicated and swallows thousands of Man hours for a minimal boost in Performance. There has been experimental engines that werde firing at the Test stand but not beyond that once they realised all that extra work doesnt improve much. Full flow engines not being the norm is a pure cost-benefit calculation, not because nobody managed to build one.

>>10347605
No, Elon commands an entire teamof hardworking engineers who make his memes reality

>>10347747
>widely considered impossible
lol

>this level of butthurt

>>10347768
Who are you talking to?

Reminder Elon Musk's SpaceX is completely dominating the current launch markets and is surpassing most nation states even superpowers in number of launches as well as total launch mass.

>>10347777
reminder that every source claiming this leads back to SpaceX themselves

The soviets made the mistake that they devoted all their ressources to developing and building their engines and then having none anymore to develop the rocket itself, which isn't exactly easy, either. Really interesting to see that SpaceX is seemingly doing the same mistake. Especially considering how similar Blue Origins approach is to that of the USA in the 60s. It's like Musk and Besoz are replaying the whole Space race.

>>10347777
Arianespace literally has a bigger share in the private launching market.

>>10347777
ULA and Arianespace are also strong contenders. China's CNSA is also up there. SpaceX needs to prove they can significantly lower the cost of launch and be reliable at the same time. Not easy.

>>10347764
>can't run for more than 3 seconds without blowing up

>>10347849
>more than 3 seconds
SpaceX managed that with their first ever subscale engine test firing of Raptor.

>>10347871
I'm talking about the RD-270 (pic related), which was the first full-flow staged combustion engine ever built. It was built by Glushko who was the main mind behind the RD-170.etc, but had an extremely troubled testing period and was eventually cancelled along with the entire UR-700 project. Aerojet Rocketdyne also tried to build a full-flow cycle engine but it was cancelled before anything could be built.

>>10347899
I realized that you were talking about that. The RD-270 was an F-1 sized engine running on N2O2 and UDMH on a full flow staged combustion cycle, but they never solved combustion instability problems in the engine and like you said, the whole thing got cancelled.

>>10347747
Nations don't tend to replace things that work, this is why the M16 / M4 and the RS-25 will both see another few decades of service.
Just because no nation is willing to throw money at R&D for marginal gains doesn't mean a crazy South African can't.

>>10347824
>be reliable
I would say they have done that as much as possible for a company a decade old. Sure the Falcon 9 is no R-7 but the R-7 has been flying for 60 years instead of 8.

>>10347965
there are no marginal gains to be made over the AR-15
the M16/M4 is a shitpile but the platform is amazing

>>10347973
If you honestly think that the AR-15 is the pinnacle of assault rifles I don't know what to say. Manufacturing, engineering tools and metallurgy have all improved so much in the last 60 years it could easily be replaced with something lighter, shorter, more accurate and more lethal. I'm not saying it isn't a good platform but if you think we can't do better 60 years later you are delusional.

>>10347991
The real trouble is "good enough to warrant replacing billions of rounds of ammunition." For 5.56, they're basically trying to squeeze blood from a stone, and that gets expensive for the relative gain.

>>10347991
well the thing is that we've had 60 years of incremental improvements on the design
>>10347996
>5.56x45
yup

>>10347996
Not only the stockpiles but the fact they forced 5.56 onto NATO, if they are the first to ditch it that is basically admitting a mistake.

>>10348002
>60 years of incremental improvements on the design
True but there is a point at which it's better to buy a new car than to keep putting newer running gear into a '57 Chevy.

thanks, you’ve reminded me that my damn 11.5” barrel still hasn’t shipped from TNTE....

>>10348015
ATF problems or dealer problems?

>>10347734
Just curious, what about the BE-4 that makes it cheaper than the Raptor?
Like, what are the design considerations?
Is there a document that details this?
If so, then that would be an interesting read!

Pic related (hopefully) an F-1B

>>10348035
Not that anon but IIRC the greatly reduced chamber pressure allows for cheaper alloys to be used in everything from the pumps to the bell.

>>10347605
Elon Musk didn't build that. His 6000 employees, $6 billion in government investment and $15 billion in private investment did.

>>10347747
>neither the US nor USSR managed to build functional FFSC engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-270

>>10347849
>can't run for more than 3 seconds
imagine coping so hard you literally have to make things up

>>10347734
The future iteration will be larger, and your scale diagram is also wrong.

>>10348060
>functional

>>10348065
>future iteration will be larger
source? where did you hear that?

>>10348067
Prove that it was not functional.

>>10348069
Prove that it will be the same size.

>>10348072
Not him, but
>Tested but cancelled before combustion instability problems solved.
http://astronautix.com/r/rd-270.html

>>10348084
Not cancelled because of the engine itself, retard.

The equivalent would be SpaceX cancelling raptor in 2016 if they wanted to use Falcon Heavy for everything and were dropping bfr.

>>10348044
30MPa vs 13MPa

Damn! I've never actually thought about those differences until now. That's just astounding.

why don’t we, oh I don’t know, just wait a week or so for the test results before we make grandiose claims over whether raptor is a failure?

>>10348087
Just what, exactly, are you trying to insinuate? It wasn't an operational rocket engine and it was never completed. It had outstanding engineering issues that were never solved. The design was never made ready to be used in an operational vehicle. How is that not "non-functional?" Because it doesn't explode as soon as someone tries to fire any engine of that make?

>>10348074
it seems to me that the latest engine to go on the test stand at McGregor is the full size engine, it won't be getting any larger

>>10348093
>It had outstanding engineering issues that were never solved.
So did the F1 and other pioneering engines of the era. RD-270 work was stopped because its rocket was cancelled.

Kill yourself you fucking chimp.

>>10348095
Seems to me that you're wrong.

>>10348098
source?

>>10348035
Nobody actually knows how much the Raptor costs to build, but people assume it's a lot because of the complicated plumbing needed for a full-flow cycle and advanced metallurgy required for the high chamber pressures. BE-4 on the other hand, uses the less complicated, tried and tested single-shaft staged-combustion cycle and operates at a comparatively benign chamber pressure of 134 bar (roughly half of the Raptor's) so the metallurgy required is much less costly.

>>10348092
Nobody in this thread has said "raptor is a failure" you fucking chimp.

>>10348099
While it is full size in relation to what’s going on the gen 1 starship, Elon says that it will be improved down the line

>>10348099
They will be rebuilding the engine with a SL and vacuum variant once they have the money for it.

>>10348107
money, but mainly need. If you’re slinging shit to the moon and LEO there’s not really a need for that additional performance (yet)

>>10348108
There's always a need for additional performance, retard. They aren't doing it now because they don't have the money for it.

>>10348106
probably not improved by making it physically larger
>>10348107
yeah but a vacuum chamber is not a physically larger engine, it's just a bigger nozzle

>>10348107
That's not a source Musk.

>>10348096
The RD-270 kept blowing up due combustion instability issues which were never solved and was cancelled, the F-1's combustion instability problems were solved and it flew many times, the two are not comparable...

>>10348116
>yeah but a vacuum chamber is not a physically larger engine, it's just a bigger nozzle
Learn how regenerative cooling works you fucking chimp.

>>10348117
Source?

>>10348118
The F1's issues were solved because its rocket was actually built, retard. Learn to read you fucking chimp.

does this child know any insults other than retard or chimp?

>>10348139
no

>>10348139
maybe

>>10347605
Stop worshipping mortals

>>10348056
But Elon has the biggest dick everyone involved, so he sorta deserves the credit imo.

bfr is the ugliest rocket ever designed

>>10348152
inb4 it is renamed "Bad Dragon"

>>10348118
>issues which were never solved
they were solved 10 years later by the Soviets themselves in another engine retard. they just didn't want to go to the moon anymore so they didn't reignite the project

>>10348100
It's a shame that those companies are being secretive about the spesifics of their engines (Although I understand why).
I would love to be able to dig into their design processes and theories behind their respective engines. The BE-4 especially.

It's always interesting to see how engineers balance performance, cost, and ease of manufacture rather than the 'performance at the expense of everything else' mindset that seems to be common in aerospace.

>>10348161
>It's always interesting to see how engineers balance performance, cost, and ease of manufacture
I can tell you how they do it SpaceX
>cost
lmao just build a tent
>performance
we have the biggest number so we win
>ease of manufacture
lmao just use retards until half of the rocket flies away by itself

>>10348174
>I can tell you how they do it SpaceX
but can you form a coherent sentence?

I keep thinking SpaceX should have gone for dirt cheap open-cycle moar engines for BFR.
That's what made Falcon a success.

>>10348160
Combustion instability is a per-engine issue. What kind of third world idiocy are you drinking up to think otherwise?

Where is bfr's launch pad?

>>10348180
no im doesnt

>>10348161
Blue Origin describes the BE-4 as a "medium-performing version of a high-performance architecture", due to it having relatively moderate performance when compared to previous staged combustion engines like the RD-170. BO seems to be banking on it's low chamber pressure (134 bar) making it extremely reliable and reusable due to the reduced stress on the plumbing.

>>10348204
It has also allowed them to develop the engine faster.

SpaceX is the world leader in rocket development and the only company to posses reusable first stage boosters as well as the largest most capable currently operational rocket the Falcon Heavy, and while all its competitors around the world are struggling to respond it is already developing fully reusable super heavy lift rocket that will change spaceflight forever.

>>10347678
>just to suffer

>>10348230
So?

>>10348230
Any government that could get it together and devote significant resources to the task would blow spaceX away. They're leading by virtue of poor competition. They might be the best, but the bar is pretty low right now and that's important to keep in mind.

>>10348230
While SpaceX has without a doubt forced the aerospace industry to change I wouldn't rule out Blue Origin just yet. They are going slow and steady but with unlimited funds and a plan to do tourist flights that is the smart move, 100% reliability sounds better than 96% reliability when you are talking about millionaires sitting on a bomb.

It's exciting times for space enthusiasts as the old guard of inefficient government funded monopolies are being challenged and they are getting pressure from the top. It's hard to keep paying $350m a launch when the public knows the competition is charging $90m.

>>10348249
While I agree the bar is low I disagree that the US government could do any better, they were the only customer for decades and instead of encouraging competition they funded monopolies.

>>10348259
>government funded monopolies
Aka, SpaceX.

>>10348268
If SpaceX is a monopoly what do you call ULA and Rocketdyne? They haven't seen competition since Apollo when North American Aviation and the Douglas Aircraft Company both died with the end of Apollo.

>>10348268
why won’t this meme die? For instance, SpaceX specifically won the recent X37b launch since the Air Force wanted two separate launch vehicles (ULA and SpaceX) capable of launching it. ULA wasn’t even allowed to bid on that particular launch.

The same is true for other parts of government space access. Some of the GPS III missions went to SpaceX, some to ULA. The government wants to maintain redundancy in space capabilities. >>10348275

>>10348279
whoops didn’t mean to (you) >>10348275 at the end

>>10348268
Didn't the USAF specifically choose SpaceX's competitors over SpaceX for some of their contracts to avoid making a monopoly?

>>10348275
ULA is younger than SpaceX.
Rocketdyne hasn't had a "monopoly" at any point in history.

>>10348279
>ULA wasn’t even allowed to bid on that particular launch.
Sounds like a monopoly to me.
>Some of the GPS III missions went to SpaceX, some to ULA.
The only missions SpaceX haven't won so far, they haven't bid on at all.

>>10348286
>Didn't the USAF specifically choose SpaceX's competitors over SpaceX for some of their contracts to avoid making a monopoly?
No. SpaceX never bid for any launches they "lost" to

>>10348293
this is false. Why do you feel the need to spread lies?

>>10348300
Post evidence then.

>>10348305
of what? the GPS contract for ULA was part of a block buy.... they didn’t bid on the other ones

>>10348309

>>10348293
>>10348300
SpaceX actually had to take the Air Force to court to get the opportunity to bid on launches, if that isn't nopotism I don't know what is.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/elon-musks-spacex-to-drop-lawsuit-against-air-force/2015/01/23/c5e8ff80-a34c-11e4-9f89-561284a573f8_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cca0fcc3ed15

>>10348322
see >>10348313
We've been talking this whole time about all of the launches awarded after that nonsense.

Just because ULA had a monopoly on a small subset of launches in the past doesn't mean that SpaceX cannot possibly have a monopoly now.

OP is a clearly a brainlet

>>10348332
It's too early to say, personally I wouldn't consider one manufacturer getting the majority of launches for a couple of years a monopoly while I would consider a manufacturer getting the majority of launches for a few decades a monopoly.
I won't lie, I honestly have no problem with one manufacturer getting most government business if they are the cheapest as that saves the tax payers dime. I do however have an issue with the government becoming dependant on a single manufacturer especially if that manufacturer uses that dependence to crush competition through nepotism and corruption.
If Blue Origin can deliver with New Glenn I would like to see them and SpaceX take all the contracts as it is provable in a court of law that ULA is corrupt.

>>10348180
>forgets one single word
>pedantic retards already at the throat so they won't have to reply to the actual content of the post

https://youtu.be/Sdwy9fzQzl4

>>10348373
Fuck off, shill.

>>10348376
>Someone posts not-hostile commentary
>MUH SHILLING

>>10348376
scawt is ourguy, you fuck off

>>10348378
>Some posts garbage trying to get people to watch a youtube channel
>NOT SHILLING

>>10348376
>shill
I fucking wish I was on SpaceX's payroll.

>>10348381
Fuck off, shill.

>>10348383
>he shills for a shitty youtuber for free

>>10348384
S E E T H I N G

>>10348390
He’s been screaming about shills for a few threads now. It’s best to ignore him

Where is BFR's launchpad?

>>10348405
Why would they have a launchpad for what is currently a paper rocket?

>>10348405
down the road a mile or so. There’s a YouTube video of it in the other thread

>>10348413
That's a flat pad for a test hopper, not for an actual rocket.

>>10348414
oh, I see what you mean. Well the location of the two is the same- that’s the eventual site of the starship launchpad as well.

elon musk has yet to sell munitions to warring states so for now he's at least slightly less of an asshat than tony stark.

>>10348420
If that is your benchmark then ULA has been on Starks level for decades.

>>10347605
Ooooh so that's where they film their fake rocket in "space". Same angle as well.

>>10348420
SpaceX has launched a Spanish spy sat. They’re launching a German one as well pretty soon

>>10348431
>/sci/ has flattards

>>10348431
>not LIES.webm
you had one job

>>10348438
If the earth is flat, it's a flat torus in 3-sphere, the dome model is a retarded psy-op.

>>10348439
It's LIE.webm brainlet, and I don't have it any more because my hard drive died after a Windows update. Maybe I'm being watched, who knows...

>>10348438
We've always had flat tards

>>10347991
Have you forgotten how many SCAR programs or “next-gem” rifles selections that the military have had? And what does everyone of those end up concluded? That the improvement of the small arm technology as of now does not warrant the cost of replacing the M4/M16.

The Army is touting about testing a new rifle that “has a chamber pressure of that of the main battle tank”

Watch it fails in two years and M4 continues to be used for another 3 decades.

>>10347605
Let's put him in a cave, with a box of scraps, and find out.

>>10348035
Fuck, why couldn't it be the New Optimized 1 : 4chanel Wall Nozzle?

SpaceX is a literal meme and anyone who buys into it is either an idiot or so desperate for muh sci fi that they've developed confirmation bias.

>>10348419
>that’s the eventual site of the starship launchpad as well.
Source?

>>10348420
Elon Musk doesn't invent or create any of the stuff at his companies. He will never be a "Tony Stark."

>>10348567
>or so desperate for muh sci fi that they've developed confirmation bias
The entire SpaceX fanbase is based upon this. Watch them toute every new thing as the "greatest" "most ingenious" invention in the history of rocketry, and watch them forget about those things as soon as SpaceX drops/removes/fails at them.

>>10348575
>BUT HE HAS LIKE TWO RETARDED DOOR DESIGN PATENTS ANON, HE'S A TRUE ENGINEER WHAT HAVE YOU ACHIEVED IN YOUR LIFE

>>10348575
Honestly, he seems like a better ideas man than a CEO at this point.

>>10348594
He's mostly just a figurehead/mouthpiece of his companies at this point.

>>10348035
>reminder that this engine would have been the most powerful single chamber engine ever built, was the only reason the speculative SLS Block 2 numbers went above 150 tons to LEO, and that it is never ever happening because muh solid boosters

>>10348074
Merlin 1D almost doubled in thrust as it was upgraded yet remains the same size, Raptor can do the same

>>10348594
>better ideas man
lol
Name one original idea by musk that is not absolutely retarded

>>10348152
>sideways glance at literally any Indian rocket

>>10348606
Cave submarine

>>10348194
They could have but then they'd need a much bigger vehicle to achieve the same delta V figures, which makes everything from building it to building the pads to launch it from to refueling it on Mars that much harder.
>inb4 Mars fuel is a meme

>>10348609
Indian rockets are cheaper and unironically superior to spacex ones.

>>10348247
kek

if spacex is “bankrupt” or “failing” they’re sure taking their sweet time with it.

>>10348291
>ULA is younger than SpaceX.
ULA came into existence when the only two american rocket launch providers merged into a single conglomerate with their own launch vehicles already operating.

SpaceX was a dozen guys in a warehouse at that point.

>>10348612
I said "not absolutely retarded"

>>10348605
Merlin started out as a completely shitty engine and slowly worked its way up. There is nothing really known about the raptor, so it is hard to judge if it is near to its full Potential or not. Just so much, the 2kn thrust they are aiming for is already really, really ambitious.

>>10348627
Solar powered flame throwers

So, SpaceX actually solved full flow cycle.
Here's the thing, if they can reuse it 10+ time, they might as well.
Actually, they might as well coat their Starship with gold if they're gonna recover it every-time.
Re-usability really is a game changer, and really why such complex engines never went through before.

>>10348672
>So, SpaceX actually solved full flow cycle.
No. The USSR did back in the 70s, just like they did with Fuel and Oxygen rich staged combustion engines as well.

>>10348677
>inb4 the retard comes in with "but they didnt, muh funding and cancelled project, since it's never been used in a rocket it doesn't count"

>>10348677
Not really.
But close enough, I guess.
FFC engines are just too expensive to just throw away. Especially when you need 30+ of those to make orbit.
BFR is the next N2. Hopefully it works this time.

>>10348688
>BFR is the next N2
Are you retarded?

>>10348425
And your point is? I dont think anyone should be doing that shit, I dont care what the name on the letterhead is

>>10348677
>No. The USSR did back in the 70s, just like they did with Fuel and Oxygen rich staged combustion engines as well.
"Solved" is a bit of a misnomer. There was still work to do before the Russian hypergolic staged combustion engine was ready to fly, and for now, SpaceX' Raptor is currently less developed than the RD-270 was.

>>10348696
Am I?
Name any rocket since N2 that had moar than 5 engines. Besides Falcon9, obviously.

>>10348709
Electron?

>>10348709
What the actual fuck is the "N2" rocket?
Are you retarded?

>>10348709
PSLV has seven of you count the six strap one

>>10348714
Ok. How is that N2 tier valves management?
Also, why use 9 engines to do a one simple engine work?

>>10348716
You're right, I am.
Don't know why I called it 2.

>>10348717
Falcon heavy had 27, and as it stands is the most simultaneous engine start that got the thing out into space.
Good thing they recovered 2-3rd of that.

>>10348633
Merlin wasn't shitty, it was just average for a gas-generator using kerosene.

>>10348743
The early versions were without a doubt extremely shitty.

hmm

>>10348763
You mean Merlin 1A? Only two of those ever flew, both on Flacon 1 flights. Merlin 1A was hampered into a low chamber pressure because the ablative nozzles couldn't keep up to any higher heat flux. This problem was solved once they got regenerative cooling working on the next version, Merlin 1C (Merlin 1B never flew, it was also ablative and they scrapped it).

>>10348773
Propellant line hookups?

>>10348774
Why do you regurgitate all this stuff that I already know as if it's some kind of rebuttal?

>>10348776
seems like it

>>10348783
Because I don't know what you know, anon. I'm not the government.

>>10348763
>The early versions were extremely shitty
>>10348774
>You mean the early versions? One was shitty and the next one was even shittier and had to be scrapped. This is somehow in contrast to you saying the early ones were shitty.

>>10348807
It wasn't shitty, it was shittier than it is currently, it was average back then and it's a superb now that it's been upgraded multiple times. Merlin 1A had the stats of an f-1 engine scaled down in thrust to 340 kN. If you scaled up a Merlin 1D to the size/mass of an F-1 it would have more than twice the thrust and be be more efficient by 20 Isp.

>>10348868
>RIP the Merlin 2

https://spaceflight101.com/spacex-launch-vehicle-concepts-designs/

>>10348773
first a retrofuturistic rocket, now about to become a steampunk rocket with lots of visible pipes?

>>10348868
What's with the spacex shills and constantly moving the goalposts?
F-1 was a good engine 60 years ago when it was first developed but even 20 years ago it was kind of shit when it comes to performance.

>>10348899
F-1 was objectively a shitty engine even back then and the only thing it had going for it was its immense size.
>>10348892
bruh

>>10348898
Why install complicated hidden 500,000 dollar hookups when you can literally just fabricate your loading pipes on site from steel tubes?

>>10348868
>It wasn't shitty, it was shittier than it is currently
Fine, let's give all the spacex designs a participation award.

>>10348899
Tell me the F-1 is shit when someone manages to build a similar sized engine without it blowing up due to combustion instability.

The only planned attempts at trying to replicate the F-1's performance were >>10348892 which lost out to the Raptor when they were both in the conceptual stage and >>10348035 which was planned to power the SLS boosters but was rejected in favour of SRBs.

>>10348791
>2019
>Not being the government.

Get on my level.

Also, can you scrootch just a little to your left, your halfway out of frame.

>>10348774
I actually got to see the Fastrac (the Merlin predecessor) in person.

It's a neat "little" engine, although replacing the ablative liner every time it fires seems like it would've been a pain.

>>10348924
Nobody will build a new F-1 because there's no need for one.
When engines are optimized for TWR the approach smaller sizes such as the RD-191, BE-4 and Raptor.

scaffolding is back

>>10348618
>>superior

>>10347819
can you elaborate on that?
I mean the bezos game with BO

speaking of BO they have a new video out with bezorp doing a voice-over https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YOL89kY8Og

>>10349292
His vision actually makes sense, compared to Musk's.

Musk
>we need to move to mars in case of asteroids, or aliens, or some shit. also MUH HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY GUYS

Bezos
>From an objective standpoint, the only way humans can continue to grow as a species well into the future is by moving into space.

>>10348313
That is not a set of goalposts. Here, save this for next time.

>>10349394
Don't care. Anything anybody can do to get manned space exploration going again is welcomed.

>See thread
>Oh cool the new Raptor engine I wonder whats going on with it
>Nearly 200 replies from r/enoughmuskspam Redditors replying to themselves and baiting anons who fall for this gay shit

Wow I wonder if we could ever have a thread just discussing the technical stuff for once without all this fucking shit.

>>10349533
Just I thought that the Musk hate was the norm in this board.
Then again, I'm new here.

But I agree with you, I wish we could talk more about the engineering without the enginREEEing.

>>10349538
No it's pretty new. Prior to this starship hopper thing we used to get a bit of it in launch threads and general discussions but it was mostly copy pastas and the same image macros over and over which mostly got ignored and was nowhere near this level of rabid shit smearing for hundreds of replies thread after thread. It's definitely either co ordinated or one hyper autistic motherfucker.

>>10349544
>>10349538
>>10349533
Fuck off Reddit niggers.
We don't wan't armchair "expert" retards here.

>>10349544
Which sucks and really kills discussion.
Having misgivings or criticism for SpaceX is one thing (such as how they treat their interns, their recent design choices, or their sudden dominance of the market), but being hostile towards everyone who has an non-negative opinion of SpaceX is just scummy.

>>10349558
>really kills discussions

I believe that is the idea, however without mods enforcing rules there isn't anything to be done other than ignoring it.

Mods should honestly remove SpaceX threads until the next launch or huge development. 90% of threads are just redditors fighting over low rez images from twitter posts. Things were better when we just made Elon memes for launch threads and photoshopped starman into other places.

>>10349563
SpaceX is off topic for /sci/, and announcing reports is against the rules.

Lurk more reddit nigger.

>>10349565
Some of the SpaceX threads seem to evolve into aerospace general threads, maybe we should start those to avoid putting SpaceX at the center of these discussions?

>>10349574
We could but most of the discussion would still be SpaceX related since other aerospace news is often months apart and these same fucking cunts would just show up anyway to shit up the thread because two people wanted to talk about SpaceX to each other. It's really out of hand.

>>10349582
Go back to r.ddit if your really want a safe space to talk about your childish shit.

>>10349587
>r.ddit
It seems pretty childish to hate a website so much that you don't want to type the name.
Dude, reddit isn't some chaos god, not saying its name won't make it go away.

>>10349587
there isn't a reddit wordfilter... when are you so obsessed with reddit anyways? Your anger isn't benefiting the conversation.

>>10349594
>>10349595
By replying you are part of the problem. Just report, hide and ignore.

>>10349595
"back to r.ddit" is word filtered you stupid newcuck

>>10349598
You have a point.

In a vain attempt to start a new line of conversation, what does /sci/ think of the new interest in methalox engines (Raptor and BE-4)?
Do you think that methane will eventually supplant kerosene as the standard launch vehicle fuel?
I personally don't think so, at least not for the next decade or two, but I can definitely see it becoming more popular for space-born systems where ions are too week and hydrogen can't be stored effectively.

>>10347605
>A literal BRAAAAP engine
In any case, chemical rockets are a dead end in the medium term. Wake me up when he cracks fusion.

>>10349606
whatever fuel 'system' is on the moon / mars first will be the standard for a long time. It would be ridiculous to try and have two+ kinds of fueling infrastructure and hardware. Given that methane engines will be powering the first manned mars missions & new moon missions, that will set the standard going forward.

>>10349622
>>10349606
like, look at TAT-8. Once that was in place it was going to be impossible to use anything BUT tcp/ip protocols. Setting standards will be a big deal on the moon and mars- communication standards, docking port standards, lots of stuff. Because whatever you have first will be what everyone will use.

>>10349631
Then I hope that whatever becomes the standard isn't garbage.

Hard to think of that would be a bad standard though. Solar Moths? Single use radios? Food pills?

>>10349656
I just wish that IEC 60906-1 is the AC plug standard for a manned base. It hasn't gotten enough love

fucking hell DM-1 is now MARCH https://ria.ru/20190131/1550174772.html

>>10349662
>>10349662
AC is fake and gay, there will be no long transmissions so everything will be on DC since that is what panels put out and batteries store at. No need for sets of inverters.

>>10349675
don't poo-poo AC too quickly. Both could have their uses... there are pros and cons of course. This is from a NASA study on a moon outpost power system

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/copeland1/docs/20060026085_2006208399.pdf

>>10349662
>IEC 60906-1
It looks so surprised.

>>10349687
Going by that even NASA admits that DC btfos AC except for safety, which is pretty debatable.

>>10349689
Why isn't the ground pic centred so that it can go in either way? Isn't AC non polarised?

>>10349699
elon agrees sort of

>SpaceX is now focused on the Moon instead of Mars
Hopefully Starlink produces enough funds for a Mars colony because this is a depressing turn of events.

>>10349706
I don't know, I'm not an electrical engineer.

>>10349710
well you might as well do moon stuff between Mars windows. And it is probably easier to get government bucks for moon stuff, since congress works on shorter timescales than the 10+ years for planning mars shit

>>10349708
Elon telling it how it is. Going to be rewiring my house for DC and telling the power company to suck my dick when batteries get to maye half or 3/4 their current $/kwh

>needing batteries

>>10349708
>instead of spending money on new renewable power plants, lets spend it all on rebuilding the entire electrical grid for no reason at all
What a retard.

you guys hyped for the Israeli lunar lander F9 mission?

>>10349826
He isn't talking about grid scale DC you fucking moron.

>>10349881
I'm excited. I hope it goes well for them!
Although I keep misreading the lander's name as "Bedsheet".

>>10349394
>guys we need to move all heavy industry into space because they currently produce waste and shit
BO is an even bigger meme than SpaceX.

>>10350357
That's actually feasible and if you want colonies a good first step.

>>10350357
>>10350362
Any guy who un ironically believes in O'Neil cylinders is a meme by definition.

>>10350387
a guy who unironically believes in mars colonisation and terraforming is a meme by definition

>>10347605
everyone in this thread is a failure

>>10349826
case in point, your poor family

>>10350387
There is literally nothing wrong with O'Neil cylinders.

>>10349826
>>10349902
A lot of Electrical Engineers have a hard on for power electronics, and at a grid wide scale, don't be so sure. Imo it can be useful to have some DC circuitry especially if you can use it to get around having transformers for all your electronics, but having AC is so useful. I want a 3 phase supply set up.

>>10348721
one obvious reason: one engine design that can work for both upper and boost stages. There is a reason the Electron has the same 9:1 ratio of lower stage to upper stage Rutherford engines as Falcon 9.

Ahem

>>10353142
thats my boi right there

>>10353165
he’s getting a bit fat

Payload increase confirmed. Also, Elon is not actually a socialist, good riddance there.

I assume that they’re super close to firing it if Elon’s down there. Do they even have two more ready to go for the three the hopper needs?

>>10353172
Estimate?

>>10353176
it’s probsbly not that much. I’d guess 5 tons or so, assuming all else equal. The new raptor specs will have a bigger impact than some weight changes

>>10353180
What does old BFR painted weight

Why is everybody assuming they solved the chamber pressure issue? A couple of months ago they hadn't yet and were at 1.4kn thrust. Is there any official statement about that? The only thing is that Elon tweet with "aiming for 2k" which is the typical elon weasel wording that probably means there are not at 2k yet. For hopper jumps, 1.4kn would also obviously be enough. So Im calling bullshit on the claims they are done developing.

>>10353180
What does old BFR paint weight, I assume it should be a lot

>>10353196
Change material, maybe?

>>10353196
Because he's stated that this version of the Raptor has undergone a "radical redesign" and there seems to be no significant specification or physical changes, meaning this radical change is likely something to do with the engine's plumbing or metallurgy that allows it to perform better. Also, a full-scale Raptor has never been tested with all the previous testing being sub scale, so why is it a big deal that 2MN has not been reached yet?

>>10353196
It's to do with the new metallurgy from what I understand.

>>10347605
Tony Stark is an inventor and engineer. I fucking hate it when retards like you say "Musk's ____".
Musk is a CEO, a frontman. NONE of it is his, he hasnt engineered or invented anything.

>>10353238
here we go again..

>>10353239
where is he wrong exactly?

>>10353247
here we go again..

>>10353142
Wow he is the designer.

>>10353262
Just report and ignore.

>>10353347
kek
why do muskfags act so redditlike
oh wait I don't actually need an explanation

>>10348152
don't worry it will never exist

>tfw reporting the samefag so you deny him (you)s and can't even see his garbage

Feels good man :^)

>>10353142
>>10353168
is it possible to lead a high stress life while avoiding becoming a tub of lard?

>>10353374
yes. but Elon isn't leading a high stress life anyway aside from his hissy fits so he's probably getting fat because he thinks decent nutrition and workout is "bs" and deludes himself into thinking he has greater things to do
>>10353371
do you unironically think any of your reports have achieved anything, redditor? if anything, the real spam are retarded spacex threads like these, 4-5 of them being in the catalog at the same time

>>10347605
No. Also Tony Stark is a fictional character.

>>10348056
tell me how they would have done that without him. would they just randomly gather together and start building shit?

>>10347716
No, chamber pressure does actually not have such a big effect, and also BE-4 nozzle diameter is 1.90m. The real thrust of each engine are currently unknown, but Blue Origin did announce 80% thrust levels, so it's at least at 2000kN, while the last report I know of from Raptor is 60% thrust, so 1100kN.

>>10353397
>great man theory

>>10353407
Is broadly correct. There would definitely be no SpaceX without Musk. Same may also apply to people like Shotwell or Mueller, but it is less clear. Everyone else is replaceable.

>>10347606
Based

>>10353423
Dont delude yourself. SpaceX is a thing because of NASA, and if Elon never founded SpaceX NASA would have picked one of the other rocket Start ups and sponsored them. And yes, there were quite a few rocket company Start ups in the early 2000s, a lot of them going for a similar concept like SpaceX. SpaceX is a prime example of "government picking a winner". It is quite the opposite of a "great man company".

>>10353442
NASA did sponsor mutliple startups. All except SpaceX failed to reach orbit.

>>10353423
>Same may also apply to people like Shotwell or Mueller, but it is less clear
imagine thinking the rocket engine design that made SpaceX so successful is less important than some fucking manager. please fucking leave /sci/, go to biz and get a business degree if you think like that.

>>10353407
Moon landing happened because of Kennedy, Webb and von Braun. Great man theory is very much real when it comes to spaceflight. Or a great handful of men. And if BFR is even half as good as SpaceX thinks it is, Musk and Mueller will join the abovementioned Great Men in history.

>>10353458
this is the same level of retardation that praises Cheops for building the pyramids instead of his brilliant architects

>>10353457
It is less important from a certain point of view. Aerospace engineering sector has quite a few genius engineers like Mueller, both in private companies and at NASA. It is great managers like Webb and Musk that are lacking. That is how you get NASA wasting $20 fucking billion every year for half a century with little to show for it.

>>10353464
Imagine being this retarded.

>>10353458
>"eyy bro draw my girlfriend, i see you're a good artist and will pay you decent money for it"
>"sure thing Francesco"
500 years later
>Francesco's Mona Lisa is truly a work of art

>>10353450
This is not true. Kistler and SpaceX both had financial troubles and NASA didnt want/couldnt help both out of their misery. So they pulled the plug on Kistler and gave SpaceX 200 Million and engineering help to finish Falcon 1. After they reached Orbit, they got 2 Billion from NASA.

>>10353392
>Elon isn't leading a high stress life

But he is. Guy is literally afraid of taking vacations because something always goes horribly wrong.

>>10353532

>>10353532
Let's face us. None of us know what it takes to manage a publically traded company. I assume it's hell on Earth though. I could never live a life like that, work work work.

>>10353606
you fell for the "100h/day" meme anons
Elon is literally shitposting on twitter all day, coming up with new companies and roasting marshmallows on his factories roofs

>>10353606
I have run my own company and it's stressful enough when there isn't the possibility of being fired by a board.

>>10347606
lol

>>10353180
>it’s probsbly not that much. I’d guess 5 tons or so, assuming all else equal. The new raptor specs will have a bigger impact than some weight changes

Every pound you take out of upper stage mass is an extra pound of payload capacity, 1:1.

>>10353610
It's not just the hours. It's the pressure from all the responsibilities. A "normal guy" wouldn't even be able to handle 10 hour a day as chief exec. Ofc Elon is not alone in this. All the F500 bosses face the same challenges.

>>10353678
normal execs don't claim they work 100hours/week

>>10353678
It takes a special mindset, though my work I have meet a lot of CEOs from Shell, BP, Chevron ect. and they all treat it as a game to be won.

>>10353247
He's not wrong, and normal people can see that.

>>10348074
>It's your job to prove it doesn't exist because I said it does.
Great bible level reasoning going on here sci. Stay classy.

>>10353715
>"new engine will be the same size"
>prove it
>"BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU ASSHOLE"
Huh?

>>10353374
Cocaine

Does anyone know what happened to the raptor's double nozzle? Any new news or developments about it?

>>10354663
those engines were fake mockups

stop bumping the thread

>>10353811
The engine they are testing right now is the final size of raptor

TEST CONFRIMED https://twitter.com/WJordanIV/status/1092242263177084929

>>10355333
Awesome! I can't wait to see the official SpaceX release of it.

Rocket engine tests always excite me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YTaG91KD5s

>>10353371
Free advice: That is ultimately going to get you banned.

>>10355321
Source? Proof?

>>10347678
every fucking day the same media agency loads up the "fuck elon threads''. Its getting old at this point.

>>10355398
What makes you think that it's an agency doing this and not just some contrarian dudes being edgy?

>>10347605
Troy Hurtubise is dead now, so I suppose some sad sack of human garbage has to come in and take up the mantle. Despite how woefully insignificant they are, relative to the greatness of Hurtubise.

So yes, by your logic, I suppose Elon Musk "might" be the best we have.

>>10355403
they only appeared after he attacked the media, and theyre way too consistent.

>>10355374
It's been started raptor will have a 1.8m bell
The engine they're testing at McGregor has a 1.8m bell

>>10355420
Source? Proof?

>>10355429
BFR presentation slides. Only way you can fit 31 in Super Heavy is if it’s that size. Plus Elon said on Twitter this is the initial 200t “moon” version

>>10355453
I think he's just stuck in a loop because we keep responding to him
I kept re

>>10355429
>>10355453
Also "flight engine"
This is as big as it gets
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1092268892339273730?s=19

>>10355453
>BFR presentation slides.
This? https://imgur.com/a/gedEyiD
>Only way you can fit 31 in Super Heavy is if it’s that size.
Why 31? Source? Proof?
>Plus Elon said on Twitter this is the initial 200t “moon” version
Don't follow how that follows. Link to the tweet anyway, but it sounds like you may have schizophrenia/brain problems and are trying to link up random facts with little rhyme or reason.

Similarly none of this shows that >>10355420
>It's been started raptor will have a 1.8m bell
>The engine they're testing at McGregor has a 1.8m bell
Again, source? Proof? Not in the slides. Not very much at all is in the slides.

>>10355470
Bruh the big memer himself just said that the one they're testing is the flight engine
>>10355466

>>10355480
And everything else that was randomly stated?

>>10353397

Wow, if only if we had a government agency that specializes in space and aeronautical engineering.

>>10355483
I got the size of the thing wrong, it's apparently 1.3m. 1.8m is the new blue origin methalox engine.

>>10355513

>NASA doesn't have upper management or famous visionaries making good decisions

>literally only firing it for one second because clearly something went wrong
>g-guys raptor is the Best engine ever i swear

Fucking kek at you shillboys.

>>10355912
>I got the size of the thing wrong
Good of you to say, that's part of why it can be good to ask for links. However, WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS INFO FROM? SOURCE?

10356287
Go back to your safe space where you think the engine is just Photoshoped and read on how rocket engines are tested....
P.S. you cant tell time apparently it was ~3 sec.... what a waste of carbon...

>>10356490
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting
>>10356330
I believe pixel counting from this image
https://www.blueorigin.com/engines/be-4
It's possible somebody somewhere who knew what they were talking about said it but I can't find it.