/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10642498
For Artemis Mission to Moon, NASA Seeks to Add Billions to Budget
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/science/trump-nasa-moon-mars.html
>NASA officials on Monday evening unveiled an updated budget request to Congress, seeking more than $1 billion in additional funding in what they called a down payment to accelerate the return of astronauts to the moon by 2024.
>Jim Bridenstine, NASA’s administrator, also said that the mission back to the moon would be called Artemis. In Greek mythology, Artemis is the twin sister of Apollo, whose name was used by NASA for the series of spacecraft that first landed Americans on the moon in 1969.
...
>The added money would include $651 million for the Space Launch System, the new large rocket NASA is developing, and the Orion capsule that would take astronauts to the moon and other deep-space destinations. NASA is also seeking $1 billion to begin development of a commercial landing system to take astronauts to the moon’s surface.

Part of that cost would be offset by scaling back and delaying plans for Gateway, an outpost in orbit around the moon.
...
>No cuts would be made to other NASA programs, said Mr. Bridenstine, who emphasized that the agency’s financing for the International Space Station and science programs would be secure. He added that he did not know what cuts might be made to other parts of the federal budget to pay for the moon program.

>>10642498
What's it doing in front of the White House?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YijwLZtslY

>>10642505
Based and redpilled

>>10642574
REMOVE LUNARIAN

The Orion ESM is coming along nicely

>>10642505
>significant added funding for commercial lunar landers
>SLS budget stagnant
>gateway budget decreased

damn straight

In my mind Obama and the Democrats cut back and neutered the space program and were very bad for space exploration.

Whereas Trump has been very good in both supporting and giving NASA a good mission statement and also in supporting the private Rocket companies.

Am I wrong or has Trump been good for Space.

What are the chances this program gets canned by the next president? Sanders has crushed NASA's budget proposals in congress before, and I dont know enough about whoever else is running.

>>10642974
Yang might not can it since he's kind of a futurist but the rest would
>>10642505

>ARTEMIS
>emphasizing the first woman on the moon

Nice, I think NASA's finally figured out how to ensure they don't get any funding cut or this program canned - by seizing on the progressive fervor of the times. They need to accelerate their PR and emphasize the fuck out of this key point- of the first woman on the moon, and the significance of the name Artemis in that context.

Can you imagine the uproar as this initiative builds in the public consciousness now (especially among liberals and progressives and feminists) only to then face cancellation by a future president or congress if Trumps administration doesn't survive election? There would be fury and outcry nation wide, accusations of sexism and a sense of betrayal of progressive ideals especially with the whole push for women in STEM and tech fields, equality, and just recently the first female spacewalk fiasco and the attention that got from upset liberals. Especially if the next administration is a democratic one and purports to be the champions of liberal ideals and feminism, equality etc..

By taking all this into account and emphasizing the landing of the first woman on the moon with this mission NASA might just have ensured the continued survival of its program against any political odds, very ingenious move.

Plus they can make a really cool logo, of Artemis, stretching her bow and aiming at the moon, a literal moon-shot.

>>10642997
ahh yes the whinging on twitter will be deafening...

>>10642997
Sounds genius, but I think that it'll only work with the first landing(s). Once the novelty of a 'small step for woman one giant leap for womankind' is gone, then the US government can scrap the whole thing without repercussions. So if NASA is going to be smart about it, then they should immediately set up support for continued missions.

>>10642994
there's not a snowballs chance in hell that Yang wins
he and his supporters are mouth breathing retards

>>10643041
they wont scrap shit if the lander is built and operated by Bezos

>>10642498
*sips* Apollo, now THAT was a program

>>10643086
I thought he just proposed a lander and NASA is still selecting one? Or did I miss something?

>>10643041

Plan for the first mission to take up a pride flag, the next one a trans flag, then some sort of negro flag, etc.

Shitlibs could never cancel it until it reaches universal inclusion.

>>10643108
I doubt that'll keep attention for long. Eventually the public will lose interest because all of the other groups are getting seconds rather than something special for them (or something like that). Anyways, doing it like that isn't smart either because it'll just encourage only setting up equipment for a quick manned landing and nothing else.

On top of that, being inclusive is a double edged sword. It's impossible to please everyone, but if the goal is to please everyone then things can fall apart really fast. "Why are blacks getting their landing after the trans? Haven't we suffered enough?" kind of stuff. In even further addition, this might all fail at the beginning because very few people are interested in spaceflight so the inclusive groups might just respond to inclusive lunar landings with "who cares?".

please note that the objective of "inclusive" missions isn't to please the groups they're including, it's to convince Congress that it will help them get reelected

>>10643123
nightmare scenario.

Identity politics has no place in spaceflight

>>10643137
I completely understand. NASA is trying out ways to keep programs cross administration and the "inclusive missions" seems genius at first. But I doubt it'll work. Mainly because most people don't care about spaceflight enough to feel it's important that some minority group is getting a flag on the moon and thus Congress wouldn't care.

>>10643138
>Identity politics has no place in spaceflight
I doubt it will be. If NASA is pushing for something like that, then its most likely just them trying everything they can to make their current moon program as politically difficult to cancel as possible.

>>10643161
idk these types of people only seem to care when its relevant to their "cause"

Once again I bring up the cancelled all-female spacewalk for example, and the outcry over that. Of course, 90% of the people who bitched about that never even knew it was happening in the first place until it was cancelled, then the uproar and complaining and hilary tweeting started

So I foresee the same scenario if Artemis and the first female on the moon is cancelled or threatened to be cancelled by the next administration -an uproar of public support which may just help keep the program afloat barring the worst case scenario of a Trump spiting democratic administration seeking to undo everything Trump had a hand in including increased NASA funding and the Moon 2024 mission.

>>10643167
>barring
I meant in the event of

>>10642498
>>10642505
Reminder that each Saturn V launch costed 1.16BILLION in today's dollars. And we had almost 17 lauches

>>10643180
And the SLS is estimated to cost $1.5B per launch at best...to carry less than half the payload to the moon compared to the Saturn V.

>>10643183
>>10643180
what about the cargo variants at least?

>>10643167
>the worst case scenario of a Trump spiting democratic administration seeking to undo everything Trump had a hand in including increased NASA funding and the Moon 2024 mission.
I really hope that this doesn't happen. I know that the next president never likes to continue a predecessor's mission but that exact issue has happened so many times that it's just infuriating. If whoever replaces Trump and they decide to keep the moon mission, then their name should be remembered in spaceflight as the first truly pro-spaceflight president since Kennedy.

>>10643195
IIRC Anything beyond Block I is put on hold indefinitely. So there will be only Block I variants, and that can send 23t to TLI. Meanwhile, the Saturn V 48.6t to TLI.

>>10643201
Embarassing

>>10643196
I want that too
but
>a leftist
>not a spiteful parasite
just isn't gonna happen
Trump either gets it finished before the end of his second term, or it doesn't get finished at all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VZuQcLNS-8&feature=youtu.be

So the BE-3 used a combustion tapoff cycle, but then was redesigned to be an open expander cycle in the BE-3U. Does anyone know why? Was there an issue with using tapoff cycles for upper stage engines? Or did Blue Origin want practice with expander cycles for their BE-7?

>>10643183
oof

>>10642994
Would you people rather take the basic income in your pocket or a womanned moon landing?

>>10642498
What a fucking PR disaster.
NASA won't able to land on the moon in 2024.
In fact, as it stands, they'll never be able to do it.
SLS needs to die if they're ever to get back there.

>>10643445
It's probably just more efficient, the combustion tap-off cycle is essentially just a gas-generator where the gasses powering the pump are dumped overboard, but rather than using a separate, smaller combustion chamber to power the pumps some of the hot gasses from the main combustion chamber are diverted and mixed with some fuel to lower the temperature before passing over the turbine. In theory combustion tap-off can have a very slight mass advantage compared to gas-generator engines, however both are much less efficient than an expander cycle, which does not dump any gasses.

>>10643515
>expander cycle, which does not dump any gasses.
Nice write up, but the BE-3U is an open cycle expander engine so it also dumps gases.

>>10643523
Maybe open cycle expander just offers better performance than combustion tap-off? Maybe it's not as harsh on the components? Idk dude some of the stuff BO does doesn't make a lot of sense.

>>10643512
>SLS needs to die if they're ever to get back there.
Congratulations! The SLS lobbyists get kicked out of Congress by the next administration who wants lunar results. The SLS is dead. But now, what will NASA use to get back to the moon?

Falcon Heavy seems like an obvious choice, but its payload to TLI is pretty small compared to SLS. A new mission profile based around FH would have to be made, but since the moon mission was originally designed around SLS many equipment would have to be redesigned to fit FH. That takes time, time that's not being spent going to the moon. Four or eight years later, a new administration comes along and cancels the whole moon mission, saying that since it hasn't achieved anything in almost a decade then its a waste of money. But how could this be? Turns out that the SLS lobbyists were what was keeping the moon mission alive cross administrations, but since they're gone they can't defend your moon mission.

The now new president sets up their own personal space program. One that'll surely inspire Americans and broaden mankind's horizons. Until the next president comes along, cancels that project, and the cycle begins anew.

>>10642505
>Add Billions
More money for SLS

>>10643278
>>a leftist
>>not a spiteful parasite
tbf, being a spiteful parasite is one of the few things both parties have in common these days

>>10643559
Dude, I never said this was happening.
Only SLS block 2 would kinda be able to.
Unfortunatly, both advanced boosters and upper stage dev are at idle right now.

>>10643515
>>10643523
>>10643558

Has the BE-3 actually flown in anything? I knows it's been tested on the ground and some companies are ordering them, but has anyone put one in the air yet? I can't find an answer on the Googles

>>10643562
One party is a streaming bowl of shit and the other party is rotten flesh from a pedo.
Let's keep the politics to a minimum please, unless you are bashing all of them.

>>10643572
New Shepard uses it. Sure, it's not a to-orbit rocket, but it has flown enough to prove its capability.

>>10643562
the republicans will at least work with you if you slide a few bribes their way
the democrats will fight you tooth and nail until the fucking heat death of the universe if you are part of the opposing ideology

>>10643577
>One party is a streaming bowl of shit and the other party is rotten flesh from a pedo.
kek, thats one way to sum it up
>Let's keep the politics to a minimum please, unless you are bashing all of them.
Yeah, agree

>>10642498
Will I find my waifu on the moon?

>>10643577
>Let's keep the politics to a minimum please, unless you are bashing all of them.
How about we just bash Nixon?

>>10643578
Can't wait for BO to crash its boosters on a manned ship.
For some reason, everyone assumes they'll just do it, no problem.

>>10642004
>He didn't name his son something memeier.
You can't get meme-ier than this, even if it wasn't intentional.

>>10643625
Yeah didn't they see how long it took SpaceX to master landing on the drone ship?

>>10643572
Yes, every New Shepard flight uses the BE-3.
BE-3U is a new engine though and hasn't flown yet.

>>10643597
>"The man in the moon."
Not unless you're waifu is a trap.

>>10643634
When you don't have billions of dollars to burn and are making money either way, you can afford to lose the boosters a bunch of times before you work out reliable landings.

>>10643641
Yeah but like that anon said the ship will be manned this time

>>10643572
>>10643578
I meant BE-4
Or is it still in development?

>>10643625
The animation Blue Origin provided shows that the booster is aimed away from the ship until the final moments of landing like how SpaceX does it. So if something goes wrong with the booster, then the ship isn't going to get snacked by a giant rocket. Blue Origin does alot of behind the scenes development work, unlike SpaceX, so by the time New Glenn flies they would have most things figured out. I still have no idea why the ship is manned though. It does seem odd.

>>10643647
>I meant BE-4
I'm not sure, but its most likely done and the tools to mass produce them are being made right now.

>>10643656
That's what Falcon does, though.
That falcon heavy center core missed the droneship by 2 meters or so, when engines didn't re-light.

>>10642994
>>10643488
go home y*ng your drunk

will never be an american on the Moon again for a long time

next man on the Moon will be chinese, whereas this is just pathetic squirms from a dying empire

>>10643669
>The central core attempted to return to the autonomous spaceport drone ship "Of Course I Still Love You" but failed to light two of the three engines during the landing burn. The core crashed into the ocean 100 metres (300 ft) away from the drone ship at 500 kilometres per hour (300 mph), causing damage to two of the drone ship's station-keeping thrusters
What i wouldnt do to watch a clip of that impact

>Artemis and Orion were inseparable lovers. However, because Artemis was the goddess of the hunt, moon, and chastity; her twin brother Apollo sought to protect Artemis from losing her innocence and despised their union. In order to keep her chaste, Apollo devised a plan to do away with Orion once and for all. The opportunity arose when Orion went for a swim in a vastly large lake, and only the faint shape of his head was visible from the shore. Apollo and Artemis were standing along the lake, and Apollo took the opportunity to challenge Artemis’ skills as an archer. Apollo told Artemis that she was not a talented enough huntress to hit targets of great distances and claimed that she could not even hit the object in the lake. Greek Gods are known for their stubbornness and Artemis was no exception. Annoyed by her brother’s remarks, Artemis shot the Orion square in the head, immediately killing him.

>>10643685
What wouldn't I do to be able enough to do a google search.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXd5UHFuZVI

>>10643183
If you want American Quality you have to Pay For It(tm).

>>10643559
Do we have TLI payload comparison between sls and falcon heavy?
Are the numbers vastly different, or are they sufficiently different to be vastly different within political context?

>>10643108
I wish /pol/fag schizos would leave these threads

>>10643718
About 10 tons due to upper stage structural limitations.

>>10643747
I assume you meant FH?

>>10643718
SLS Block 1 can do 23t to TLI.

>>10643747
I don't think the 10 ton adapter limit exists anymore considering the amount of Starlink satellites launching tomorrow.

>>10643677
whatever you say chang

>>10643766
The launch looks pretty impressive - Space X has managed to cram 60 of their Starlink satellites into a single rocket. I know that before this announcement most people were predicting they would only be able to fit 20-30 Starlink sats into a Falcon.

Open field again.

>>10643809
I see the Florida team is up and running. Panels seem different. Makes sense, since each team is building off of the other's mistakes/tips

more testing soon:
>The closure is scheduled for May 28 between 2 and 10 p.m. or in the alternative, on May 29 and/or May 30, according to a press release.

https://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/county-approves-another-round-of-spacex-road-closures/article_52b32cee-7682-11e9-b13b-cb22079e283c.html#.XNsgwuPTJ6A.twitter

>>10643809
What are we looking at here? Third prototype?

higher res

>>10643825
the Florida team's prototype. They are building them in parallel with the Texas (Boca Chica) team.

>>10642997
If the left supports it, the right will turn against it. If it gets perceived as a feminist program which every good leftist should support, the right will just start thinking that it's too expensive. Just like the left will hate it if it gets perceived as a right-wing thing.
That's the gayest part of the political climate.

>>10643852
true for most things but we're talking about returning to the moon here, a great national achievement, and a new space race against China

The appeasement of the liberals by this announcement should be a relatively minor thing in comparison to the grand national achievement of returning to the moon again

also pic related, the last time we were there.

>>10643864
>also pic related, the last time we were there.
stop making me sad

>>10643790
mostly because we didn't know what their Starlink satellite bus looked like
turns out they bought Swedish, apparently

>>10643937

>>10643790
I'll look even more impressive when launched from the BFR.

>>10642505
man FUCK can't someone in the trump admin read the high frontier or something?

FUCK MOON FUCK MARS LETS LIVE IN SPACE NOT ON SOME ROCK

>>10644020
You haven't read anything about how bad living in space actually is for humans, have you? It's so much better for us to live on "some rock" than it is to live in zero G being bombarded by radiation.

>>10644020
What's wrong with going to Moon or Mars?

>>10644013
Where the fuck do those solar panels go during launch and re-entry?

>>10644043
>What's wrong with going to Moon or Mars?

Dumbfucks have it in their head that its better to do nothing at all than their particular pet project.

>>10643559
Falcon Heavy would get a beefier second stage if there was demand for it.

But honestly, it's stupid to keep looking at Falcon Heavy just because it's available right now. It's nothing more than a stop gap before Starship. Even if we assume a massive amount of Elon time, it'd still be done soon enough to help with a moon base.

>>10644043
>What's wrong with going to Moon or Mars?

Dumbfucks have it in their head that its better to do nothing at all if they can't have their particular pet project.

welding from the inside

ooh

>>10644057
>Dumbfucks have it in their head that its better to do nothing at all if they can't have their particular pet project.
That mindset is why spaceflight has been stuck in LEO for decades. Let there be a Mars mission, let there be a Moon mission, and any other mission in parallel. They all might not work out, but it's better than focusing on one project and suppressing any other.

>>10644013
Do people actually find this funny?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfkZFScGF9c

>>10644020
It's just a political stunt bro. If it does succeed I really fucking hope we do some ISRU. Also hope that Resource Prospector[renamed version] gets launched. The existence of extractable lunar volatiles could change a lot.
>>rock
you gotta mine that dank moon dust for space colonies. Didn't you read high frontier? Gerald O'Neil proposed building colonies from moon dust. Building a mass driver on the Moon let's us get tonnage quantities of dank Moon to L5
>>10644044
They fold up bro.

>>10644131
yes

>>10643872
>making me sad
Hold my beer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQOEC9gHpmA

Watch 32:00 to 37:00

>>10644170
Why?

>>10644077
Another tent?

>>10642997
>emphasizing the first woman on the moon

Imagine the inferiority complex you'd need as a woman to eat this shit up. I swear if this doesn't motivate the Russians, Elon, the Chicoms, and everyone else to get there first...

>>10644159
Obviously, but it seems like they would need to tuck into a protective shell or something. The heat and aerodynamic forces would rip them off if they just fold up against the hull.
None of the renders I've seen show any sort of mechanism for protecting them once folded up.

Here we go boys, five years to go and the feminists are already framing the mission

Don't you protest though, because this time we are going to fight against muhsoggyknees, as inspiration for woomen of the future

Those Apollo astronauts were tired old racist WHITE MEN

>>10642997
The moon will get cut as soon as a Democrat is in the oval office again :)

>>10644254
Let's write her first words one word at a time

YAAS

>>10644254
anon, you're mad about the IDEA of feminism, it hasn't even hurt you

>>10644254
>Here we go boys, five years to go and the feminists are already framing the mission
I doubt this (I assume you meant feminists of the man hating kind). I'm pretty sure that NASA is just trying to appease to the Democrats in case Trump doesn't win the reelection.

>>10644280
Anon, you're proud of the IDEA of feminism, it hasn't helped anyone.

>>10644280
Men died so they could pave the first steps to the Moon. It's utterly sickening to apply a modern frame to the past, just to spitefully trample on their monumental efforts

>>10644289
I'm neutral to the idea of feminism, but you're so angry about nothing that I can't help but think you're letting it interfere with your life. You should try giving less of a shit about dumb shit nobody cares about, and also shut up because you're interfering with my free time.
>>10644306
how is women existing in space trampling on the monumental efforts of Apollo?

>>10644267
Especially if its Biden, he'll sell out to china and let them land first

Moon lander image dump to reel the discussion in the spaceflight thread back to spaceflight.

>>10644324

What do we know about the "Advanced Maneuvering Vehicle" from the Space Development Agency? I assume that nobody here knows anything, but I'm asking just in case. Pic related.

>>10644326

>>10644331
One more after this.

>>10644336
Кoммyниcтичecкий cюpпpиз, cyкa.

>>10644136
in case people missed it, here's an awesome video of the Florida orbital starship under construction. Address is 850 Cidco rd in Cocoa FL

>>10644318
>I'm neutral to the idea of feminism, but you're so angry about nothing that I can't help but think you're letting it interfere with your life. You should try giving less of a shit about dumb shit nobody cares about, and also shut up because you're interfering with my free time.

Don't gotta be angry to say feminism is shit, bruv, but it obviously has you riled up when people talk about it.

>>10644345
because every time they talk about it, it sucks the conversation down the toilet

>>10644318
Women in space doesn't equal feminism in space

EVERYONE HOL' UP, ELON'S TWEETING:
quotes -
>SpaceX is doing simultaneous competing builds of Starship in Boca Chica Texas & Cape Canaveral Florida
>Both sites will make many Starships. This is a competition to see which location is most effective. Answer might be both.
>Any insights gained by one team must be shared with the other, but other team not required to use them.
>[Raptor] SN4 is done. Hawthorne is working on SN5 now, but focus is ramping build rate of SN6 through SN10.
>[flap/leg/landing stuff] Probably start installing end of next month
>[100 raptors being built by early next year] That’s about right

>>10644326
>>10644324
nice gonna use this to btfo those retards on /pol/ and elsewhere when they bring up how the LEM looked like a flimsy cardboard construction, idiots can't comprehend the idea of a solid structure underneath the thermal protection

>>10644318
>women existing in space
That's all they will be doing, and that's all they ever do to get anywhere they go.

>>10644362
Just be careful. I think >>10644324 isn't the actual lunar lander but a developmental version that was bulkier than necessary. A small issue, I know, but you know how anal about detail conspiracy theorists are when it comes to evidence that disproves their pet theory.

>>10644371
ah good to know, I'll look into it I guess still a cool pic to see whats the general structure beneath the LEM

>>10644372
people that don't use the official photo name schemes for their filenames make me angry. THAT MEANS YOU, ANON

>>10644376
if you would see my image folders organization system you would understand why I don't care, there is no organization

>>10644362
>nice gonna use this to btfo those retards on /pol/
/pol/ thinks that the Apollo landings were fake now? Got any examples?

Also, just ask them if the USA faked the moon landings, then why didn't the Soviets reveal it to the world. They'll eventually claim that the US and Soviets were secretly working together, which is trivial to debunk.

>>10642498
>WE GOIN' TO THE MOON AGAIN!
*Blocks your path.*
Hey, hey, not so fast kiddo.

>>10644386
Every space thread on /pol/, even today's news threads about Artemis, and sometimes just the occasional /x/ tier conspiracy thread

Filled with pictures and webms usually posted by one dedicated French autist about how all the zero g movement aboard ISS is done with wires, and spacewalks are done in a water tank, and flat Earth and moon landing hoax shit too.

>>10644389
*keeps going*
What are you going to do, old man? Ban rich people from space? We'll keep a retirement home on the moon/Mars warm for you.

>>10644392
Sounds lame. Hopefully they'll shut up when manned missions on the moon become a thing again.

>Filled with pictures and webms usually posted by one dedicated French autist about how all the zero g movement aboard ISS is done with wires, and spacewalks are done in a water tank
Just bring up Skylab. The motions done there are too complex for wires and too long for a vomit comet.

>>10644396
*dismantles your business*
*taxes your income*
You got that money by mistreating your employees. Amazon and Tesla should operate as co-ops.

Who will you sell rockets to when NASA can no longer buy them?

>>10644389
>declines in polls

oh no no no

>>10643696
The CHAD Apollo
The virgin Artemis

>>10644401
>dismantles your business
I know you're exaggerating what Bernie might do, but there's no way he can't do that. Both SpaceX and Blue Origin have important contracts with the US military, who will not be happy when their spy satellites can't be launched.

>VP gets to watch gigakino again, even thought I only got to see it in fakemax once before the run was over

why

>>10644418
i'm sure it will return to theaters and run at festivals all the time

>>10644404
He's still the frontrunner.
>>10643672

soon

also who do you think will get to orbit first? Florida's starship team or Texas? I vote Florida

rip turtles

>>10644324
Looks like a guy’s face with the skin peeled off.

>>10644443
I agree, Texas is going to get their schedule fucked by Hopper and something is going to go pear shaped when it comes to the fins, Florida will have time to learn from their mistakes.

>>10644452
plus I'd imagine more space talent around the KSC area; Boca Chica has traditional construction talent it seems but that can only go so far.

>>10644254
They will send transwoman to the moon not real women
>MA'AM astronauts

100 R A P T O R S

0

0

R

A

P

T

O

R

S

>>10644386
Just some shithead flat earthers and antispace guys. Most people on /pol/ like space due to space exploration's origins

>>10644478
How can bezodrones even compete?

Just wait until we land on the moon again, and the new conspiracies start.

>We landed on the moon before but these new ones are fake
>The original landings were faked but these are real
>Both eras moon landings are fake

>>10644484
by hopping the Karman line

>>10644484
by not blowing up astronauts on the launch pad

>>10644491
>working on a lunar depot
>still says the moon landings are fake

can the landers deployed enmasse do enough to start constructing infastructure on the moon. Or, will we need something bigger. Or can we just utilize like several 100 of these constantly sent up or something? New glenn can keep sending them up

>>10644554
At this rate Starship will be launching regularly before they even fly New Glenn, let alone build and test a lunar lander.

>>10644508
>working on a new train tunnel through the alps
>skeptics say tunnel doesn't exist

https://www.rep-am.com/news/world/2019/02/15/high-speed-tunnel-project-divides-italys-ruling-populists/

>>10644565
>Have to answer bullshit data scraping survey to read the article

Might as well not exist.

>>10644560
star ship needs to get the weird mouth open thing. Landers are sorta tried and true. Also the crane thing seems kinda awkward. Lander seems simpler in a way. But I suppose Elon will have a lot of starships because he is treating them a lot like those sats. Cheap and disposable fast. After they have been flown a few times, now they ferry shit to the moon.
I just wish we had the methodoligy to construct and extract shit up there. Without using almost all earth based materials. We can only ferry so much steel up there before you reasonably expect to use the moon to build on the moon

>>10644589
Blue Balls lander is approx 24 feet high, on the moon you could just jump out if you don't want to wait for the elevator like a fag.

>>10644589
>Also the crane thing seems kinda awkward
I mean, Blue Balls also uses a crane. Cranes are pretty well understood.

>>10644443
I suspect SpaceX will explode a test vehicle first.

Bezos' company literally says they will take it slow in their slogan, so this is a dumb question.

>>10644223
InGaP solar cells can OPERATE up to 350 C. ntrs.nasa.gove/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050206368.pdf
NASA even showed that solar cells that can operate on the Venusian surface are probably possible. So heat protection need not be that good. In reality, yeah, they're going to be folded up behind some insulation to keep them at reasonable temperatures. Or just discarded. Christ that's a fucking big solar array now that I think about it. Could probably power the damn ISS with all that. Maybe that's what musk is talking about when he means dragon wings...

>>10644597
>Blue Balls lander is approx 24 feet high, on the moon you could just jump out if you don't want to wait for the elevator like a fag.

yeah i get that, but starship crane has to be internal and I just can't picture it. It already looks ridicilous

>>10644491
I can see it now:
>OBVIOUSLY the ones in the 60s were faked, Anon, but these one are real. They fucking live-streamed them on Twitch!
>no the old ones were real, retard. this is just to placate the sjws
>implying the moon is real
>REEEEEE FLAT EARTHERS GET OUT
I can't wait to watch the moon landing deniers descend into THAT huge fight.

>>10644609
The moon is real, but it's not a rocky world circling around us anon, it's just a light.

>>10644603
I know Starship is much bigger, but it's not like they have the cables just sitting inside in a heap, it'll be spooled up. Then all you need is a door and platform, keep in mind Mars' atmosphere is too weak for wind to be much of a threat.

>>10644622
I'm glad you posted this because it raises an interesting question:
The number a couple months ago when the Boeing 737th were grounded because of that programming fuckup? Also remember Israel's Bullshit lander crashing into Luna surface?

Unlike NASA, which trains people for years, Musk has said that he intends for starship to just be part of a transportation company...Well you don't expect airline passengers to fly the plane so one I'm wondering is will it have some manual override so that if people look out the window and see that the ship is coming down too fast or hasn't ignited retro rockets or something they can fire them on their own without waiting for the computer to control systems?

>>10644609
>>10644491
I want to put all those conspiracy theorists together in a huge room and see what happens, and I mean ALL of them, you know, moon landing, 9/11, flat earth, ancient aliens, illuminati, bigfoot, crop circles, lizard people, new world order... the whole shebang.

When faced with contradicting believes will they:
A. Scream their heads off and/or rip each other's throats out
B. Realize how crazy their own believe and arguments had been and emerge a better person.
or C. Merge all their crazies together and unleash upon the world one superconspiracy the likes of which will rend the minds of any sane man asunder.

>>10644554
>>10644560
Starship needs like 10 or something refuelings to even get to the moon, so yeah it better fly regularly
>>new glenn
Uhhhh... I think their lander can fly on other launchers. It is a bit big though. Like really big...
>>enmasse
If we actually launch them enmasse and actually decide to build infrastructure on the Moon. Had an aerospace prof talking about how they were working with spacex on planning a mission. So they ask spacex what launch rate can you provide and they come back and say we'll fulfill whatever launch demand you have. If we put down the money to do it we can do it. Now if you want to get cheaty, it is estimated that we could get all the infrastructure on the moon we'll ever need in ~5 apollo launches. In those 5 launches you could put up a self replicating robot factory that just keeps on replicating till the whole moon is covered or we tell it to stop.
>>10644637
>>manual override
laughable. Truly laughable. It's just too fast for humans to do anything of value. If that scenario has happened the people inside are already fucked. Also, 737 had trained pilots onboard and it was still fucked.
FUN FACT: spaceX's rockets know where all the critical infrastructure is at the pads and will do everything in their power to avoid them if a landing goes south.

>>10644661
>is too fast
Armstrong literally did this.

>>10644661
they're trolley-problem complete, if that's what you mean

>>10644622

>>10644661
>If that scenario has happened the people inside are already fucked
>Autopilot's reaction to the passengers when it fails

>>10644660
There will be blood. A good portion of conspiracy theorists probably have some sort of mental disorder. Some of them may become violent. Figuring out what happens requires exact numbers, but if we have enough people with a violent tendency it becomes THUNDERDOME.

>>10644671
That doesn't sound like a downside.

>>10644660
>I want to put all those conspiracy theorists together in a huge room and see what happens
THE TRUTH, that's what'll happen!

>>10644666 (checked)
Armstrong didn't land on the moon using suicide burns.

>>10644683
He definitely took over and controlled the rockets himself. Stay right there, I'll be back with link.

>>10644661
>Also, 737 had trained pilots onboard and it was still fucked.
Their training deliberately left out key changes in the hardware and software that differed in the new version of the plane.

>>10644689
I'm not arguing against that part. I meant had the Apollo landings used a suicide burn approach (which seems very likely for starstarships), Armstrong *wouldn't* be able to take manual control.

>>10644599
I am greatly looking forward to it

>>10644698
The Grumman lunar lander was designed for a thrust to weight ratio that dropped below one, and could hover. Suicide Burn only applies to a vehicle whose thrust to weight ratio is always greater than one.

>>10644661
>Self replicating robot factory

Yeah ok bro

>>10644689
You can hardly compare adjusting a landing parabola in no atmosphere and 1/8g or whatever to figuring out the correct suicide burn to nail a tiny landing pad from a gorillion miles up on a ship weighing hundreds of tonnes coming in at re entry speeds.

>>10644712
>Bro just press crtl+C, then ctrl+V a thousand times

>>10644627
gotcha

Question can we do actual construction on the moon. Or is all we got is habitation modules. is there any chance of within our life times, planetS type set up where we can use moon dust for mortar or as cement than line the insides with thinner steel. Or bind the moon dust together so it doesn't really chip and use it as foundation.
I am curious you motherfuckers, I am just not sure the future looks like 10,000 biglow cabins, or nasa moduless scaterred across the surface.
And if we go the internal tunnel route, we'd still need a functional base of operations for solar panels, cells, processing facitilities as well as medical facilities

>>10644723
muh dust

>>10644599

>>10644033
read the BOOK

>>10644159
yeah true I guess but I read "moon base" as the goal, not that start. maybe i'm wrong and we'll get our colonies one day but mars is such a huge meme that I bet we'll just get a moon launchpad to that shit

launch thread tomorrow lads, get your snacks ready. For a fun drinking game, take a shot for each satellite deployment

>>10644769
how many do people actually expect to end up in their orbits.
Also how effective is the mechanism space x is using for deployment?

>>10644712
It's not that crazy:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Advanced_Automation_for_Space_Missions
http://cba.mit.edu/docs/papers/17.04.11.SelfAssemSpacecraft.pdf

>>10644748
Moon base is step 1 in Gerald O'neill's colonization plan. Also did you know Bezos was actually taught by Gerald O'neill?

>>10644779
Actually its pronounced Gerald

>>10644772
The deployment is going to be dicy, I mean, we don't know how exactly it will work, but seems like one failed separation could affect the rest of the remaining satellites.

>>10644779
my dad had him guest lecture at MIT once

>>10644772
>Also how effective is the mechanism space x is using for deployment?
How is SpaceX going to deploy the satellites anyways? I'd guess that they just spin the upper stage along it's long axis, decouple the satellites, and let the centrifugal forces throw them out.

>>10644796
so they gamble on the ion thrusters and pray they got enough reliable juice. I guess since it's low orbits it kinda makes sense that they wouldn't need something overly intense right? right?
This still seems crazy

>>10644772
elon posted that a lot will fail

>>10643559
>The Falcon Heavy TLI payload is pretty small compared to SLS

>18 to 22 tons TLI is pretty small compared to 23 tons >>10643201

Holy shit Trump needs to cancel SLS immediately

>>10644823
even i the falcon heavy can't quite beat sls the next generation coming up will surely make it obsolete

>>10644823
But that FH payload to TLI is with the expendable version and SpaceX is trying to phase out expendable Falcons entirely. So the actual payload to TLI will be much lower. I'm not sure of the values, but I think the payload to LEO gets halved from expendable to reusable. If the trend continues for TLI payloads, then FH reusable can put 9 to 11 tons to the moon. Which is rather smaller than SLS.

And even if NASA is willing to fork over the extra cash to convince SpaceX to make expendable FHs for their moon program, there's the issue that Falcon is a long and thin rocket, and thus may not be able to handle the loads of a heaver payload. I think the FH is a great rocket, and the SLS is a bloated mess too, but FH has some definite weaknesses compared to SLS.

>>10644826
You mean the block 2 SLS? I thought anything beyond block 1 is put on hold indefinitely.

Anyone got a video of a non Newtonian fluid on the ISS?
Need it for reasons

>>10644828
>But that FH payload to TLI is with the expendable version and SpaceX is trying to phase out expendable Falcons entirely.

SpaceX isn't blind to money. They'll do whatever their customer pays them (enough) to do.

>>10644508
>>working on a lunar depot
earth is fake

>>10644661
Excuse me, Starship is actually Two Stage To Mars

>>10643278
get fucked

>>10644359
>[100 raptors being built by early next year] That’s about right
Holy shit. They really don‘t plan on fucking around with this.
Guess they‘ll get started with Super Heavy as well soon.

>>10644376
bruh, lunar topography tall af

>>10643696
A naming scheme that involves the capsule dieing on them.
Real smart, Nasa.

>>10644927
They're just being proactive

>>10644831
Nope. EUS is on the backburner, but it's still being worked on.

>>10644560
Starship still has to clear a lot of hurdles. The fins have to properly actuate, they have to relearn how to land these vehicles, the heat shielding is a huge issue, the reentry trajectory is completely new, the payload mouth/windows need to be figured out.
A lot of room for things to go wrong.

>>10644601
>Christ that's a fucking big solar array now that I think about it. Could probably power the damn ISS with all that
Starship has about the same pressurized volume as ISS, keep in mind.

>>10644775
Woah, that arm stacking legos is literally the same as self replicating nanomachines.

>>10644177
But it was EVA-2 that went furthest out, the furthest humans have ever traveled away from a spacecraft during an EVA of any type.

The coming days will see the 50th anniversary of Apollo 10, anons. Don't be a pseud and allow it to go unobserved.

>>10644177
Why you do me like this, brah?

>>10645045

Learning of the goodwill rock led me to the world's lunar sample displays, many of which are missing, stolen or sitting in storage somewhere-while others are on proper display. I will now make it my business to ask about my state's Apollo 11 and 17 moon rocks, both of which seem to be at the historical society, but they might not be on exhibit at the moment.

>>10644399
>too complex
That just gives them more reason to ree about it and come up with more intricate ways around the "fakening". Im not a fan of throwing out Dunning-Kruger and Occam's Razor, but FE, Moonhoax and the other run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorists tend to suit those two

>>10644482
And the idea of "smart white men going into space without niggers and women" appeal to them, even though most of them would be first in line for the showers if eugenics ever come back in style

>>10645075
What ever you say dipshit.

>>10645101
<3

>>10644359
>100 until early next year

Impossible.

Advanced engines are not as easy to make as marketing teams claim - see shuttle engines.

Judging by industry standards I'd say they could make 2-4 per year without acquiring large outside investments to increase production capability and even that is pushing it.
The demonstrated number of raptor prototypes coincidentally plagued by issues support this.

With large government support they could possible double that but anything outside of that is pure fantasy.

>>10645207
Take a look at how many engines GE makes and these are much more complex than Raptor

Have you noticed that too? Why is it so?
First I thought it's just an optical illusion, but it can't be perspective. I think it's on all of the designs.

>>10644401
>Amazon and Tesla should operate as co-ops.
ULA 2 Electric Boogaloo

>>10645284
Musk has a hard-on for panel gaps.

>>10644976
>Tortilla Flat

>>10645292
This actually could get things moving for ULA.
Also Amazon as a co-op would boost the economy greately as employes wouldn't need food stamps and actually spend money.

>>10644492
S U B O R B I T A L

Starlink mission payload is 13,620kg... at least.

Holy shit.

>>10645207
I appreciate your roleplaying efforts.

>>10645284
No way that's 9m in diameter

>>10645347
Falcon 9 can't lift more than 11 tons so I don't see how it could be nearly 14.

>>10645284
It’s a shoop

>>10645365
DM-1 was like 12,000kg

>>10644747
based launch cat

>>10644775
So what happens when the arm runs out of those perfect little octahedrons? Where is the octahedron manufacturing robot? That's why "self-replicating robots" is a such a hand wave. You aren't going to make metal parts out of moon dust. If you can't build the first robot out of moon dust, then the robot sure can't build more robots out of moon dust.

>>10644796
springs generally won't fail, with the right kind of latches

>>10645284
the pic is a shoop, but that line isn't straight because the camera is below its level
lrn2perspective

They are ramping up prop production. He is planning to con someone big time.

raptor testing soon

this morning's progress

>>10645504
>>10645508
in case people are wondering where this part is

>>10645504
>>10645508
This is too flimsy its never going to survive flight.

>>10645440
read the fucking links asshole.
this details mining robots for mining moondust:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Advanced_Automation_for_Space_Missions/Appendix_5D
This details some of the chemical processing involved for making robots from mined moondust
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Advanced_Automation_for_Space_Missions/Appendix_5E
>>octahedron manufacturing robot?
The most difficult part of making a self replicating robot is assembling things. Robots aren't that good at assembling things. You need precise fixtures for every part you have, doing this for a self replicating machine would be difficult. Modular blocks get around this problem. The GIF I posted is just one an example of this.
>> aren't going to make metal parts out of moon dust.
bullshit. Moon dust contains 0.5% free iron. You can get straight up metallic iron by just passing magnets over moon dust. For more complicated processing we can do HF acid leach like that mentioned above or we can use a new up and coming process magma electrolysis. In magma electrolysis you melt moondust to magma and electrolyse it. This yields a melt of iron and silicon. With some processing you can separate out the silicon from the iron.

>>10645547
it's steel with internal stiffeners, what are you talking about

>>10645548
why am I getting a bunch of creationist gooblygook when I look up moon dust thickness? wtf

>>10645571
At a guess, I think it's because young-earthfags take early predictions of the moon having several feet worth of accumulated dust as PROOF the Moon is younger than "the scientists" thought, seeing as how there was far less than initially speculated. You can see the wideness of the LEM footpads, designed in such a way that they'd be able to settle onto a thick layer of dust if needed.
Of course the young-Earthfags are retarded, but I think that's why you're getting creationist nonsense in your search.

>>10645571
you're supposed to call it regolith. I call it moon dust cause that sounds DANK. Self replicating machines would do strip mining. Just scrape off the first couple of meters. There's no need to dig any deeper.

>>10642498
erath us flat

>>10645608
b&r

>The White House did not agree to ask for "new" money for the accelerated lunar landing program. Instead, the additional $1.6 billion will be derived from "offsets" in other areas of the federal budget. Bridenstine said during the call that he had not been briefed on what those budgetary offsets would be. However, three sources told Ars that, as of Monday, the White House plans to pay the additional $1.6 billion for the lunar program by cutting the Pell Grant Reserve Fund, which helps low-income students pay for college.

Oof, that's gonna be a hard sell.

>>10645533
>sheet

>>10643137
>Rocket scientists have actual board meetings discussing strategies to sell to congress to get funding.
>The CURRENT YEAR strategy is "inclusivity missions"...
Where were you when you realized this country was dead?

>>10642498
if we cut funding from niggers and shitskins in genneral we will have enough money to go mars, but nooo we have to mouthfeed a bunch of apes

>>10645472
>lrn2perspective
You're a moron. Top is further away from the camera than the bottom.

I didn't shoooop the loop, fuck you.
>>10644443

I don't think the diameter is constant even in the design.

>>10645667
Sacrifices have to be made for the future of mankind.

>>10644832
just google shear thickening fluid ISS. There was an experiment on it. It was done because moon dust in plastic binder is a shear thickening fluid. This is something you'd want to do if you want to 3d print shit in microgravity.
>>10644947
Read the second paper, it'll blow your mind. I just posted that animation cause I was lazy. They have smaller blocks that can be built into electronics, actuators, and other moving parts.
>>nanomachines
We don't know if the nanomachines which are useful are practically possible or not. There's biology, but biology is hard to engineer and does not work well in a hard vacuum.
>>10645448
It really is something that tape measures are a tried and true method for deploying structures in space since the 1960s.
>>10645667
damn! But what if we have moon scholarships? Like if you go to college you have to do some work for the moon program. Yeah, it's basically fucked though. Taking away student loans is going to piss off a lot of people. I just hope they don't fuck over the science budget looking for money for the meat bags to the moon program. Oh well I guess for a glorious couple years or two NASA will probably put some serious effort into ISRU before abandoning it. Again.

>>10645881
>Oh well I guess for a glorious couple years or two NASA will probably put some serious effort into ISRU before abandoning it. Again.
ISRU on the moon is the easiest. The only propellant that's practical to use on the moon right now is hydrolox from lunar ice, and that's easy to gather and turn into propellant. The only reason why its not being done is that Congress is scared that NASA will push for an expensive mission if it had any capability beyond Earth orbit. LOP-G is just a compromise to please NASA until the next president comes along and stops it all because he wants his own mission.

>>10645823
>I didn't shoooop the loop, fuck you.
The picture you were working from was a shoop, rethard. Look at the other recent pictures, they haven't put the nose on yet.

>>10645963
>rethard
I didn't know Mike Tyson browses 4than.

>>10642974
>>10643647
Latest news is that it is still stuck at 80% thrust.
Apparently current test engine would be the last before production (estimated to begin start of next year).

>>10645986
>Iron Mike Tyson
>I.M.T.
>Innovation. Mathematics. Technology.

>>10645667
To be clear, it is reserve money. Won't affect Pell Grants now.
But say there is an economic downturn and more people apply for a grant, this reserve would be used.

>>10645667
a blog post from the planetary society said that it wont be a problem:
>"Fortunately, Congress does not have to abide by their own spending caps. In fact, Congress has waived them every year since 2013. If Congress once again raises these caps, we can have Pell Grants, fully funded scientific research across the government, and a modest increase to human spaceflight efforts."

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2019/the-moon-in-2024-a-crash-program-or-modest-proposal.html

>launch is at 4am for me
G-go on without me! It‘s the mission that counts!

>>10645207
100 engines = 2 Superheavys, 3 Starships, and 3 engines left over. So if Space X will have to figure out a way to mass produce them if they want to keep moving forward quickly. I have more confidence that they will figure out a way to do this, than the predictions of massive low-ballers, like yourself (2-4 engines a year, really?)

>>10645365
From spaceflightnow:
>Each of the Starlink satellites weighs around 500 pounds (227 kilograms), according to SpaceX. Stacked together inside the payload shroud of a Falcon 9 rocket, the 60 satellites weigh 15 tons (13,620 kilograms)

>>10646219
they already have 4 engines this year, so that guy's a retard

T-5 hours to SpaceX Starlink launch

Once it finally launches the sls will have costed around the same amount of money than the whole apollo program (100 billion accounted for inflation) (accounting for cancelled programs) and took several decades what elon could accomplish in 5 years if ypu gave them just 1/8 of that. And most of that would be r&d after that each flight qould be cheaper.

Its mad. absolutely mad that they dont give money to elon

>>10642905
you're wrong

>>10646311
>Its mad. absolutely mad that they dont give money to elon
To be fair towards NASA and the US government, when the groundwork for the SLS was laid down SpaceX was a nobody. So it made sense not to give lots of money to a company that hasn't proven itself. On top of that, SLS itself isn't the reason why it's so expensive, it's the shit management at NASA who didn't play hard with the contractors when they were being late. Shit management can kill any project no mater how great it is.

>>10646336
I mean the only reason why we have space exploration be a thing is because of trump's admin supporting NASA. You're wrong dude

Where's the launch thread you fucking niggers

>>10646449
There's still 4 hours left to T-0.

>>10646454
The threads are usually up 24 hours in advance.

>>10646456
sorry I was caught off guard by a errand; it'll be up briefly

>>10646468
You better link it you faggot. Unless you want to be a fag?

>>10646476
>>10646471
I try to please

>>10646486
>>I try to please
All faggots do.

>>10646512
>faggots
Why the homophobia?

>>10646519
Go be gay somewhere else.

>>10646522
>gay
Why the homophobia?

>>10646525
Oh my god fuck off we all call each other faggots. Its an age old tradition of 4chan. Go back to plebbit if you dont like that.

>>10646419
SLS has constantly proven themselves to be shit. Spacex has made ground breaking technology revolutions that will change the game for everyone several time in the few years it has existed, with almost no money basically

>>10646630
why the homophobia, 4chan is against racism, did you fall for the "faggot" meme?

>>10646751
>why the homophobia
Gay

>>10646749
>with almost no money basically

>with generous billions provided by NASA's COTS program
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Orbital_Transportation_Services

>>10646301
The launch failed m8.

>>10646881
millions*

>>10646630
>faggots
Why the homophobia?

You guys ready?
Next stop, Moon

>>10646914
Why the homophobiaphobia?

>>10646922
Why the homophobiaphobiaphobiaphobia?

odd thing, this

>>10646928
Looks like some kind of support that's on it's side?

>>10646930
no clue

>>10646925
That's my line, you skipped one.

>>10646887
no, billions.

>>10646919
he's shopped in here, right? I don't think his face is lit up correctly for the lighting conditions
also what's he standing in
>>10646928
is that the GSE quick disconnect for the fueling and such?

What does he mean by this?

Welp, tonight was disappointing. Here's some rocket porn to cheer you guys up.

>>10647169
he's shitposting but also if he leaves for space it means that he's about to become the pirate king

>>10647171
Or just spaceflight porn in general.

>>10647178

>>10647169
>>10647176
Is Cruz really worried about space pirates tho?

>>10647182

>>10647184
have you seen his beard?

>>10647184
I mean, he should be
I also don't think he'll be able to stop them

>>10647186
Anyone want anymore?

>>10646917
>one-story hangar
disappointing

i wonder how they're going to allocate resources between the two teams

>>10647192
Give me your best one and I'm going to sleep

>>10647213
The new hangar structure might just be for engine storage.

>>10647223
Here you go. Goodnight, sleepyhead.

>>10647213
I'd imagine that speed, cost, quality, and safety are all metrics for the teams. Elon made it sound like it's purely a time-based how many starships can you build sort of deal, but that seems too easy

>>10647233
honestly i like the competition idea but its kind of silly that they're not working together and splitting prototypes based on ideas

who knows though, maybe florida engineers and texas engineers would never be in the same office anyways and i'm sure having the problem in front of you is easier to solve

>>10647244
they are... the teams are required to share useful information with each other.
Maybe they'll schedule the launch day for each's first orbital prototype to be identical; dual-stream so you see which team's starship explodes.

>>10647227
true

i feel like they're going to finish 76 raptors (2x38) long before the two(hopefully) starships get Superheavies and go orbital

>>10647252
I think both of them are going to fail and it's going to cost a lot of expensive turbopumps

I wonder what the next step after that is going to be

>>10647244
"Any insights gained by one team must be shared with the other, though they may choose not to implement it."

semi-paraphrased.

>>10647268
>>10647252
i mean having the engineers shoulder to shoulder

long distance relationships suck

when starship is done, elon should buy a launch site on Staten Island and also next to blue origin headquarters just to flex

prove me wrong

>>10647169
He is gonna be harlock irl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDsIA3zTx-U

>>10646311
>Once it finally launches the sls will have costed around the same amount of money than the whole apollo program (100 billion accounted for inflation) (accounting for cancelled programs)
are you fucking lumping constellation into the pot to get that absolutely fucking unreal figure that has no relation to reality?

dont do that.

>>10647442
SLS and Orion is the Constellation project with a new name, resetting the monetary odometer just because you changed names is a dirty trick

>>10647448
>SLS = Ares
That's a fucking meme. There are literally two things that the SLS has that came from CxP:

>5 segment SRBs
>Orion

That's it. Everything else is new.

Also new thread:
>>10647453

>>10647467
ur geh

>>10644210
Hush, this is the best way to get all the feminists and liberals to be in full support of the mission and start a fucking riot if the next administration tries to cancel it

>>10647267
But if both team success how do you choose the winner?

>>10643864
>The appeasement of the liberals by this announcement should be a relatively minor thing in comparison to the grand national achievement of returning to the moon again
It's 2019, literally nothing is more important than libs feels

>>10643167
You just know itll get turned into gibs for the poor anyways wether its spite or not. Theyll just insist theyre doing 1000 other things for the advancement of women. Their bottom line is greed anyways the sjw shit is just a tool

>>10647169
>weeb
>chronic shitposter
Literally /ourguy/