/sci/ - Science & Math

SpaceX is now the uncontested world leader in engine development, thank you based Tom

>>10376437
It is kinda crazy how long it took to break these old Soviet records

about that graph
1) what's the x axis?
2) what do the *'s represent?

x-axis must be in seconds, then.

"6 where we lit main chamber & several with only preburners" when asked about how many test fires there have been

Q:Are you considering an extendable nozzle for Raptor at any time?
A: "Yes, aiming for 380 sec Isp with vac nozzle. Maybe 382 if we get lucky."

Q: Is this with cryo or is there likely still another 10-20% performance bump possible?
A: Propellant was not deep cryo. CH4 & O2 were just barely below liquid temp at 1 bar. In theory, Raptor should do ~300 bar at deep cryo, provided everything holds together, which is far from certain. However, only 250 bar is needed for nominal operation of Starship/Super Heavy.

more tweets, yum

Q: I know you said Raptor would eventually reach 300 bar, but will you stop there or go furthur? 300 is already impressive but is it capable of more?
A: Much above 300 bar main chamber pressure means extreme oxygen preburner pressure of 700 to 800+ bar. Definitely pushing the limit of known physics.

Q: Is the SL engine's expected vac ISP relatively unchanged from IAC 2017?
A: Close

>>10376492
(which, in case you were wondering, is 356s)

>>10376463
Fuck I didn't know they were that close to the ocean. That's nuts. Supposedly salt water in the air can make welding difficult. We used to think it was impossible for the russians to make their titanium hulled submarines in a dockside environment cause of all the salt, but they did anyway..

>>10376499
here's a map of the facilities. It's right next to the ocean, and also a stone's throw from the Mexico border https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1wvgFIPuOmI8da9EIB88tHo9vamo&ll=25.99452206733848%2C-97.16715696565143&z=13

AHAHHHAAHAHAH STARSHIP-WILL-COST-6-GORRILON-DOLLARS-BELIEVERS BTFO

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1094793664809689089
Reminder that a Falcon 9 costs about ~40 mil to produce

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1094793664809689089

The Raptor is now the the rocket equivalent of this webm.

"Very dependent on volume, but I’m confident moving to Mars (return ticket is free) will one day cost less than $500k & maybe even below $100k. Low enough that most people in advanced economies could sell their home on Earth & move to Mars if they want."

"At least 10X cheaper [than F9 for kg to LEO]"

hmm, this tweet is an interesting one. Goodwill?

>>10376558
He's probably talking about people dying.

>>10376563
his answer:
"Just planning on keeping the public informed about progress & setbacks. Will be some RUDs along the way, but excitement is guaranteed!"

>>10376539
why must you be so cruel? You're making me homesick. I can't help but be reminded of Lockhart Texas' famous BBQ restaurants, which you know are good because they've burned down multiple times(which indicates they are able to maintain a constant fire). It's so good that using BBQ sauce is discouraged. It's on the way down to Brownsville and my family used to stop there all the time. Smitty and Kreuz forever! I can't get decent BBQ in the hell hole I live in now, I can't even get a Whataburger.

>>10376425
this is a horrible image for this topic OP

>>10376614
it's a big deal

>>10376620
for thread identitation it sucks

>>10376425
what kind of energy would be needed for a rocket to be single one stage and have the tonnage capacity of the starship nuclear?

>>10376496
At 300 bar that goes up to 334/361s sl/vac

>>10376524
"Raptor will cost >$25 million each' fags btfo?

>>10376697
What the fuck did you just say?

>>10376820
What kind of energy would be needed for a rocket to be single one stage and have the tonnage capacity of the starship nuclear?

>>10376900
no

>>10376499

Welding stainless steel is extremely common in the oil and gas industry. It isn't a really massive hurdle right by the ocean.

>>10376425
oh wow, and with methane instead of RP-1 to boot, this engine will be a monster

>>10376563
probably about getting taxpayer funding once SLS is cancelled, and I dont mean it as a slur, SpaceX is very cost-efficient but a Mars colony will have to be subsidized initially

>>10376921
It's already a monster
With luck we'll see them do a full mission burn soon

Elon says that Ignition! is his bedside table book.

>>10376979
It's a meme but a good book besides
I think he's memeing

>>10376816
yes

>>10376978
They went from 1 second burn to 10 seconds in 6 test fires, so it might not take that long to get to the minute realm etc

>>10376524
>>10376816
>>10377013

Imagine being so fucking deluded you actually believe that bullshit

>>10377069
Cope.

>>10376558
He’s openly recruiting for his shill teams.

>>10377239
ayy lmao he literally answered to a very specific question about how many they can produce and at what cost if they stopped Merlin production completely with "there is a path to it being basically free" How you shills can swallow so much bullshit is beyond me. Even the Trumptards look like independent, critical thinkers next to you guys.

>>10377352
>if we accuse others of raiding, they will ignore our own raiding
You've been rabidly shilling 24/7 ever since the hopper construction began
And yes, it's clear as fucking day that is you every time, since you spam the very same things with the very same words

>>10377381
Dude don't fucking reply to him jesus christ.

>>10376816
This brings me so much joy on my neet monday morning. Every time we get new info the goal post will move and move.....

>>10377485
>"i think there might be a path" qualifies as new info now

>>10376906
And, he implied back when saying that the metal thickness would be dynamically varied that it would be machine welded

Have they posted any clips of the longer duration firings?

>>10376443
>soviet moon engine
>sold to boeing for nickles
Not sure to laugh or cry.

>>10376816
It'll be 24 million before eco-tax and transportation costs!

>>10376443
Elon is such a fucking shithead. These engines actually fly with these chamber pressures. Im pretty sure they also experimented with higher chamber pressures in the test stands. Raptor achieved the "record" for 0,2 seconds. This was obviously just a pure PR stunt. "lel look at our world record breaking engine". Starting to dislike him more and more.

>>10376437
haha nope russia is working on atomic engines already

>>10378320
>testing a rocket engine is a PR stunt

You are a moron. It is not like they will fire up the engine at 300 bar for two minutes immediately. These things are done gradually.

>>10378334
>putting a rocket above a "record" for 0,2 seconds and then tweet about how you beat the record is not a PR stunt

And I repeat, I highl doubt the russians didnt have a higher chamber pressure for fractions of a second at their test stands.

Smells like samefag.

>>10378346
They did beat the record, so it is not a PR stunt. Especially when they are using methane which is harder to pressurize than RP-1.

>>10378372
No, they had for 0,2 second a chamber pressure that was slightly higher than that the RD-180 actually flies with. It is completely obvious that you could put the RD-180 on a test stand and also achieve higher chamber pressures for fractions of a second. Nobody knows what the actual highest chamber pressure of the RD-180 was during testing.

That being said, Raptors are going to fly with 250 bars, so yes, this is a stinky PR stunt with the sole purpose to brand the Raptors as the "world record breaking engines".

>>10378380
>0,2
as so you’re that filthy europoor from a few threads ago. Your decimal-less formatting makes you stand out desu.

Tell me, what’s your metric for it not being PR? If you can claim something IS PR then you must have a cutoff, no?

>>10378390
A good indicator generally is bragging about something on twitter

>>10378403
Posting about something on twitter is not the same as bragging about it. Raptor exceeding RD chamber pressure is certainly interesting on its own, PR or not.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/the-trump-administration-has-taken-its-first-real-step-toward-lunar-landings/

>the Chinese lunar program is cited as one of the justifications for the push to return to the Moon
we space race now

>>10378452
The architecture seems extremely efficient. Would spend tax money on/10.

>>10378452
Meh. Props to them for reusing elements at the station, but it will still be unaffordable without ditching SLS and seems overly complex, with three separate elements merely to land on the Moon. Also, no LEO refueling is just fundamentally dumb.

>>10378452
>2028
just kill me please

>>10378452
>>10378456

Either of you have the COTS one where they expect billions of dollars to be spent on regular tourism?

>>10378330
You mean makes powerpoint presentations of the new magical wunderwaffe just to cancel the project after 5 years due to lack of money?

>>10378452
>bush makes a "return to space" -plan
>"we going to moon guys"
>ends his terms
>obama cancelles/changes/re-directs program
"This nigga goin to mars, bitches"
>ends his terms
>trump cancelles/changes/re-directs program
>"GONNA GRAB THE MOON, MARS AND THE CHINESE BY THE PUSSY"
At this point im close to believing the conspiracy of NASA killing JFK just so they could finish a fucking program stretching more than 10 years

>>10378452
>increase delta v requirements and mission risk by launching crew lander and return vehicle to a station in the middle of nowhere

I think that's a jobs program masquerading as a space program.

>>10378452
2028...put that in the never gonna happen box

>>10378452
as a matter of sanity i completely ignore all government proposals on space exploration.
I only have faith in commercial now and honesly jeff bezos needs to speed up his project so spacex can have some company in the aerospace industry

>>10378483
Seven years later ITER will have first fusion. And 7 years after that JWST is finally gonna be done with its final safety check.

>>10378553
But the Apollo program was cancelled prematurely anyway.

>>10378753
>tfw all of those additional J missions had hardware ready but Congress had to be an ass

>>10378680
its kind of similar to the commercial resupply missions for the ISS, so there are hopes that this program will be just as successful

>>10378452
>all that for what amounts to a really overdesigned apollo mission
You‘d think launching on the most expensive vehicle ever would be enough but they actually need even more launches than that. Yikes!

pic

>>10378810
when is it flying? we're almost midway through february

>>10378814
shortly after the engines arrive, probably
there's no point even talking about it until then unless they make a new nose-cone

>>10378814
Need a new nosecone and actual engines. Also the launch pad isn't done.

>>10378814
the max end of Elon’s prediction plus the wind toppling delay adds up to 6 weeks I think?
>>10378810
Looks like they’ve added electrical connections along the side

>>10378753
Yeah, but they didnt change their mind and decide to land on Venus in 1965 either, they fullfilled a 8+ year old plan

>>10378674
What do you mean? 2082 gives plenty of time for this even at a glacial pace.

What does it feel like when Neuralink directly zaps information into your brain?

>>10378861
like a smartphone screen but without the screen. Just information. At least that’s what Elon says.

>>10378795
To supply that rarely manned (week long once or twice per year) station with anything meaningful you need at least F9 or Atlas sized rocket, preferably FH sized or more. Supplies will likely be brought along with the crew anyway.This means repeat of COTS is impossible - the entry barrier is extremely high. Maybe that's the idea.

Nothing to do with commercial, space, or anything. This is just to keep the existing ISS ground army going while giving SLS-Orion something to do and protecting them from cancellation.

>>10378836
JFK's death. Cancelling Apollo after that would make anyone look like a retard, coward, or a traitor. Shutting everything down after the promise was kept though...

heat flow probe is grappled

>>10378889
oh shit son

>>10378893
mars 2020 is coming along nicely

pipes?

Keep them pics coming.

>>10379026
this is the last new NSF one.

>>10379013
struts?

>>10379243
>SIX porta-pottys

could SpaceX bid on all three elements of this with their starship:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/the-trump-administration-has-taken-its-first-real-step-toward-lunar-landings/
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=13ca9566b575d496988122e66efc8230&tab=core&_cview=1
Can the starship go to the gateway(for no reasons), dock/undock, then land on the Moon and go back to the gateway? And then go home? Or is the announcement gimped so that only things that can ride the SLS are allowed? I really want to see SpaceX bid on this and basically show they can land on the moon without that stupid gateway.
>>10378889
this is something to watch, it will be the deepest we've penetrated into another planet. If it works, then it's a sign that ISRU hardware might be testable on earth. Granular materials are a bitch to work with.

>>10379241
What sort of legal authority does spacex have to close off the road during a test? Wonder how that bureaucratically happens

>>10379257
Despite the LUVOIR study, NASA still doesn’t believe that Starship will exist, apparently

>>10379241
>All those tire tracks out on the mud flats

>>10379257
bfr has too many launches required (~11 for a single moon mission), making the mission risk too high.

>>10379268
They're right to believe so. SpaceX has never gotten anywhere without significant NASA funding.

>>10379258
Well that is the end of the road so I don't thing there is too much bureaucracy

>>10379285
FH was done without government gibs

>>10379285
risk? If a fueler blows up you just launch another.

>>10379285
I know your just trolling, but I feel obliged to remind you that the Falcon Heavy exists and was developed only using 500 million dollars of private funding.

>>10379288
pad 39A is a $2 billion asset that was given to SpaceX by NASA for free

There should be a congressional investigation into what sort of backdoor deals happened to make that sort of thing take place.

>>10379290
This is actually a good point. bfr will have to rendezvous with the gateway station, because NASA isn't stupid enough to put their people on a rocket with no launch escape system again.

>>10379293
Falcon 9 cost $1.6 billion (minus internal NASA funding for CCP & COTS, equivalent to ~$300 million), plus SpaceX got 39A for free, a $2 billion dollar asset. Seems like the real cost to develop FH was more like $4.4 billion.

>>10379268
Of course, but could SpaceX still bid on the proposal? If there's nothing that says no starship allowed, SpaceX can bid on it no matter what NASA thinks. If SpaceX can make the a good case that their proposal was unfairly rejected they can even sue the government.
>>10379285
source for those 11 launches?
>>10379290
In space refueling has not been done, at least at that scale. Instead of SLS we could have built propellant depots like the augustine report recommended...

>>10379296
>There should be a congressional investigation into what sort of backdoor deals happened to make that sort of thing take place.

Its called "We're leasing these pads to try to get commercial space off the ground while we reorient towards SLS." It worked as intended with Falcon 9.

>>10378452
>we space race now

So fuckin stoked my anons. Our society finally has a purpose again.

>>10379301
1 launch plus 9 tanker flights, and throw in an extra for the extra margin to reach gateway first. See the 2017 IAC bfr talk for more details.

>>10379304
SpaceX already had an operational East Coast pad, and another on the way. Giving them pad 39A for free was crony as fuck.

>>10379308
Blue origin wanted to share it. Which is stupid. The first flight of NG is now 2022; that would sure be a lot of years of “sharing”

>>10379301
I believe it’s actualy 7 to land 150t on the surface. Six in orbit around earth then another tanker halfway to the moon

>>10379309
Now Blue Origin has to spend $1.5 billion building their own pad when there was a perfectly good one a few miles up shore. Retarded as fuck. Typical braindead musktard talk to defend giving the pad solely to spacex.

>>10379310
More than one tanker flight is needed to send a tanker load to high elliptical orbit

>>10379310
>another tanker halfway to the moon
wut? you don't fly rockets the way you drive a car

>>10379313
lol.
>be Blue Origin
>throw a fit over 39A
>get btfo
>throw a fit over rocket landing patents
>get btfo

>>10379320
>be SpaceX
>spend more on lobbying than ULA and Northrop Grumman combined
>buy Florida and California congressional support
>acquire $2 billion pad and shut out all competition for free (the equivalent would be giving a private company a 1000 mile stretch of interstate for 20 years, and letting them set whatever toll they want for users)
>retarded musk fanboys defend the obvious crony capitalism

Stop replying to the moron ya nerds. Also here’s your answer to the refueling question https://youtu.be/UtwixqKaCmo

>>10379334
>no return payload
oh look, it's this retard again

>>10379328
>spend more on lobbying than ULA and Northrop Grumman combined

Lol, it's an open fact that most of ULA's lobbying occurs through it's parent companies and there are documents to prove this.

>>10379328
Someone sounds like they're fearing for their own, or their relative's, job.

>>10379310
well could they land less to just get to the moon and back? Just land three people, a moon buggy, some instruments, and take home some rocks.

aaaaaaaaaaand the BAA's gimped. Everything has to be less than 6.3 m diameter and with a wet mass at launch less than 16 mt. So no Starships allowed.

>>10379257
>Can the starship go to the gateway(for no reasons),
Imagine resupplying a station with a vehicle that‘s larger than the station.
What fucking nonsense that would be.

>>10379344
It's probably Mr 70% from the Blue Origin propulsion development team...

>>10379342
>Lol, it's an open fact that most of ULA's lobbying occurs through it's parent companies and there are documents to prove this.
Prove it then, retard.

>>10379344
Projecting much?
You don't even have a job, lmao

>>10379350
Blue Origin has developed BE-4 in much less time than SpaceX developing Raptor. Raptor development started in 2010, whereas BE-4 started in 2011, but was completely reset in 2014 due to a deal with ULA. Raptor first test fired in 2016 whereas BE-4 first test fired in late 2017.

Seems like SpaceX started four years ahead and over the past decade Blue Origin has slowly closed the gap to ~9 months.

>>10379319
yes you can
just burn till the edge of Earth sphere of influence and make a elliptical orbit

>>10379358
Raptor is a much more complex design.

>>10379367
Full flow staged combustion is a much easier architecture to master. It was just less understood than oxygen rich staged combustion when raptor development was started.

>>10379358
That's false, the idea of Raptor had existed since 2009, but component testing didn't start till 2014.

>>10379372
In 2009 it was still a hydrolox engine, so no it's not relevant at all.

easier architecture to master
look at all the mature engines with that easier architecture...

>>10379371
>t. BO employee

Yes, that's right the engine that's much less common (only tested twice before) and has never been used on a launch vehicle is definitely less complicated...

>>10379377
Soviets were going to do it decades ago (with a much less forgiving propellant) but the rockets they were built for ran out of money.

>>10379378
Why is FFSC more difficult than ORSC in your opinion?

>>10379379
>with a much less forgiving propellant

You say this but apparently one of the biggest challenges in testing a FFSC engine is getting it to start, using hypergolics would make this easier:

>>10379388
using methane makes the required internal turbopump pressures much lower

>>10379383
Much more complicated plumbingand lack of prior development means it's an untrodden path, compared to ORSC engines which have been developed by Russia, China and India.

>>10379371
>It was just less understood than oxygen rich staged combustion when raptor development was started.
So you‘re saying Raptor is much easier to build now that SpaceX figured out how to build Raptor?
Wow, you sure are a well of wisdom.

>>10379404
Good thing "build" and "master" have identical meanings

Fucking retard

>>10379253
they come in bundles

>punisher skull

>>10379395
FFSC engines don't need a complex hydrostatic bearing also built to resist 800+ bar pressures in between the oxygen rich and fuel rich flows, and their turbopump pressures are much lower. China has ORSC engines because they literally bought and reverse engineered them, just like they do with Russian jet engines, and just like their jet engine copies, their engine copies are complete shit.

>cancel Ares V
>rebuild Ares V but rename it SLS, and halve its payload
Why?

>>10379438
Because the RS-68 didn't play nice with the shuttle derived SRBs.

>>10379414
lots of retarded fanboys on job sites

>>10379442
Why not fix it?

>>10379448
why not ditch the SRBs?

>>10379455
Because they're the most powerful rockets ever made, and more importantly they make the project palletable for more members of congress?

>>10379455
Why not indeed...

>>10379459
>the most powerful rockets ever made
that's not even close to correct

>>10379466

>>10379466
ok retard

>>10379448
>Why not fix it?
Because you'd have to completely redesign the RS-68. They're ablatively cooled; they simply aren't robust enough for the heat flux from close proximity to other large rocket motors. This is why they switched to SSMEs for SLS, but engine cost is what kept the core to four engines, even though the rocket's payload goes up dramatically with a fifth engine.

>>10379466
>laughs in AJ-260

http://www.astronautix.com/a/aj-260.html

Tbf the SRBs are the most powerful rocket engines ever flown at 12MN of thrust...

>>10379475
see, that's a chart plotting the most powerful rocket engines, not the most powerful rockets

>>10379476
SpaceX redesigned the merlin several times.

>>10379479
When it comes to bragging rights, nobody cares about how many engines you can bundle together. Just look at irrelevant rockets like N-1 or Falcon Heavy.

>>10379491
>SpaceX redesigned the merlin several times.
Something that distinguishes SpaceX (and newspace in general) from Old Space. Rocketdyne (and whoever their latest owners happen to be) flatly refuse to and will not do shit without a cost-plus contract to pay for it.

>>10378843
I agree 2282 is plenty time for nasa to get their shit together for a moon mission. 2582 will fly by like its nothing and then well realize wow its 2882 already just like that

>>10379358
until blue orgin gets a single satellite into orbit they can shut the fuck up. all these "just the tip" incremental moves are annoying as fuck. Spacex is moving at lightspeed compared to blue origin
maybe if bezos wasnt wasting his time having his side chick suck his balls and sending her dick pics blue origin would be further along.

>>10379550
SpaceX has received >$5 billion in government investment, >$5 billion in private investment, and >$3 billion in profits for launch. Blue has received less than $4 billion in total. That's the only reason SpaceX has moved at all, let alone moved "at lightspeed."

>>10379503
get your terminology right
the shuttle SRB is the most powerful rocket engine ever flown
the most powerful rocket ever flown is uhhhh
let's make a list of candidates for maximum liftoff thrust
Shuttle Stack: 1,181,400 lbf orbiter, 2,800,000 lbf x 2 boosters for 6,781,400 lbf total
Energia: 6,500,000 lbf from the four Zenit boosters and 1,300,000 lbf from the core stage for 7,800,000 lbf total
Saturn 5: 5,891,000 lbf total
N1 (shut up, it flew, just not very far): 10,200,000 lbf
as you can see, the N1 is big dick swinging in this case

>>10379557
There's no reason to take your damage control this far, my dude.

>>10379563
I was actually just curious now, so thanks for being so incredibly wrong

>>10379556
Spacex has created a profitable business, Blue has made a hopper

>>10379556
>owned by a man with 100 billion dollar lying around
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

sure is shilly in here

>>10379573
<30% of their funds in their entire history are from launching rockets.

They are profitable in ripping off the taxpayer and ripping off gullible private investors.

>>10379580
>this meme again
It's so tiresome.jpg

>>10379575
NASA alone has invested more in SpaceX than Bezos has in blue origin.

>>10379580
>ripping off the taxpayer
>saving the taxpayer money by launching stuff for cheaper than the alternative
.....?

I can't tell if you're stupid or brainwashed

>>10379581
Are you implying it's wrong?

Where's your source?

>>10379585
Blue Origin is the cheaper alternative, as they've costed the taxpayer 1/100th what SpaceX has cost them.

>>10379590
but accomplished 0%

>>10379590
funny I don't see BO launching NRO missions, NASA missions, or Air Force missions. And they won't for three more years.
it's kinda pathetic how much you're trying to make this a us-vs-them sort of thing. Blue Origin is awesome with the work they're doing with reusability, but to try and say they're hotter shit than SpaceX is retarded.

>>10379594
It's hard to develop things as quickly when you don't receive $5 billion in government investment and a $2 billion launch pad for free.

New Glenn already has more contracts than FH and BFR.

>>10379594
>trying to make this an us vs them thing
oh, good point
thanks anon

>>10379600
well aren't you a broken record

>>10379594
>it's kinda pathetic how much you're trying to make this a us-vs-them sort of thing.
Ironic coming form a muskfaggot

>>10379605
how is it fanboyism to point out that a company won't fly payloads to orbit for THREE MORE YEARS?

>>10379604
I like it when he he so obviously intentionally mispeaks so as to be misleading
"most powerful rocket."
"more contracts than FH and BFR"
instead of the actually correct statements:
"most powerful rocket engine"
"more publicly announced contracts out with delivery before 2025 (or whatever far future it is) than FH (excluding starship super heavy from this comparison because they have an contract so far)"

>>10379438
Because the Ares V was 10m across compared to the SLS and shuttle tank's 8.4m
It's a lot quicker to reuse jigs for the cost of an extra launch or two than develop new tooling

>>10379612
& 7-8 years before they fly people as well

Friendly reminder:
It's always the muskfaggots who bring up Blue Origin first >>10379309
and then hypocritically try to claim innocence in "us vs them" thinking >>10379594

>>10379614
Post some refutations then. I'll wait.

>>10379615
>Because the Ares V was 10m across compared to the SLS and shuttle tank's 8.4m
Source?

>The first flight of NG is now 2022
Source?

>>10379625

>>10379626
meant for >>10379309

>>10379573
blue origin will be making a ton of money from space tourism once they start flying people later this year

>>10379622
if you're going to act like a troll then get treated like a troll, it's only fair.
The complaint was about 39A. My comment was that the whole boondoggle was BO's fault. They pouted and screamed and said nuh-uh SpaceX has to share it with us!!!11!!

How is it wrong to bring up BO when they're at the crux of your trolling claims that SpaceX is LITERALLY the devil?


>>10379630
lol, they haven't even set a price yet

>>10379628
Right. So, you have nothing then?

>>10379631
have you considered not arguing with blatant trolling?

>>10379631
>lol, they haven't even set a price yet
it will be about one tenth of what virgin galactic is charging, theyll be in total control of the market

>>10379631
>act like a troll
Are you 12 years old?
>They pouted and screamed and said nuh-uh SpaceX has to share it with us!!!11!!
If you read any of the documentation surrounding the case, you'll see they were perfectly justified in their case for being against SpaceX getting a $2 billion asset from the government for free.
>How is it wrong to bring up BO when they're at the crux of your trolling claims that SpaceX is LITERALLY the devil?
So you're resorting to straw man arguments now?

>>10379636
but it's so tempting

>>10379647

>>10379637
They have not set a price. no one knows a price. It's not like this'll stop you from lying through your teeth but whatever https://spacenews.com/blue-origin-still-holding-off-on-new-shepard-ticket-sales/

>>10379640
ahhhh yes, a "$2 billion" asset consisting of a rusted to shit RSS and zero useful GSE. Why must you blatantly lie as well? Where is the OIG number showing that's what it was worth? Oh right, there isn't one

>>10379652
>ahhhh yes, a "$2 billion" asset consisting of a rusted to shit RSS and zero useful GSE. Why must you blatantly lie as well? Where is the OIG number showing that's what it was worth? Oh right, there isn't one
Let me guess: you think 39A cost $0 to build? Are you retarded?

>>10379653
>it's a anon doesn't understand 8th grade econ and marginal utility episode

>>10379652
>They have not set a price
they have, they just haven't announced it yet. i know people in the company

>>10379652
>consisting of a rusted to shit RSS and zero useful GSE
ah yes, the classic muskrat tactic of moving the goalposts

>>10379656
>he thinks SpaceX paid money for 39A

>>10379653
I don't see how the price to originally build it is relevant, when it's hardly useful anyway
>>10379657
>my uncle works at Nintendo
okay kid
>>10379658
your goalposts were dumb anyway

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

>>10379652
>a "$2 billion" asset consisting of a rusted to shit RSS and zero useful GSE
yeah, except for the entire pad complex, the foundations and flame trench and entire substructure, the tower superstructure, the RSS which spacex had the money to throw away to remove for no reason, the water tower and entirety of water deluge plumbing, the propellant tanks, ect. ect.

>>10379668
Funny how Blue will be using their own pad more often than SpaceX will be using 39A by the time this "lease" is half over. You're just digging your own grave further, my dude.

>>10379667
>when it's hardly useful anyway
see >>10379674

>>10379668
wasn't this an attempt to increase the price and decrease the availability of SpaceX launches by basically giving ULA veto power on their launches, increasing the paperwork and cost needed for each launch from 39A?

reminder that he STILL has not posted a source for the """"""""""""$2,000,000,000""""""""""" figure

>>10379674
>throw away for no reason
100000/10 trolling good job m8 well done clap clap clap

>government supported monopolies are bad!
>unless it's SpaceX!

>>10379689
don't try and butt in here like you weren't posting already. NG, SpaceX, and ULA all have a chunk. SpaceX BROKE UP the monopoly if anything

>>10379688
>>10379689

>>10379668
Funny how NASA's policy of supporting a monopoly ended up utterly killing their "multi-use space complex" concept.

>>10379475
Srb is a fircrcker

SO MUCH FOR THAT 2 GORRILION DOLLAR LAUNCHPAD EH? THEY WERE GOING TO TOSS IT IN THE TRASH AHAHAHAWHWOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHHOHOHO

>HE STILL HASN'T POSTED A SOURCE FOR THE 2 BILLION DOLLAR CLAIM
did he honestly believe that SpaceX should have signed a check to the government for $2bil to use 39a? AHAHAHAHAAHOHOHOHOHOHHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO

>>10379688
>>10379704
>>10379710
>>10379715
OH NONONONONO AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

*breathes in*

AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
>muskrats on eternal suicide watch

>>10379144
both?!

>>10379729
Boy you're in for a big surprise when you try to re-sell your used car for the price you paid plus inflation.

>>10379688
>>10379704
>>10379710
>>10379715
>>10379725

>>10379729
Holy shit. Imagine getting this utterly BTFO

lol I actually got a reply out of him. Mission accomplished. And yet he still doesn't understand how monumentally STUPID his argument is. Keep it coming, moron

https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/659674.pdf

>>10379740
>>10379742
Imagine SEETHING this hard, lmao.

I've never seen someone backtrack their arguments this hard EVER on 4chan. Embarrassing.

>>10379740
>CLEAN TITLE LOW MILES I KNOW WHAT I GOT
is his literal argument. Reminder that THIS is what he claimed. yeah sure, TWO BILLION for a LITERAL RUSTBUCKET THEY WERE GOING TO TEAR DOWN AND WAS COSTING THEM MILLIONS IN UPKEEP OHHHH WOWWWWWWW

>>10379748
>cope
you only now realize the error of your ways, but instead of manning up to your stupidity you double down and try and justify criticizing NASA for doing the right thing top jej
https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/659674.pdf

how much Amazon stock do you have anyways?

>>10379751
NASA could have maintained 39A for 4000 YEARS with money they have given to SpaceX so far, by your own figures lmao

Kek, imagine being this desperate for an argument after getting BTFO this hard

actual curiously: what parts of 39A are actually useful? Obviously the LOx tanks are, and the water deluge system seems pretty useful
did the flame trench need a bunch of refurb? they're using it mostly unmodified, right?

>>10379756
>https://www.gao.gov/assets/660/659674.pdf
see >>10379679

>>10379760
SpaceX has done a tremendous amount of modification. New everything, basically. Don't think much survived of the original pad.

>These modifications included removing unneeded equipment and structures, – which later included the entire Rotating Service Structure (RSS), installing RP-1 tanks and fuel lines, and building a Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF) on the pad border to assemble and prepare Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets launching from 39A.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/09/spacex-pad-39a-upgrades-return-crew-operations/

>>10379762
are you literally retarded? what are you trying to say? use your words instead of avoiding actual discussion idiot

>>10379757
I can't tell if you have a sub-50 IQ or are just baiting for (you)s

>>10379760
>what parts of 39A are actually useful?
see >>10379674

>>10379765
>SpaceX has done a tremendous amount of modification. New everything, basically. Don't think much survived of the original pad.
completely wrong
see >>10379674

>>10379765
well obviously they needed to throw out the tower, it's not useful for F9 and FH
they needed to build an actual pad too because they weren't using the crawler and the mobile launch shit it could do
fucking love those crawlers
is NASA planning on using those things for SLS?

>>10379773
you're fucking retarded, holy shit

>>10379774
>they needed to throw out the tower
>needed
source?

I'd love to be a fly on the wall of
>$2 billion
Anon at any kind of Government surplus sale. Holy shit he'd be trying to jail everyone there for stealing tax dollars.

ohh nooo the government is being irrational, look they're considering giving away for free a $12 billion dollar mothballed aircraft carrier for free oh no so much corruption :(

>>10379777
that doesn't even justify a legit answer. Do you THINK that a SHUTTLE TOWER would be magically compatible with F9 and FH???????????? Just how much of an imbecile are you?

Literally the ugliest piece of shit ever designed.

>>10379783
>government surplus sale
>NO BIDDING ALLOWED!
>my friend gets thing for free :)
This is literally your argument.

oh noooooooo why don't these museum organizations give the government the Fair Market Value of $12 billion dollars for USS JFK, that's how much it cost back in the day oh nooooo :(

>>10379792
The equivalent would be the Navy giving a museum this ship for free, and then also paying them $4 billion dollars for "museum services" for the next 20 years

>>10379790
My argument is that you know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

>>10379784
>Do you THINK that a SHUTTLE TOWER would be magically compatible with F9 and FH???????????? Just how much of an imbecile are you?
Is that why the literal EXACT same structure that was used for Apollo and Shuttle is now being used by SpaceX?

>>10379803
oh are they reusing it? that's cool
how much of what structures did they throw away and how much did they keep?

>>10379785
I agree but they can worry about aesthetics after its proven to work

>>10379812
they removed basically all of it. over 500,000 pounds of steel.

>>10379674
OH NOOOOO WHY DID THEY TEAR DOWN THE TOWER AT BLUE ORIGIN'S LC-36??????!?!?!?!?!? WHY DIDN'T THEY KEEP IT???!?!?!?!?!?!

old

>>10379800
If the pad was worthless, then why did SpaceX want it exclusively for themselves?

>>10379826
>OH NOOOOO WHY DID THEY TEAR DOWN THE TOWER AT BLUE ORIGIN'S LC-36??????!?!?!?!?!? WHY DIDN'T THEY KEEP IT???!?!?!?!?!?!
Why the all caps? Are you upset?
Anyways, the answer is because all the infrastructure there was too small for New Glenn, which has 2.5x the thrust of Atlas II in its initial configuration.

new

>>10379844
memes, pretty sure
launching from historic Pad 39A has a lot of meme power, it makes for a good story

>>10379844
>If the pad was worthless, then why did SpaceX want it exclusively for themselves?

Nobody said it was worthless. Have you considered the possibility that it was worth more to the Government to give it to SpaceX than demand payment? And why on Earth would anyone share a launch pad with the subsequent redundant and incompatible infrastructure?

snazzy air photo from a few days ago

>>10379849
Man, the "new" paint on the tower looks tacky as fuck.
Why does new space stuff have shit tier aesthetics?

>>10379864
that color is a leftover of the shuttle program
it's true, the shuttle ruined everything forever

>>10379863
that looks cgi

>>10379785
>ohnononono

>>10379872
Bait, or you're just retarded.

>>10379883
source?

>>10379875
higher res I think

>>10379900
no it's roughly the same

Americans are still relying on Nazi tech half a century later.

>meanwhile, OmegA chugs along, so plain and boring that no one cares about it

>>10379923

>>10380006
>>10379923
the prophecy

A G R I C U L T U R E

>>10377461
Jesus Christ is sitting passenger in the convertible Tesla cruising to Uranus

let's talk about starship

>>10380064
that's not starship, that's a big metal tub sitting in a field next to the ocean in Texas
soon it will ride a column of flame into the sky

time for bureaucracy!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-12/spacex-launch-certification-to-face-review-by-pentagon-watchdog

>The Pentagon’s inspector general said it will begin an evaluation of the Air Force’s certification of SpaceX’s primary launch vehicles, the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, years after a legal fight led to a victory for the company founded by Elon Musk.

>“Our objective is to determine whether the U.S. Air Force complied with the Launch Services New Entrant Certification Guide when certifying the launch system design for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle-class SpaceX Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles,” the inspector general said in a memo to Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson sent on Monday.
>SpaceX officials declined to comment. Air Force spokesman Brigadier General Edward Thomas said the service didn’t have an immediate comment.

>>10376425
ITT people who don't work in aerospace talking about aerospace. God I hate 4chan sometimes.

>>10380157
yeah me too buddy
got any dank insights to share with us?

>>10380157
>TT people who don't work in aerospace talking about aerospace.
Describes the musk fanclub pretty well, honestly.

Gotta love salt from muskrat fags.

sigh

Imagine the butthurt from these people if it was a letter from ULA-supported congressmen protesting about ULA not getting selected for a contract. The hypocrisy here is palpable. Listen to these pathetic faggots squeal about muh starship funding.

>>10380184
>>10380178
>>10380173
no one cares.

>>10379904
I think it looks weird because a cloud is covering up the sunlight, which you can see is happening by looking at the ground

>>10380006
>>10379923
Is he the chosen one?

>>10380205
we shall see
it can only be given in hindsight

imagine being at rockets

>>10380205
Who?

>>10380205
t-50 years for self sufficient mars colony

>>10379573
>Spacex has created a profitable business
Source?

>>10380215
They created a profitable business of acquiring government contracts.

>>10376425
"at least its not november"
can any nerd people help me with this?
400k likes what am i missing

>>10379556
>Blue has received less than $4 billion in total
so blue has received half that and is still in its infancy. again...if bezos wasnt having his pole spit shined by his mistress and dumped 5billion into rockets to cover the ground that spacex made up he'd be 55billion dollars richer today.

>>10380220
even if that was true, why is that a bad thing? Huge numbers of companies exist solely to provide the government with services. Some do it better than others.

>>10380273
most of BO's early years were as a think tank. They only started doing serious engineering in the late 2000s, and their factory is barely up and running too. Still, the push to 2021 at the earliest for NG's first flight is worrying

>>10380258
reference to "no nut november"?

>>10380258
NoFap November

>>10380273
>so blue has received half that and is still in its infancy.
SpaceX received more money from NASA in a single award in 2008 than all of Blue's funding from 2000 to 2014.
>if bezos wasnt having his pole spit shined by his mistress and dumped 5billion into rockets to cover the ground that spacex made up he'd be 55billion dollars richer today.
Personal attacks, nice. At least Bezos doesn't insult journalists, create a publicity stunt out of a crisis, and call random people pedos on twitter.

>>10380275
>even if that was true, why is that a bad thing? Huge numbers of companies exist solely to provide the government with services. Some do it better than others.
because muskrats have been crying about everyone else doing this for the past ten straight years, and it's hilarious to watch them eat crow now. I never said it was a bad thing either, in fact, it was the fully expected and inevitable outcome for them after not going bankrupt.

is there anything more petulant that using the phrase "muskrats" unironically?

>>10380283
dude, have you seen the news?

>>10380220
That's not "profit" nobody knows how much money they makr or lose.

>>10380290
>dude, have you seen the news?
Have you?

>>10380294
yes, and all three of your supposed criticisms are unfounded.
It's not like any of this is related to spaceflight in the slightest.

Although someone keeps bringing it up. The anti-musk crowd is responsible for a good 99% of the derailing in these threads. It's ridiculous. Just stop, you'll have a more receptive crowd in other places.

>>10380299
>all three of your supposed criticisms are unfounded
Source?
I must have missed the news about Elon's twitter being used by an impersonator for the past year.

>>10380283
not an elon fan, i could care less if bezos walked around with his balls out while chicks sucking them. but the dude had a 120billion dollars and clearly would have been better off focusing on BO and gving it the necessary cash injection than wasting time chasing a shreveled up thot.

for all the non elon does, he clearly has his eyes on the prize

>>10380306
>i could care less if bezos walked around with his balls out while chicks sucking them. but the dude had a 120billion dollars and clearly would have been better off focusing on BO and gving it the necessary cash injection than wasting time chasing a shreveled up thot.
It will be interesting to see how far down the rabbit hole goes with regards to Saudi/Trump involvement in all of this. The drama is far more interesting than Elon's was last year, where he came across as a retard (Tesla shares) or a petulant child (cave rescue debacle). It was pretty funny to see him get BTFO by the based Thai divers

BASED Air Force auditor is going after SpaceX cronyism
>https://media.defense.gov/2019/Feb/11/2002088764/-1/-1/1/D2019-D000PT-0059.000.PDF

>>10379556
it doesn't even matter who is doing rockets, space is cool

>>10380309
how does trump and saudis have anything to do this,
what the fuck are you talking about

>>10380317
dude, have you seen the news?

>>10380319
send me link faggot

>>10380320
>https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-thank-you-mr-pecker-146e3922310f
>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/09/opinion/sunday/jeff-bezos-national-enquirer-blackmail.html

Nothing gets me madder than someone doing rockets. So mad, in fact, that I am compelled to rage about it all day every day for at least two and a half months.

New
>>10380329
>>10380329
>>10380329
>>10380329

>>10380325
i did a find an it had nothing to do with musk and spaceflight

>>10378452

>>10380273
The New Glenn is a rocket that can capture the whole market (more capable than both Delta 4 Heavy, Falcon Heavy and Ariane 5 while cheaper than the Falcon 9) and unlike the Falcon, might actually have a cheaply reusable booster. Don't shit on Blue, New Glenn is going to hit the launch market hard.

>>10380537
basically Falcon 9 < New Glenn < realistic BFR < New Armstrong < what ever spacex does after BFR
It all comes down to how quickly and cheaply they can do it.

>>10380543
New Glenn offers dual launches. So if they can keep the manufacturing cost below 100 million the expendable New Glenn can compete with the reusable Falcon 9. If they don't, their reusable variant definetely will.

>>10380537
>might actually have a cheaply reusable booster

It doesn't matter about the first-stage when it also has a massive expendable hydrogen second-stage. New Glenn will never be cheap compared to Falcon 9 because of this, unless Blue wants to be permanently in the red.

>>10380553
The second stage is about twice the size of the New Shepard, which costs around 10 million to produce. So assuming their second stage cost is ~20 million, that would be around double of the Falcon 9 second stage cost, e.g. they are at a disadvantage of 10 million there. They can easily cover that by offering dual launches and having a cheap reusable first stage.

BO is really different from SpaceX in the sense that Bezos isnt involved much, he is only the money. The people that create the strategy at BO are people who are industry veterans while at the same time not satisfied with how the industry works. A lot of people who worked at the actually first rocket than landed vertically (Delta Clipper) ended up at Blue. So the strategy at Blue is to drop one rocket that can capture the whole market, so the number of launches will be maximized, which will lower the cost even more.

>>10379704
>>10379710
>>10379715
Jesus you savage !!!! The guy will not be able to walk proper for weeks !!!

>>10380283

Blue was perfectly eligible to compete for that award, they chose not to.

>>10380016
>agriculture
>in space
>on the moon
>on mars
oh yes this pleases me, for this shows that they want to use space as it is meant to be used

>>10380299
>The anti-musk crowd is responsible for a good 99% of the derailing in these threads.
and ironically keep Starship threads bumped and active

>>10379310
>Six in orbit around earth then another tanker halfway to the moon
That Tanker needs its own six tankers to fill it up in LEO as well.