/sci/ - Science & Math

>Canada confirmed for brawl
Trudeau will announce later today that Canada is joining the LOP-G/Gateway space station program. It will be the cornerstone of their new "Canadian Space Strategy." Funding is set for $2.5 billion Canadian dollars over 24 years.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/canada-lunar-mission-1.5036570

>US government shutdown has delayed the LOP-G/Gateway
The first element of the new space station has been delayed. Instead of launching in September 2022, it is pushed back to no later than December 31, 2022.
https://spacenews.com/shutdown-to-delay-first-element-of-nasas-lunar-gateway/

>OneWeb launch successful
The first 6 out of 150 expected to be launched this year have successfully made it into space. OneWeb is expected to launch 300 satellites by the end of 2020, and 300 more in 2021. The total constellation will be 648 satellites.
https://spacenews.com/first-six-oneweb-satellites-launch-on-soyuz-rocket/

>>10424479
SpaceX, NASA and most other space-oriented ventures are money laundering operations.

>>10424481
>5 fucking years for the Gateway to begin construction

this is utterly ridiculous

>>10424757
BFS will be flying circles around the moon by then

>>10424481
Are they going to contribute another Canadarm?

>>10424812
Unironically, yes.

>The Prime Minister added that Canada’s involvement will entail providing the new platform with a robotic arm, which he called “Canadarm 3.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-canada-is-going-to-the-moon-trudeau-announces-canada-will-join-the/

>>10424819
Kek. I know it's a vitally important piece of equipment and all, but I couldn't help but feel a wry sense of amusement that it seems to be the only thing Canada can ever contribute.

>>10424812
>>10424819
>>10424832

hmmm
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Mars_Express/First_evidence_of_planet-wide_groundwater_system_on_Mars

work continues

>>10424948
All the wrinkles look like faces.

Starship powered by the souls of the damned confirmed.

>>10425095
well its better than nazi space magic...

>Canada is the first confirmed Gateway partner
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-secures-first-international-partnership-for-moon-to-mars-lunar-gateway

I thought alot of countries were already in, including ESA, Japan, and Russia?

>>10425142
>I thought alot of countries were already in, including ESA, Japan, and Russia?
Maybe it meant that Canada will be the first to contribute something?

The NASA press conference for Dragon demo flight should start in a little under 2 hours from now (4pm EST).

>>10424832
What's the point of building an expertise in something if you don't intent to uses it?

Video of inside the crew Dragon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE_hCTfMdng

>>10425148
press conference stream starting soon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

>>10424832
we don't really have the budget to do much else
we're 11x smaller than the US, and most of our money is pissed away on gibsmedats for undesirables

>>10424757
Gateway is going to be glorious though. Finally deep space missions becoming routine.

>>10425511
it's not gonna be useful senpai
it's a fucking shoebox, no deep space mission worthy of note (read: manned) will use it, since the delta v cost of going to it outweigh the nonexistent benefits of going to it

The gateway was quite literally designed from the ground up to be as worthless as possible
they literally could not have made it even more of a piece of actively detrimental trash than it already fucking is

where's our KEYHOLE / buffalo hunter photo poster?

>>10425672
this

>>10425672
>it's not gonna be useful senpai
Source?
>it's a fucking shoebox, no deep space mission worthy of note (read: manned) will use it, since the delta v cost of going to it outweigh the nonexistent benefits of going to it
Source?
>The gateway was quite literally designed from the ground up to be as worthless as possible
Source?
>they literally could not have made it even more of a piece of actively detrimental trash than it already fucking is
Source?

>>10425714
my source is screencap his post and wait four years

OH NONONONO HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

>>10425943
>WE'RE NOT SUBSIDIES, YOU'RE SUBSIDIES
>*CRIES*
wow so profound, have you considered not doing that obnoxious type laugh thing it's not useful or funny

>>10425943
no big surprise

The state of South African spaceflight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_xeFGf1tDY

EXOS Aerospace is supposed to launch a previously launched rocket on Saturday. Not sure where the launch is going to happen. I guess New Mexico like last time? The rocket is suborbital only. Pic related. It'll be carrying a few commercial experiments.

>>10426839
south africa used to into space, used to into nukes as well
then the ghouls came

I haven't heard much of any talk about it but apparently the same company that built the BEAM module currently attached to the ISS is planning to launch a huge 330 cubic meter module in 2020 and at some undetermined time later enormous 2100+ cubic meter modules. Gateway is going to look pretty embarrassing when a single B330 with six times the habitable volume seems like it will be up two years before the first parts of it are even on the pad.

Ars did a story about NASA's space communications and trying to create a network with lasers.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/how-et-phones-home-what-todays-interplanetary-internet-service-looks-like/

>>10427525
There has been lots of talk about it but it's always getting delayed. It's been years now. I heard interested parties have been turned off by the high cost of the modules that Bigelow is charging. Rent only too, no purchasing.

>>10424832
The Canadarm has seen a lot of advancements over the years though, and CSA contributes a lot of electronics components as well.

>>10427706
>the high cost of the modules that Bigelow is charging
Source?

>>10424479
they had better ships in the past.

>>10424479
>Mitshubishi rocket
When do we se Toyota rocket or Mazda rocket

>>10428212
We're never seeing a Tesla rocket, that's for sure.

>Department of Defense wants "competitive" procurement for launches
>only two launch providers will be allowed to bid
Literally what the fuck is this?

>>10428304
Follow the money
then you will understand

>>10428318

>>10428328
sweet fuck I've had that pic for ages, and I never noticed it

>>10428304
Government continues to be inefficient at everything, more news every single day for the rest of eternity.

>>10428212
>Get a Toyota rocket
>Drag it through the mud, throw it off a cliff, and drop a building on it
>It still works

>Get a BMW rocket
>Get sudden urge to be a massive asshole, pushing others off their launch pads

>Get a Ford rocket
>Its literally just an F-150 with a rocket engine strapped to the bed

>Get a Fiat rocket
>Its so tiny that it could fit in a closet
>Bring it to your local Starbucks to show off how "hip" and "green" you are

>>10428337
It's mostly an aerospace thing, ironically

>>10428333
I'm sorry anon, but it appears to be terminal

>>10428340
>Fiat makes an upsize model that's twice the price of its competitors and offers half the performance
>sells like gangbusters to soccer moms

>>10428347
Well I'm sure it shows most in the industries which are already the most expensive, but bureaucratic shit rolls all the way down hill inevitably, making everything else slightly shit along the way. It's why even though private rocketry and aerospace companies work closely with NASA their technology is progressing at a significantly faster rate, Bigleow is building and may be launching a hab so big only 3 of them will surpass the ISS in total internal volume, some brittish Aerospace company is building a hybrid rocket engine spaceplane, Starhopper will be flying for months before SLS has it's first flight, not to mention Blue Origin and all of the other smaller rocket startups making rapid progress.

>>10428340
>Choosing between Skoda rocket and Audi rocket
>Decide to get Audi rocket for twice the price
>Merchant gets a rocket from storage and tapes a four-ring-logo on it

>>10428372
I really hope private expansion into space takes off. The biggest barrier to that would be the lack of a reliable source of nongovernment income.

>>10428384
I'd guess it will still be almost government exclusive for another decade, there's lots of rare minerals out there but the startup costs are still near a trillion for a ten trillion payoff, we'll need reusable low cost rocketry to cut the costs significantly before companies are willing to do major stuff in space. That and less cost prohibitive habitation space, which is why I doubt NASA will ever have a hand in the major expansion of human work in space from now on, reduction of cost is tied closely to mass production, which NASA and other government space programs will never be ideal for.

>>10424760
>BFS will be flying circles around the moon by then
funny right, the successful of BFS will make people completely think of NASA as an irrelevant agency Imagine the live shots of the commerical crew and jap billionaire as they orbit the moon while NASA is (likey) going to delay their lunar program.

>>10424481
at this stage anything less than pic is pointless

>>10424760
SpaceX is on the verge of bankruptcy. The stuttering pothead behind it has embarrassed himself on the world stage for the last time.

>>10427525
damn thats nice, but i still think unless you build that shit in space from scratch youre limiting yourself, but i guess its a good start for "space ramada"

>>10428529
NASA will end up begin a regulatory industry like the FAA. The question will shift to more bureaucratic stuff like earth orbit space docking fees and regulation seating.
eventually private companies will want to get their hands on a low yield nuclear reactor for ion drives thatll be an entirely new fight.

>>10429104
>low yield nuclear reactor for ion drive

Why would you use a heavy as fuck nuclear reactor that has a joke of kg/kW compared to thin film solar? Fucking brainlet.

>>10429111
More power flexibility and reliability. Plus solar significantly looses capability beyond Mars.

>>10429115
>More power flexibility

What does this even mean? Yo

>Reliability

Just fucking no, you cannot possibly compare a nuclear reactor with turbines, radiators, pumps, high pressure circuits and shit to passive solar panels.

>Plus solar significantly looses capability beyond Mars

10x less efficient around Jupiter is still far in excess of the garbage kg/kW ratio of nuclear. You have no idea what you are talking about, fuck off brainlet.

>>10429124
>More power flexibility
Missions which are strongly dependent on power, such as orbital maneuvers with ion drives, may be jeopardized if the needed power isn't available. Solar panels would need to not only have line of sight to the Sun but if a required "burn" puts a planet between the ion driven spacecraft and the Sun, then the burn will have to be postponed until the craft can receive power from the Sun. This may complicate the mission if carefully timed orbital maneuvers are required. A nuclear reactor can just output power constantly, thus allowing more flexibility in missions compared to Solar power.

>Reliability...
First. Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators are simpler than what you have described. Second, while a reactor is complicated, it can be easier to make a reactor resistant to the elements of space compared to Solar panels. As reactors can be encased in shielded containers, while thin Solar panels need to be exposed to space, potentially allow orbital debris to strike the panel and reduce its power potential. This has happened on the ISS.

>Plus solar significantly looses capability beyond Mars
This fact is true, as the majority of space probes beyond Mars' orbit were nuclear powered. While RTGs do have limitations in power output, nuclear reactors which use turbines and pumps can definitely pump out more power than kg/kW.

I'm simply pointing out how nuclear power can still be an option for power in space. Solar has it's purpose, it's simple, relatively low maintenance, and is easier to deploy. No need to be hostile.

>>10429095
Well several 2100 cubic meter habs still offers you an enormous and unprecedented amount of space to work with, not to mention you could build hubs to latch several of them together and then set them spinning to rapidly create gargantuan habitat "flowers" which generate enough simulated gravity for long term living and working environments, something like this shitty five minute sketch would have something in the ballpark of 16800m^3 of habitable volume, you could convert a few to airless storage modules and have rockets send up large shipments of components to be assembled into ships or satellites in orbit, letting you put together even bigger objects which might not fit even in 8-10m fairings.

>>10428249
But the new Roadster is supposed to have gas thrusters on it.

interesting to think that energy generation will sort of be the currency of space colonies. if you have energy, you can make stuff and go places

>>10429300
Well, you need energy, water, metals, and plastic. If you have those four then you're set.

>>10429312
and, in the near future, prostitutes as well. imo the future space colonies will be degenerate fuckfests half the time

And we're live!

>>10429361

NASA redhead is CUTE

Cute

>>10429321
GET SOME ASS ON MARS

Actual launch thread for Dragon 2 DM-1 is here y'all >>10424117

>>10429469
forgot pic

>>10429474
it's a goddamn sticky

well that was a launch!

>>10429868
The other two astronauts are skinnier and luck a lot better in the suits.

>>10429888
this is for sure a skinny person suit
the mannequin it looks so good on is super skinny

>>10429888
it's sort of a once piece zip design, I bet it gives them a lot of mobility though

helmets are great I think.

>>10429894
Yeah, I think going with hollywood costume designers was interesting but the problem being they designed it for hollywood stars' bodies.

>>10429900
they aren't that bad

>>10429896
supposedly the helmets fit great and are comfortable but don't provide much mobility of the neck (probably a good thing in a launch suit lol)
Boeings retarded looking bubble helmet are supposedly really easy to move in

>"Weather is 80% GO"

With the black tower and scary weather, 39A is starting to look a lot like Mordor...

couple questions
1. what's this?
2. the rocket's acceleration significantly jumped after passing max q, what's up with that?

>>10429945
plume due to gas expansion. They throttle down at max q due to loads; after it the thrust increases again. Also less mass, and less atmosphere so more acceleration

>>10429945
that's a rocket exhaust
the acceleration jumped after Max Q because the atmosphere thins out and they throttle back up to max

>>10429945
>the rocket's acceleration significantly jumped after passing max q, what's up with that?
The rocket throttles its engines back up since the stresses on the vehicle are gonna get smaller after MaxQ

>>10429945
Google “falcon 9 acceleration profile” for a bunch of community graphs and stuff

>>10429868
not that it matters in the big scheme of things but they look like fat fucks in that suit.

>>10429979
early practice for a jello baby colony. Have you seen the Boeing suits? The asses are phat

>>10429974
>>10429956
>>10429954
>>10429950
thanks anons

>>10429021

NASA's moon program includes commercial projects, so that situation cannot exist. Did you even read NASA's moon plans at all? It explicitly allows for this plausibility because they are building to it.

>>10429984
have you read the moon plans? the openings for commercial participation are for designing, essentially, apollo 2.0 modules of ascent, command, and capsule

30 SECONDS

>>10428304
Even better.
>both providers are approved
>pick the more expensive option

>>10429868
hehehe, should have done the infinite warfare suits
maybe the spaceforce *navy* will have that

Meh the Falcon Heavy was still more kino

>>10425943

EU's Arianne program is going to have a hard time justifying its launch rocket costs when Starship starts flying and is able to fly on an annual basis with 1-2 launches per year. Especially if SpaceX decides to build a Starfreighter that can haul 100-150T to LEO.

"Oh your Arianne launcher can put 24T to LEO and the rocket is not reusable? That's cute. Starfreighter can launch up to 6x and is fully reusable."

So you can imagine the sheer benefit that would be for ride sharing satellites. A single ship being able to launch up to 5 Arianne 6 equivalent payloads in 1 launch to multiple orbits before returning to earth for landing/refueling and being ready to launch again. Additionally, the Arianne 6 is 90M euros per launch, which is 102.4M USD. So, 5x that means $512M in launch costs on the Arianne 6 for 5 different payloads.

Elon says here: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-starship-super-heavy-cost-ticket-mars-2019-2 | That Starship payload costs would be 10x cheaper over F9 payload to LEO which is about 25T, same as Arianne 6, except we have an overwhelming empirical statistic that F9 is reusable to the point where launch costs (being $60M for new cores) are considerably less likely with reused cores instead. Arguably, probably, around $30M for a reused core. So in essence, a single Starship launch would be able to deliver the same level of payload to into LEO (at ~$150M) as 5 Arianne 6 launches at essentially 1/3rd the price. With the exception of NatSec payloads in EU, I can't reasonably imagine any Satellite company would look at the Arianne launch family and go "yeah, its worth our dime to spend money on this instead of cutting a check to SpaceX for an F9 launch or a Starship launch to LEO."

>>10429982
>Boeing suits
yeah Boeing suits are ridiculous, id be curious to see what a company like apple would do if it was tasked with designing a space suit

press conf, coming up now

>>10430007
Link: https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/#public

>>10429985

Yes, and?

>>10428304

>>10430010
the apollo 2.0 modules that NASA is asking commercial crew pretty explicitly exclude Starship by specifying a diameter limit

I'm sure starship could be used no matter what; NASA couldn't really say no to them just delivering a big tank of water or raw materials to the surface assuming the prices are cheap

>>10430007
You can tell Elon will be in attendance because it's been delayed 5 minutes...

3 minutes to go according to Foust

>>10430016
what nasa is asking for is again pure retardation.
*GUYs we want a specialized shit that can fit into our specialized shitty rocket to be use on the moon that may or may not be delayed into infiniti.

the reason for the diameter limit is because of nasa needing** to put that into sls.
why bother with all that nonsense when the BFR can just land on the moon itself.

>>10430028
yeah... a truly open architecture/base plan would have standards for docking and power /communication / spacespace safety & not much else. Let the engineers do their engineering without a tome of requirements to slog though

Elon and Jim!

>>10430028

If SpaceX can get the Starship to circle the moon before SLS launches, NASA will have a hard time justifying SLS. If They manage to land it on the Moon and take off before SLS launches with crew and cargo for an actual mission. It will be impossible to justify outside of "the admin is corrupt and retarded." Which will massively damage their reputation worldwide.

Elon, Doug and Jim!
Elon looks so fucking bored

Is Jim the most based NASA admin yet?

man he's so nervous

>>10430042
that's his thinking face

>>10430048
he looks really incredibly out of it
he sounds incredibly out of it

Elon needs some public speaking lessons

>>10430061
I think he needs a drink and a nap

>>10430061
he's an engineer at heart anon
also he was great in meme review

>>10430039
as it stands spacex can land on the moon right now, once bfr is built they could simply land on the moon for shits and giggles.The only fall out from preventing musk for being bold enough to do that without telling nasa would buracrats holding government contracts. i simply cannot wait for NASA to be relegated to being the FAA of space and being told to fuck off when cool shit wants to be done.
the FAA doesnt state where a Boeing plane can or cannot go, they just want make sure standards and safety is adhered to(which is fair)

they're posting inside video soon!

he's picking up now that he's talking about his shit

>the everyday Astronaught

TIMDODD EVERYDAY ESTRONOAUT
holy shit he asked a good question

>>10430075
>>10430076
How can someone so soi be so based

>>10430080
maybe he should be bumped up the chart

>>10430072
He still stutters and shit a lot. I'm not gonna nail him for it but some couching wouldn't go a miss.

>>10430076
elon got btfod

Is Elon okay?

>>10430076
what did he ask again

>>10430075
>>10430076
He usually asks technical questions (that he gets from his community or that interests him) while the press usually goes for more news story type questions.

>>10430085
He asked about the hydraulic stall of the grid fin system. How they fixed it, how fixing it affected the freeze on the F9 design, etc

>>10430076
for the people who arent tuned in,maybe you could relay the question to us on the board

>>10430084
hell no that man needs a nap
>>10430085
he was asking about how much of a freeze NASA had placed on the Falcon 9 design for Commercial Crew, and the hydraulic stall of the grid fin system

>>10430089
gridfin hydraulic issue was fixed with a relief valve. block5 freeze isn't that freezy, they can still make changes with nasa oversight

Will Dragon 2 use TDRS like the shuttle? Or will we get communication blackouts during re-entry? Is that even a thing anymore (does Soyuz blackout?)

>>10430089
Just watch the stream faggot

https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html#public

>>10430086
because most journalists are useless mouthbreathers and many dont have the passion to know about the details they just want to ask silly questions about "why wasnt the zipper pink to show support for breast cancer"

where is the post launch conf stream?

Please stop asking Elon question Man is clearly barely awake

>>10430092
more like a slush

>>10430098
NASA TV
there's a youtube stream with rewind up to like six hours or something so go now
>>10430099
honestly the best time to ask an engineer questions because he's less likely to remember he's not supposed to tell you something

>>10430097
That question about re-entry over populated are was pretty good. Who asked that? Though the answer from NASA was a little sparse.

And please somebody throw some questions to the astronauts actually flying in DM-2.

>>10430094
we will always get blackouts during reentry due to the reentry heating and plasma absolutely whiting out any signal you could ever try to send

>>10430106
It may be possible to use x-ray comm system during reentry.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315536539_Potential_application_of_X-ray_communication_through_a_plasma_sheath_encountered_during_spacecraft_reentry_into_earth's_atmosphere

Umm, you know, so. Fly. so, umm, you know, like, umm, yeah. so, we know. yeah. umm

>>10430111
no one is going to go through that trouble just so you can jerk off to landing vids

these questions are dumb

>>10430114
he hates talking about himself he just wants to talk about his capsule

>>10430119
I just want somebody to ask about the suits

>>10430126
data was "good" from Ripley

>>10430119
like i said, unless someone is a geek enthusiast or engineer training they should be allowed in that room.
Theres a reason everyone at bloomberg who reports knows the subject they all trained for it.
Personally i think journalists need to be trained (like receive certification) for different aspects of the news.

>most of the questions are about Elon's feelings
goddamn media vultures

>>10430127
I want to know about the astronauts opinions on SpaceX suits
the astronauts are doing a pretty good job of talking and making their own questions whenever they get the chance because these journalists won't oblige them

>>10424479
earth is flat

>>10430130
yeah it's annoying
is this man about to start crying holy shit Elon pull yourself together

is elon stoned

Elon just reiterated that "we should have a manned base on the moon, and then a permanantly manned based on Mars"

Key wording here was "we should", not "we will"

>>10430136
He's on 1.5 hours of sleep, basically the same thing

>>10430136
I think he's like 3/10 about to start crying from relief, 3/10 about to pass the fuck out from sleep deprivation, and 4/10 a big nerd

>>10430136
too many drugs with Grimes

>>10430137
You've got the context wrong, he's talking about how we should have bases their by now because Apollo was 50 years ago.

SpaceAXED

WE MOON NOW

Finally Jim gets a chance to talk

>>10430137
if his team makes Starship real it should have the capability but they would only have a vehicle, not a whole integrated base system

promising words from Jim

>going to mars is also high on NASA's agenda
>Pls forget the fact we have been ignoring the guy with a realistic mars plan for like 30 years

Have they asked if he's going to fly in dragon himself yet? They usually don't miss the chance to ask the same fucking question every time.

>>10430147
I've never actually listened to this guy, he sure knows how to talk
most of this is politik, not science words however

>>10430156
Yeah Jim seems pretty based

man this man can speak

>>10430158
earth is flat

>>10430160
yeah, he basically said "yes but where would I go" except he didn't say that, he just said "yes it's a good vehicle"

>>10430160
he said yes; it's a good design he says

>>10430161
Yeah. He is a politician. But maybe NASA need guys like him to make sure NASA is well funded.

>Elon how do you feel about this
>Elon how did x make you feel
>Elon wen u fly on roket
>Elon what are your feelings about x

Journalist massacre when?

It's not about increasing NASA's budget, Jim

It's about using that money more effectively instead of wasting it on doomed projects like SLS

>>10430176
Better round them up and pack them into Soyuz vehicles in a decade or so. As volunteer laborers on the moon base.

>>10430176
Everybody loves Elon

This is just how they express their adoration
>Elon please be my friend

>>10430178
NASA should more like darpa, just use the money to "venture cap" promising projects
the engineers can work closely with the companies and teams

>>10430176

>>10430183
pournelle always was a big fan of x projects. There are some good write ups on his website with some numbers and great justification, RIP the dude

Gotta re read the falkenberg series sometimes

>>10430181
it's nice to have a billionaire ceo that isn't an out of touch cunt for once
the whole SPACE thing just makes it better

>>10430184
Kek holy shit did he actually tweet that?

>>10430190
yeah

>>10430176
>mfw the only one to ask a real question was fucking Dodd

>>10430192
Based and spacepilled

>>10430183
>NASA should more like darpa

Quoted for truth. Let NASA handle funding, regulation and advanced research, and let commercial companies execute the actual spaceflight goals. After the Shuttle and the SLS, I do not have any trust in NASA being able to do great things anymore.

>>10430200
really? I lost faith after Skylab burned up

>>10430193
Update the chart?

>>10430200
i lost faith after james webb and that fact that nasa is making returning to the moon seem like theyve never done it before.

>>10430211
>60 years later
>Yeah so we are going back to the moon guise
>Soibois - Wooooooooooooooo
>Everyone else - what the fuck have you been doing for half a century

>>10430211
they haven't, all the apollo guys are dead or retired

>>10430215
>nasa replying uhhhhhh uhhhh

post on Boca Chica FB group

>>10430230
I WANT TO SEE A RAPTOR BUUUURRRRRNNNNNNN

>>10430230
Hmmm do static tests mean their going to practice fuelling and purging the thing? Or does it mean static firing?

>>10430247
BURNS, BABY
BURNSSSSS
ALL THREE, ALL THREEEEEE

>>10430230
Dude my dad works for SpaceX too!

>>10430247
Based on how it works with serious rockets, all of the above.

>>10430285
I'm just wondering if SpaceX will transport the hopper to the pad without engines first to do tanking tests, because it seems like the Raptors are what's delaying the hops.

>>10429868
hopefully Dava Newman's suit becomes more than a meme

>>10424743
NASA maybe. SpaceX possibly. Proofs?

>>10430296
I expect SpaceX to at least consult with her research group extensively.

>>10430296
These actually look good. Futuristic, but not in a toyish way like the SpaceX suits.

>>10430230
That's quite the delay from the initial feburary target.

>>10429089
This is meaningless slander. Post supporting evidence if you have any

>>10427525
Instead of inflatable, why not have Ikea style modules?

Either self assembled (by a robot or otherwise) or through human EVA.

I just wish somebody would finally start to test out artificial gravity in space. All colonisation plans are pretty pointless if that doesn't work out.

>>10430313
It's just a mockup, but the concept is pretty interesting. Instead of gas pressurization it uses wires embedded in the material that tighten and apply pressure to the body.

>>10430331
Yep, how fucking hard would a spinning cylinder with a few pods that hold rats at different gees be?

Meanwhile they send up the gorrilionth rats in 0g experiment, what a joke. Literally the most important fucking question and we don't have an answer because scientists chasing grants need to circlejerk over muh microgravity experiments.

>>10430350
Well, you would have some sort of minimum diameter for it to work out. But still, you'd need two small pods, a 500-1000m cable, and a centre weight. Then just put mice in there or whatever and see how they are doing via cameras. One single Atlas 5 or Falcon 9 could easily put it into LEO.

>>10430357
You don't need a huge radius, the only reason for that is humans getting sick due to rotation, this whole experiment could easily be done inside a small crate sized container.

>>10430366
Mice would get sick, too. The whole point is 1. to check if it works at all 2. to see how small you can go while still not causing side effects 3. develop mechanisms to cancel out "wobbling" caused by things moving inside the pods.

>>10430350
There were almost no rat reproduction experiments done even in zero-g. That alone would go a long way towards proving the viability of space colonization. It is quite ridiculous..

>>10430372
>to check if it works at all

Uh, I'll give you a hint, it does.

>>10430381
You don't know that. The direction of the force would be slightly different so it is hard to tell if it is going to work at all or feel "off" and potentially cause side effects.

>>10430386
No, this is basic physics. We can talk about what is the smallest radius to make Coriolis acceptable. But make the radius large, and we know it will work. It is just engineering, not science.

>>10430390
You absoluetely do not know if it works or not, because it was never tested. As I said, the forces are not identical so you can't know if they are interchangeable.

>>10424819
>canadarm 3
https://ironsky.fandom.com/wiki/Canadarm

>>10430400
>You absoluetely do not know if it works or not, because it was never tested
>Spin bucket on rope
>Water stays in bucket

Wow that was hard, you are going to need to clarify the magic effects that planetary gravity has over spin gravity since you are just making up retarded shit.

>>10430413
Obviously, the water in that bucket would behave completely differently compared to a water in a lake and that is the whole point

>>10430419
I don't know what to say to you dude, you are just fucking retarded.

>>10430428
Of course you don't because you don't know anything about physics.

>>10430419
>Lake
>Downward applied force with rotational coriolis from planetary spin

>Bucket
>Downward applied force with rotational coriolis from bucket spin

Literally fucking identical

>>10430319
Musk is low-key facing jail time for his stock price manipulation and for embezzling SpaceX investor funds to prop up Tesla.

>>10430430
>Hurr U r uneducated

>>10430439
I sure wish the SEC would actually convict all these fucking people guilty of massive collusion of global markets and not some dude who makes shitty meme cars and rockets. What a joke of an organisation.

>>10430439
Source? I call BS.

>>10430444
He shouldn't have posted it.

>>10430439
no, he is facing a fine and stepping down from Tesla leadership for his tweet, nothing more

>>10430431
You don't even know how gravity acts on matter you fucking shit

>>10430439
I'll look into it, thanks. I suspect he just doesn't give a fuck about the law in order to accomplish the thing he wants to do, which is different than a Theranos case. If he just wanted to embezzle investor money for personal financial gain he would've quit after Paypal sale and gone VC

>>10430447
Zerohedge

>>10430450
Force is a force, you moron.

>>10430450
Gravity is a simple downward force, unless you have a source to show me it has magical side effects other than being a downward force?

>>10430451
>VC

You do realize though Elon Musk has become way richer than Peter Thiel, who did what you suggested?

Where do you know from Elon Musk didn't found SpaceX because he realized launching for the government is probably the most profitable legal business there is? And did he really buy Tesla because he wanted to stop climate change, or because he realized there is big time government money you can grab?

>>10430453
great source right there lol

>>10430296
neat

>>10430464
Shit off Tyler Durden.

>>10430469
I'm just saying. Elon Musk is clearly a psychopath and concerned about his own net worth first and foremost. The whole "saviour of humanity" thing is probably just a neat trick he discovered to make himself richer and more powerful.

>>10430464
>he realized launching for the government is probably the most profitable legal business there is

Fucking hardly. For that you need to be a cost+ preferred contractor with decades of bribing congressmen in your pocket.

>>10430478
Clearly. Between not allowing his workers to unionize, and privatizing our once glorious space program to the lowest bidder, Elon Musk is a menace to the public that needs to be eliminated. People like him will be the first against the wall when the glorious revolution comes. Am I right, comrade?

>>10430485
He literally got almost 300 million blank cheque from NASA (twice his net worth back then) just for founding SpaceX.

>>10430486
Im not saying what he is doing is good or bad, im saying hes a psychopath who doesnt care about humanity and only sees humans as ressources he can exploit.

>>10424948
Why are people getting paid to work on this?
Its obviously an April fools joke.

>>10430491
>im saying hes a psychopath who doesnt care about humanity and only sees humans as ressources he can exploit.

And I am saying you do not know shit about what is going on in his head or what his motivation is.

>>10430491
>He literally got almost 300 million blank cheque from NASA (twice his net worth back then) just for founding SpaceX.

Source needed

>>10430491
>He literally got almost 300 million blank cheque from NASA (twice his net worth back then) just for founding SpaceX.
no, he got it after he launched the first private orbital rocket, not for founding spacex, and he got it to develop Falcon 9 and Dragon, which he did, for mere peanuts as far as aerospace funding goes

>>10430491
He seems like too much of a stuttering weirdo to be a psychopath.

>>10430478
That is possible, however....do you psychopaths stutter nervously when public speaking? I guess they could do so as an act. Do they get excited when talking about what they're working on like he did with Marquess Brownley's video? Do they lash out in anger where everyone can see (on Twitter against the cave diver)? I'm not extremely familiar with psychopathy, but from what I know, he does not appear to fit the bill. More like an autistic engineer with disregard for lots of people opinions

>>10425095
in the grim darkness of the 21st century, there is only social justice war

This is a cool picture...

>>10430495
>>10430496
>>10430497
>>10430498
>>10430500
Actual engineering nerds don't end up as heads of global companies that are worth tens of billions, actual engineering nerds end up getting exploited by people like Elon Musk.

The list of billionaires consists of three kind of people:

1. people who inherited
2. people who had a lucky investment decades ago and are still enjoying the wealth while not being interested in further enriching themselves
3. Psychopaths

Elon Musk is not category 1 or 2, so he's category 3. Like Donald Trump realized how much power you can get over people by talking about how much you hate minorities and appeal to tribal instincts, Elon Musk realized how much power you can get by talking about space colonization and appealing to survival instincts. Both dont really give a fuck about the topics they talk about, they are just tools to get more powerful.

>>10430526
4. Normal people, but with workoholic tendencies, smart and a bit of luck

But yes, you can tell yourself that all the rich are psychopaths if it makes you sleep better at night. But you are just an idiot.

>>10430548
>4. Normal people, but with workoholic tendencies, smart and a bit of luck

look at mr ultra naive over here.

>>10430526
>>10430555
Resentful, low-paid engineer detected.

Next SpaceX launch when?

>>10430526
>tfw everyone who's successful is a psychopath
where were you when anon enlightened us on the truth. might as well kill yourself now if you have emotions as you'll never amount to anything unlike the master race :^)

>>10430570
Falcon Heavy-Arabsat 6A

Late March or early April

>>10430500
Let's go through the check list for psychopathy

>pathological lying
lol, not even a question with Elon Musk, this guy can't last a day without spouting some grandiose lies

>extreme narcissm
yes, elon loves the attention of his 25 million twitter followers.

>superficial charm
Elon had multiple plastic surgeries to enhance his attractiveness and puts a lot of effort into the presentation shows of his new "ideas", so yes

>unstable relationships
Yes, always up to banging some mentally unstable chick

>constant need for stimulation and approval
lol, yes, obviously

>ability to manipulate others
just look at all these Muskrats doing his bidding voluntarily. Plus, he is known to be an A+ fundraiser, e.g. manipulating other rich people into giving him money

>impulsiveness
Cave diver incident plus dozens of stories of former employees where Elon would fire people on the spot for doing one thing wrong and routinely getting into tantrums.

>lack of remorse and empathy
Elon when a Tesla crashed and the driver died in a fire: Great, new data to improve Teslas!

I'd say Elon would easily score at least 35 out of 40 points in a psychopath rating.

>>10430548
well not all of them are but they might fall somewhere in the spectrum.however,I think Donal Trump and Elon Musk do not care about anything else but money,power and fame.

>>10430578
This is the truth. But on the bright side, psychopaths don't think other people have souls because they themselves don't have one. They are the literal NPCs in this world.

>>10430587
SEETHING

Wow so much spaceflight discussion, we should rename this thread the psychoanalysis general...

>>10430680
Super Heavy? Doesn’t need to be shiny...

>>10426839
>university project
Don't claim this is South Africa's best, they are the masters of rocket artillery.

Don’t know if you people realized this or not but the next spacex launch is a falcon heavy

>>10430706
says falcon 9 launching radarsat for canada is next

>>10430706
Really? I thought the next one was the Dragon Max-Q abort test.

>>10430706
>>10430711
>>10430714
FH was supposed to launch in feburary but got delayed for an unspecified amount of time.

>>10430733
Arabsat's current NET is March 9, but that's undoubtedly going to slip due to pad reconfiguring and extra testing.

>>10430737
29th*

>>10429979
>Does this space suit make me look fat uguu?

>>10430133

>>10430751
That's not official yet, I don't think. Hopefully the 29th sticks, apparently it's due to needing more time for testing the satellite.

>>10430164
>>10430165
He always came off as a bit of a stuttering autist to me, and not one who's well-informed like Elon.

>>10430800
Jim is definitely not a stuttering autist, he's a great public speaker.

>>10430815
Are we talking about the same Jim? I watch him interview his underlings on nasa TV and their eyes all glaze over when starts talking..

>>10430838
How the fuck is Elon Tusk the center of attention in a picture with four fucking astronauts?

>>10430846
>rocket tips over
>my hard hat will save me!
lol at OSHART

>>10430847
Because he's the chief designer of the rocket and capsule their going to launch on in a few months? Also, he has a nice coat, their probably admiring it...

>>10430843
It's cool to see all the pads in the background.

>>10430856
I don't know. The jumpsuits look mighty comfy to me.

>>10430847
>>10430856
Because you two are annoying fanboys who would like to suck his cock.

>>10430856
>>10430863
Jump suits are too utilitarian and look fine only when you are actually in a real environment that requires one, like a sub or the space station.

Also long coat master race.

>>10430847
It could be that the photographer is trying to capture both the Dragon capsule and the people, but it just happens that Musk is in the center.

>>10430448
>greentexting on Twatter

>>10430929
what is that?

>>10430949
falcon launch from vandenberg as seen from downtown los angeles. you can see the first stage separation when that big cloud is made.

>>10430964
is it color enhanced like NASA pics?

>>10430980
no

>>10430980
supposedly it only looks like that because it's sunset. if it was a day or night launch then you wouldn't see much of anything.

>>10430997
>because it's sunset
you're probably right

Calm the fuck down Jeff. Your company barely has a suborbital hopper so stop hallucinating about trillion people colonies.

>>10431016
The salt of you guys when New Glenn bankrupts SpaceX will be so delicious.

>>10431032
You wish. Even if New Glenn succeeds, it will just be Falcon Heavy 2.0. Get back to us when New Armstrong flies.

>>10431039
It will be cheaper than Falcon 9 to launch per payload so Falcon 9 wont do much anymore besides Crew flights to the ISS.

>>10431016
>MY space colonies
Here comes the era of neomonarchy with nuneocolonialism. This democracy thingy was just a phase and never really stand on it's own.

>watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuXPLtJXd14
>musk says that they will launch tourists to the ISS sometime and NASA has already approved it (~31:20)
based

>>10431081
people didnt give a fuck when a seat to iss was only 15 million and on dragon a seat is 60 million.

>>10430404

Needs more Macross design philosophies in there, with foldable arms and retraction frames. Basically 10x more origami.

>>10431048
>It will be cheaper than Falcon 9 to launch per payload
Only if you have an enormous payload. Heavy GEO sats aren't a growth industry.

I'm actually really disappointed by Elon. He claimed he wants to make space access cheaper, but now a seat on Dragon costs exactly the same as a seat on Boeing. The mars plans are also not on the agenda anymore, instead he wants to support NASA's plans and go to the moon.

SpaceX is turning into oldspace really fast. In 5 years they are probably going to join ULA to squeeze more money out of american taxpayers.

>>10431100
That's a seat for NASA, government launches always come with special requirements that jack up the costs. Commercial launches will be significantly cheaper due to less hoops for SpaceX to jump through.

>>10431114
Mars is still on the agenda. There's just a big Moon rush in the works so he's trying to capitalize on it.

>>10431114
>I'm actually really disappointed by Elon. He claimed he wants to make space access cheaper, but now a seat on Dragon costs exactly the same as a seat on Boeing.
He also claims that reuse will bring down the price of spaceflight, but it hasn't happened at all.

>>10431116
Source?

>>10431113
New Glenn has dual launch capability. It can launch two GTO satellites 6,2 tonnes each time, or up to three LEO satellites each 12 tonnes.

>>10431114
You know that Crew Dragon and Starliner will only fly twice year right? They need to make some money somehow, SpaceX only underbids on competitive contracts, for shoe ins like CRS-2 they bid at normal levels because more contract money equals more Starship funding.

>>10431130
They already got more than 3 billion for development, manufacture, and demo flights. It's not like they need to recoup R&D costs, because those are already paid for by the american taxpayer.

>>10431125
So New Glenn currently has a whopping total of 1 GTO launch scheduled then? Blue are lucky they snagged the Telesat contract otherwise their ship would be scuttled.

>>10431125
>dual launch
The memey-est of memes. Nobody wants enough GEO sats to make launching them profitable long-term.

>>10431130
>You know that Crew Dragon and Starliner will only fly twice year right?
For NASA, yes. They only want brand new capsules for ISS crew missions, so SpaceX will have a pile of only-used-once Dragon2 capsules that it can use to launch its own space tourists.

>>10431122
this, the ISS has created a lot of succesfull projects in research to microgravity,etc..
But now its comming to its end.
The next logical step is to have a running moonbase when ISS finaly burns up in orbit.
Its best to test these things close to earth so we can intervene instead then doing all this on mars.

>>10431135
don't forget 3 free government launch pads

in fact the only launch pad they've had to pay for was the one they blew up and had to rebuild

>>10431124
>reuse will bring down the price of spaceflight
it already has, but why would spacex lower the price they charge when there is no competition? once there are competing reusing rockets the price will drop

>>10431137
New Glenn has more contracts than Falcon Heavy and it hasn't even flown yet :^)

>>10431143
>it already has
Wrong.

>>10431146
read the full text before responding!

>>10431145
But the majority are for mega constellations, so if those fail they have little to no business. Falcon Heavy is doing fine with it's military contracts.

>>10431142
>free
the companies lease the launch pads

>>10431140
>The memey-est of memes.

Are you retarded? Ariane 5 being able to dual launch is the reason it the only reason it still is the most succesful commercial rocket despite being a big old throwaway rocket.

One New Glenn launch can replace 2-3 Falcon 9 launches depending on the mission profile. So as long as they are going to end up only twice as expensive per launch as Falcon 9 is, they are going to eat it for launch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=1gRuXIGNn6s

Watch a liquid-fuel sounding rocket launch

>>10431154
>he doesn't know...

>>10431150
Did you pay to build your apartment before you rent it?
Retard.

>>10431158
>shifting the goalposts

>>10431157
>he doesn't know how to greentext
Back to your shithole reddit, faggot

>>10431160
Prove that they are leasing the pads, and show they are paying rent to do so.

>>10431162
>'muh reddit'

Lol

>>10431149
If mega constellations fail, SpaceX goes bankrupt and Blue Origin thrives.

If mega constellations succeed, SpaceX doesn't go bankrupt and Blue Origin thrives by launching starlink's competition.

>>10431167
Let's see them launch a satellite first. ANY satellite.

>>10431169
*snap*

>>10431169
You do realize though that all of BOs employees have industry experience, because BO, unless SpaceX, doesn't hire you if you don't, and that the team that build New Shepard is basically the same that build the Delta clipper, just paid by Bezos instead of NASA, and that there is actually a huge stream going on since 2 years from SpaceX employees going from SpaceX to BO? So while BO under its own brand didn't launch an orbital rocket yet, it is completely obvious that they are capable to and will so it soon.

>>10431167
OneWeb has a PR problem. Alot of people know about Starlink but few people know about OneWeb (or they forget about them). It'll take OneWeb awhile before they get enough industry traction. This is going to be a money issue for them for awhile as they fight to gain customers.

>>10431183
OneWeb isn't going into consumer business, they will do b2b. If a lot of people knew about them they really would have a PR problem.

>>10431183
>OneWeb has a PR problem. Alot of people know about Starlink but few people know about OneWeb (or they forget about them).
Source?

>>10431135

If I was a reasonably well researched American tax payer, I'd be asking my rep in congress to increase NASA's budget with explicit requests on sending more money to SpaceX for the building of Starship, Startanker and Starfreighter; with additional funding going out to agencies who'd be able to build sustainable and habitation payloads that can be ferried on both Starship/Freighter variants as well as BlueOrigin's NewGlenn and NewAlan launch vehicles.

Conservative designs with capsules and expendable rockets is not going to get us to the Moon or Mars in a cost-effective and sustainable manner with multi-annual launches across multiple launch providers to deliver mission critical payloads for long-term habitation of crew, space based goals involving resource mining/refinement/use, as well as development of new areas of science and technologies in zero-G or 1/4th gee environments.

It happens to be that Musk will end up with majority of the contracts because he's started and overseen several companies who ultimately factor back into off-world missions:

>SpaceX for launch vehicles
>Tesla for autonomous vehicles and powerwalls
>Boring Company for subsurface drilling and tunneling with a width of 14 feet (https://www.boringcompany.com/faq)) | which means 4.26m wide tunnel. Assuming a loss of 1 meter to a protective all around shell with segmented reinforcements, you'd still be looking at around a 3 meter usable volume for equipment and livable space

Electric motors with high torque and range/capability will be what ultimately drives long-term presence on Moon and Mars. So far, Tesla exceeds that in the market. But any car company investing in EVs can get in on that now. Imagine NASA contracting Tesla to build 12T in Tesla Powerwalls (220lbs each) which gives you 109 powerwalls @ 5.6 kWh usable energy at 100% storage per. So, with NG and FH ferrying the electrical infrastructure, the Moon can now have .61MWh in capacity. Many possibilities in pipe over 20yrs.

>>10431146
This isn't even accurate. SpaceX charges ~$80 million for a GTO sat on a reused booster and $120 million for any government mission.

>>10431194
This the most deluded muskrat-post in this thread so far, congrats.

>>10431194
>3 meter usable volume

>>10431194
i know this will seem like a completely retarded question but arent we trying to "pollute" mars to make it warmer so cant we just burn methane there to make an atmosphere

>>10429906
Why so many while males?

>>10431181
BO still has yet to launch anything into space, listen, its great there will be a "UPS" to spacex's "FEDEX" but you cant talk about how great your shipping and postge will be when you dont even have a single delivery truck.

>>10431199

It's a hypothetical, disphit. Simply outlining existing capabilities. Anyone can get in on this market because of the existence of multiple commercial standard and heavy launch vehicles that can deliver payload to LEO, GTO, and beyond. I also said 20 years, so anything can happen in the market across the board. Finally, with a 2000 character limit, I can only state so much. Delusion my ass.

>>10431200

Well, according to the site, the Boring machine has reduced the tunnel diameter from 28 feet to 14 feet. Which is 4.26 meters, taking away 1-1.25 meters for a protective shell of the material say used in the BEAM modules: https://astrowright.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-beam-but-were-afraid-to-ask/ | which is significantly stronger than kevlar and does a good job of micrometeorite protection + pretty solid radiation shielding, would leave you with a usable interior of roughly 3 meters in diameter. 9 feet is quite a bit of space, considering how small the livable volume of each segment of the ISS is.

>>10431210

>pollute mars

Well, it's not a stupid question per se--though your timescales are off. It would take us an industry roughly the size of a say Texas all focused on being as pollutant as possible tens of decades maybe a century or more to generate enough gases to thicken the atmosphere, in order to retain heat long enough to begin melting of the polar ice-caps as well as bring the water trapped in the martian soil back into liquid state and allow us to make a Blue Mars. Timescales well beyond our lifetime.

It's better to focus on a long-term sustainable presence on the Moon for several reasons, but primarily due to proximity to Earth (for emergency access), as well as cost and transfer of mission critical materials. Also, the Moon is reported to have plenty of water ice that we can access at the poles & dark side. There's likely a significant amount subsurface + usable mineral resources for building new habitats.

>>10431218
They did launch something into space, but not into orbit. If you want to shitpost, at least learn your facts.

>>10431218
>BO still has yet to launch anything into space
unironically factually incorrect

>>10431221
>It's a hypothetical, disphit.

Yeah man, it's totally not deluded thinking Tesla power walls and those ultra shitty boring single-lane tunnels are going to happen on Moon and Mars.

>>10431221
>Well, according to the site, the Boring machine has reduced the tunnel diameter from 28 feet to 14 feet. Which is 4.26 meters, taking away 1-1.25 meters for a protective shell of the material say used in the BEAM modules: https://astrowright.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-beam-but-were-afraid-to-ask/ | which is significantly stronger than kevlar and does a good job of micrometeorite protection + pretty solid radiation shielding, would leave you with a usable interior of roughly 3 meters in diameter. 9 feet is quite a bit of space, considering how small the livable volume of each segment of the ISS is.

>>10431227

They have to. You can't run gasoline or fossil fuel generators on the moon, since they need oxygen to function you retard--oxygen that humans also need to live. On top of that, living in inflated habitats on the moon is a bad fucking idea since it doesn't have a magnetic field of its own that can protect against solar radiation and meteorite impacts. Only way to protect against both is to bore subsurface upwards of 5-10 meters and then build a ringed habitat that's anywhere from 5-10 meters wide and then line the inner surface with BEAM-like material so you can inflate and have a breathable atmosphere--whilst running power lines out to the surface for solar panels to gather the energy which is fed into either Tesla Powerwalls or the equivalent of kWh battery packs that can store it for long-term use.

Good luck convincing NASA and DoD and god knows which other agency in sending up nuclear material to build a fission reactor on the Moon at scale to provide long-term energy availability.

Also, all those are examples. I can't believe you're so fucking retarded that you can't see past that and look at the bigger picture.

>>10430176
Notice how it's almost always the women "journalists" who ask these sorts of questions.

>>10431223
>>10431222
so based on my example of UPS, they drove an empty truck just around the corner

>>10431222
That's not a delivery truck, that's a drag racer.

>>10431258
>>10431257
>>10431252

fuel tank access port?

>>10430016
>>10430028

Because:

1. BFR probably won't work as intended, even if it doesn't blow up on the launch pad NASA wants alternatives in case something goes wrong on a mission and they can't reuse the vehicle
2. The whole point of doing a commercial program is to bid multiple companies against each other, letting a single company become dominant only creates a new monopoly. Even if the BFR worked exactly as specified, NASA wouldn't give it any missions until at least one other competitor is made.
3. Even if all that happens NASA wants everything to be mostly compatible with each other, so there's no issues with proprietary designs not being able to work with each other. This is done to reduce costs and mission risk.

At any rate, if the BFR is what it's cracked up to be then SpaceX will have no problem ferrying large private probes (funded by universities, mining companies, etc) to Mars or wherever. NASA's manned plans don't interrupt this, at the very most it just means the BFR will be used to ferry smaller crew-rated vehicles and equipment to Lunar orbit.

>>10430215
>NASA: getting dicked around by corrupt congressmen, corrupt administrators and lofty presidential goals that are immediately trashed and burned upon the other party getting in power

>>10431114

They sell bespoke products to NASA to provide revenue and to grow their company. With that they can work on Starship which will be the revolutionary technology.

>>10431242
wouldnt we be building in lava tubes or craters away.
re 5 to 10meters, based on nasa drawings and sketches ive seen most show half a meter to 1 meter thick shield of regolith to be used ontop of habitats, but im curious if you can make a dense concrete material from regolith you might be able to make it wall thickness 6" to 8"(inches). Not to mention you;d have paneling on the inside of that wall like apadded drywall to further reduce any radiation threat.

>>10431269
i dont have problem with nasa bidding to different companies, but i do have an issue with nasa setting restrictive the size(volume) requirements which limit innovation,because it **HAS** to fit into an SLS rocket fairing

>>10431290
>but i do have an issue with nasa setting restrictive the size(volume) requirements which limit innovation,because it **HAS** to fit into an SLS rocket fairing
No, it has nothing to do with the SLS. The components that NASA put out an RFP for will not be flown on SLS, but on commercial vehicles that are even more volume and mass constrained than SLS.

>>10430526
>it's another ass blasted commie who hates the idea that other people are more successful than his stoner ass

>>10431290
What a fucking moron.

>>10431290

SLS fairing diameter: 27' 1/2"

777 fuselage diameter: 19'

There's a way to make this work. SpaceX can just build a better rocket supporting the standard payload bay size. Specifically, they can just make the payload bay longer and stack more standardized cargo containers in much like every existing air freight company does. Boeing itself is doing it with their stretched 777-X9.

>>10431295

It's all about SLS continuing and providing new rhetoric for it to gaslight people.

>>10431242
have you seen NASA's kilopower

>>10431344
prove it

>>10431302
>>10431299

how many times is SLS going to launch faggot
once or twice per decade
fuck you faggots for not seeing this as a total waste of time and energy and resources

cap this, BFR /starship will be landing on the moon before any SLS moon lander mission and then you precious NASA fucks can go kill yourselves

>>10431369

Also, regardless of when it launches, it bears mentioning that each launch of the SLS is expected to cost $500M (logistical support included). F9 and FH on the other hand are around 100-120M as I understand it. Also, you're throwing away every single stage up to the capsule with each launch. That's enormously expensive per launch. Finally, factoring in build, testing, and certification, it seems like the turnaround on building of a new SLS Block vehicle is anywhere from 12-14 months, perhaps longer; making re-flight differences considerable.

>>10431348

I'm sure you'll show me.

>>10431287

You could arguably make concrete from lunar regolith, though you'd have to do it in a sealed chamber--because over billions of years, its turned into this razor fine dust--far smaller a grain than what we produce on earth. Biggest challenge will come from three things:

1. Access to water ice
2. Access to electricity in quantifiable amounts that can be dedicated to construction material production
3. Access to a 3D printer that can operate in the vacuum of space and use the lunar concrete that can be applied to the inner surface of a tunnel and MOST IMPORTANTLY, can be dried so in the vacuum of space somehow so that it will harden and form the protective shell.

Unironically, I imagine they'll produce the concrete in a sealed environment and then feed that into a machine that produces lunar bricks. Then use these bricks to create a sealed shell in a tunnel/lava tube; inside of which you'd deploy the inflatable habitat with reinforced segmented struts.

The problem I foresee with lava tubes is that you'd have to dedicate infrastructure to mapping out the interior, doing seismic studies to determine viability as a habitable space, doing material analysis to figure out what the walls are made up of and whether they can be trusted to not cave in on them if there's a material impact somewhere on the moon near to the habitat, etc. All of which costs time, money, and O2 1/2

>>10431287
regarding shielding thickness, it depends on whether you want a completely Earth-like environment, in which case you need like 10 tons per square meter of regolith on top of the habitat, or if you merely want to protect against micrometeorites and solar flares and attenuate cosmic rays somewhat, in which case a ton of regolith is enough, but expect higher cancer rate if people spend years in your colony

>>10431397
>nasa kilopower
source
https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/kilopower/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2IiI4UVZP8

the youtube is a good explanation if you dont want to slog through text

>re regolith concrete
save the water and just super heat it till its molten and pour slabs of it into brick or slab form. only issue is the binding agent to "reinforce it" maybe just carbon fiber

>>10431397

It would be cheaper, arguably, to but something like the Boring Company's driller on the Moon near where water-ice in quantifiable amounts has been discovered and then begin to build a sub-surface habitat within a few kilometers of the deposit, and hopefully that area is also near an area that gets plenty of sunlight.

That way you can throw up your solar panels, feed them into large under battery packs (vacuum rated) that will store energy until you can excavate the water ice and use it with hydrolysis processes to extract oxygen and hydrogen from it. Assuming you brought your supply of nitrogen with you, you can mix it with oxygen and you get your breathable atmosphere. Additionally, the hydrogen can then be used with hydrogen fuel cells to store energy when the battery packs are full (so that you don't waste free energy in an environment, when energy is the system critical integrator). Additionally, for any ships that come to the moon to deliver payload and need hydrogen for fuel, that excess resource can be used to refuel cargo vehicles.

Then, once you have a stable supply of water, oxygen, and hydrogen, you can in the interior tunnel, drill deeper on an incline or parallel to the lunar surface and excavate out additional space which you'll use as your hydrophonics facility. In doing so, you'll be able to recycle human material waste as nutrients for plants (saving you the trouble of shipping fertilizer), and recycling/purifying liquid wastes through systems and plant growth. The added benefit of the hydrophonics facility in addition to producing food and oxygen which is a net gain for the habitat, is that it provides the crew with a connection to home. Seeing green on a sterile atmosphere-less celestial body will reduce psychological stress and keep morale high. Finally, by boring into the surface you are able to provide vast amounts of data for several new areas of growth in space:

1. Sub-surface habitat development

1/3

>>10431418

Thanks will take a look. The binding agent would have to be shipped to the Moon though, which is added cost to payload. In the immediate future of the early human settlement, if we find a large enough water-ice deposit--say 5,000 metric tons of water ice (let's pretend for this example). Then if we factor in that (http://www.conversion-website.com/volume/ton-water-to-gallon-US-liquid.html)) 1 ton of ice = 269 gallons, factoring in loss due to extraction process and purification to get rid of contaminants and we walk away with say 225 gallons of water. We'd still be looking at around 1.125M gallons of water.

Average human on earth uses between 150-175 gallons of water per day. This accounts for cooking, cleaning, and showering. Assuming that showers will be infrequent (like once a week) and operating with an open flame in space would be a bad idea even if you are in a sealed, underground, pressurized habitat, most foods will be dehydrated or frozen to microwave types. At some point open flame cooking WILL be done but in controlled manner out of risk to the crew and habitat. So the only real expenditure will be for the crew initially, so you can basically reduce that number by 50%, and then increase it by 50% again for the hydrophonics facility (let's assume that its there from day one). So... 175 gallons a day into the extracted water of 1.125M gallons. But let's go further and say half of that is shelved for hydrogen fuel cells, atmosphere production for crew & foods, and fuel for landers, rovers, and industry equip. We'd still have enough to support 1 person for 3.2k days or 50 people for 65 days.

2/3

>>10431419

2. Drilling into lunar regolith and rock at industrial scale
3. Off-world resource extraction and refinement
4. Off-world material analysis at industrial scale (which in turn might give us an idea on the type of material resources available below the surface for industry growth in common, uncommon, and rare earth metals), etc.

>>10431369
No matter how much money they dump into launches, there isn't manufacturing capacity to create more than two SLS per year without a major factory build-out. I think the engines are the big limitation.
Remember when Wii was new and there was a shortage? That was because it would have cost Nintendo more to build a new factory than they would make in profit from the extra capacity.

>>10431459
since the moon has a high amount of silicia we could..manufacture solar panels on there couldnt we?

>>10431459

But since you will be recycling as much of the waste as possible and almost all the water that you possibly can, you'd be able to easily extend that number by as much as 150-200%. So a crew of 50 with a single 5,000 ton water-ice deposit would be able to sustain themselves for up to 4 months without a resupply mission for life critical resources (technically, but realistically it'd be 1-1.5 months tops, maybe even less).

All in all, there's a massive amount to be gained by drilling into the surface, excavating a tunnel and converting it into a habitat than to simply explore a lava tube or a crater and build a surface level habitat there. Unlike video games which have cool as shields that can protect from orbital debris and meteorites and asteroids impacting on the surface of the Moon, we don't have that fancy shit. We need to make do with what we have. Building a base on the surface and covering it with regolith is the easiest path, but its also an extremely conservative path--its the kind of path that got us the SLS instead of the Falcon 9, FH, Starship, NewShepperd, NewGlenn, and the landing orbital class boosters on land and on drone ships.

We as a species have all the knowledge and experience we need to apply what we know off-world and do it safely, but to great effect. If we pussyfoot around, it will takes 10-25x longer to achieve the same result.

>>10430843
>mfw elon will never take me on a romantic date over 39A

>>10431459
>Average human on earth uses between 150-175 gallons of water per day

i suspect

1, water processing and oxygen production facilities will be multi billion dollar businesses for space colonies
2. every drop of water will be on a credit system, need 500ml of water...thatll be $10 bux a shower would cost $200 worth of credit shipped in food will be per calorie. luckily creatures like shrimp and shrill and certain algae grow fast which can be grown on the moon. **expect some chem ph'd to make algae/seaweed alcohol on his freetime**

for habitation, you dont want to make spaces too cramp and have enough space for large amount of people to gather so as to not go crazy. yes yes i know early days but if could eventually build out something like pic shown minus the glass covering it would be good for colonists psychology, maybe just find a decent sized crater and build a structure over it and dump regolith on top and put led/lcd panels that mimic day and night cycles.

>>10431479

We could. That will likely come much later though. It would be better to ship the panels via rocket to the Moon for the first decade or so, until we can establish enough of a presence where we can improve our energy storage systems, resource extraction and material production for habitation, hydrolysis, and subsurface large volume access to creating industrial and scientific infrastructure which we can then bring in good talent which can use the resources on hand to design, build, and test products in low-gravity to maximize potential of the product.

It's theorized that producing silica based products in zero-g or even fractional gravity can greatly improve semiconductivity and in turn performance of whatever is created. So, we'd have to manufacture the panels and test them rigorously to find weaknesses/flaws until we can get to like 35-40% efficiency before mass producing them. It's entirely possible that the Moon in the future will become a next-generation manufacturing hub for production of very high efficiency solar panels which are then condensed into blocks and shipped back to earth via Super Heavy Cargo vehicles, allowing for a much greater access of renewables planetside than currently.

Our best solar panels today: https://us.sunpower.com/home-solar/solar-cell-technology-solutions/ | Have a record of 22.8% efficiency. If we can double that over the course of the next 20 years either Earth or Lunar side, we'd have a 2x increase in electricity production per square meter.

https://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/solar-panels/how-much-electricity | At 17.5% average efficiency, we're looking at around 175Wm^2 of usable electricity (of the 1kW that the sun delivers per second). Doubling that would get us 350Wm^2 per hour. That's huge. With 24 hour sun access, we'd see the base get 8.4 kWh daily per square meter. If we had say 10m^2 in panels, that'd get us 84 kWh (roughly Model 3 battery), 100m^2 = 840kWh and 1000m^2 = 8.4MWh.

Major gains.

>>10431502

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/305/5688/1273
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169433205000553
https://www.nature.com/articles/nnano.2011.184
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/185887-whats-better-than-a-carbon-nanotube-chip-a-transparent-and-flexible-carbon-nanotube-and-igzo-chip
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02229
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167577X18305561

^ transparent carbon nanotube films/screens/electrodes/panels

If this fucking meta-material can leave the R&D labs in the next 10-20 years and reach industry scale manufacturing. Then we might be able to, in the next 30-40 years, build a giant ass dome around a crater, then reinforce the crater walls with some kind of a CNT + metal composite and bam. You can now have a dome with sunlight that is strong enough to take micrometerorite impacts and stand, while giving enough surface area inside to allow for large scale habitation, development of industry, manufacturing, green growth, oxygen/foods, etc.

It's literally the most amazing material with unlimited possibilities. It just needs to fucking leave the lab and suddenly, almost any off-world possibility is now within the reach of your fingertips.

>>10431525

Should have said micrometeorite and meteorite impacts at orbital velocities. I'd imagine by the time this dome would finish building, we'd have railguns and shit with satellites tracking bigger rocks that could be a threat to the drone, which'd be taken out well before they'd cross the point of no return and be a threat to the Lunar city.

>>10431525
>almost any off-world possibility is now within the reach of your fingertips.

kinda feels like we are entering the next industrial revolution huh
everything is coming together like people discovering light bulbs,radio waves and microphone speaker technology within years of each other.

Their building a climbing frame...

>>10431568
where are you getting these pics?

>>10431593
pornhub

>>10431597
checks out, I'm getting hard from them

>march
>hopper still hasnt flown
it's supposed to fly before april right?

>>10431642
NET July according to the presser this morning ;^)

>>10431642
my guess is that they had Raptor issues
turns out they didn't get it exactly right on the first try, weird right?

>>10428178
that never left the ground.

>>10431648
It doesn't necessarily have to be issues, think about it: they have to fully and successfully test 3 new engines (not counting the damaged SN-1) at all throttle regimes. That takes time and you want your engines thoroughly tested before putting them on a vehicle.

>>10431648
>first try
third try, and they purposefully broke the engine this time

>>10431666
>>10431651
>>10431648
>>10431642
>>10431624
>>10431597
>>10431593

new space general when?

>>10431697
>hownew.ru
/sci/ is a slow board. When it hits page 10.

>>10431665
the full scale engine didn't perform perfectly, it had some erosion issues or something
probably easy enough to fix
>>10431666
>third try
what did Satan mean by this
>>10431697
>page 6
give it like 6 hours

>>10431644
the hopper, not the dragon

>>10431697
Oh I'm sorry /sci/ doesn't have a mass of gacha game addicts posting all the time about their digital crack, meaning threads here actually last a while.

>>10431697
kill yourself

>>10431726
Who said anything about dragon?

>>10431798
where's the news about the hopper getting delayed?

>>10431369
>cap this, BFR /starship will be landing on the moon before any SLS moon lander mission and then you precious NASA fucks can go kill yourselves

SLS is not meant to go to the Moon. SLS exists to provide the USA with assured access to space by being government owned and operated vehicle.

>>10431875

SLS exists, then bogus "reasons".

>>10431875

"assuredness" is a product of spending to realize something. this is not a property that SLS alone possesses. the alternate tracks spend money to realize a different assortment of aims.

Some more info about the Space Force legislative proposal was released. There's some new info plus reaffirming old info like "DoD does not intend to transition to the Space Force missions that are tangentially associated with space such as nuclear and cyberspace operations, or missile defense."
https://spacenews.com/defense-officials-new-military-branch-designed-for-the-unique-culture-of-space/

>no separate chaplain functions
Space priests are out for now.

>WAAAHHH SLS IS A WASTE OF MONEY!!!!11!!
Name some other manned launchers that can reach the moon and are up to NASA's safety standards.

>>10431910

Space Force is a big pile of nothing. Renaming and regrouping the same activities that already occur.

>>10431914
Source?