/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10989763
First for N-11GR

>>10989780
I hope for your sake that an Orion third stage is hiding under that fairing.

>>10989786
Does a MIRV count?

>>10989788
>MIRV
If they use one kiloton-scale, shaped-yield kicker, yes. It would count.

MORE IMPORTANTLY:
FLEG ROOTS

>>10989803
Well isn't that shiny as fuck

>>10989803
>FLEG ROOTS
Are you drunk? It's okay, because I am too on rocket fuel.

>>10989808
I'm about to be

>>10989811
Amazing. Happy Friday to all!

>>10989816
fleg, in this context, is a portmanteau of flap and leg which has never been a combination tried before in reality before Starship

Musk: sends water towers welded up in a field to space.

Bezos: still playing with a suborbital dildo

>>10989826
I just ftlought it was a drunk typo.

>>10989830
fuck no, those objects are called Flegs and they're the aerosurface shell around the actual fleg

>>10989829
But isn't Musk playing with a large chrome dildo? Someone call Bad Dragon.

>>10989840
no, Starship is a stainless trash can
New Shephard is shaped like a penis

>>10989841
Are you sure about that?

>>10989841
starhopper is the trashcan, fool
Starship looks like a magnum dong too

>>10989852
no.

>>10989840
>Someone call Bad Dragon
No, that synergy will arrive with the Mars-bound version of the Boring Co's tunnel digging machine, and not a moment before.

>>10989829
look at that chad hand, does the guy cut down trees for fun on the weekends or something?

>>10989892
>Giant drilling cock extends from shiny spaceship to penetrate Mars

Fund it

>>10989892
>not wanting a chrome starship dildo

>>10989763
>>10988428
3m just does a hiring freeze then offers an early retirement plan if you have been there a bit. If they dont like you-your working leads, team leads, team advisors, product managers(typically the plant manager) boss brow beats you into leaving.
3m does adhesive shit for lockheeds f35, we also work for commercial airliners (boeing). Northrop as far as I knew was looking into it as well with the aerospace adhesive.

>>10989959
>five guys investigate starship-chan's hole

CSpOC video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btmU3hHvJGk

i think i like AGI's space operations center better

>>10989852
no u
Starship is a steely dan.

anyone interested in ad astra movie? the story sounds kind of boring https://youtu.be/P6AaSMfXHbA

>Looks like Australia is joining us for Moon/Mars.
>NASA Dep Admin Morhard will sign an agreement w/Australian Space Agency head Megan Clark tmrw (Sat) 9amET.
wait what

>>10990035
>space emus

Looks like the number of launches is picking up again. There are at least six launches scheduled for the next 9-10 days: 3 Russian, 2 Chinese, 1 Japanese.

suggestions for dealing with space debris and space traffic that were talked about today

>>10990079
Now that we have a space force we can just send grunts up there to collect the rocks.

been busy all day so im just catching up now

>>10990082
nobody is signing up for the space force if it's just going to be Planetes

Will the mk1 actually be done by the 28th?

STACC
T
A
C
C

>>10990089
unironically this is what the space force might end up doing. If you have a bunch of space debris clean up bots, you can also clean up objects that other countries do not consider to be debris. Doing so is also better than shooting at said objects because shooting generates debris which could fuck over your own satellites.

>>10990117
Kessler Treaty of Warfare 2024 states all combat actions must be debris-negative, that is, you must not cause more debris than you deorbit.

>>10990108
First orbital launch from the Cape by year's end? It's more likely than you think

>>10985559
SLS Cargo sizemogs Starship
SLS is also almost ready to go to the moon whereas starship is currently a tin can
>>10985724
You can't reuse your rocket if the main stage takes you to the edge of space

>>10990201
You’re actually sort of right. F9 stages pretty early and the engines can heavily throttle and re-light. Other rockets lack those traits, so propulsive landings of the 1st stage is impossible without massive redesigns

>>10990201
Starship is much larger than any version of SLS in any possible way.
I think the final upgraded version of SLS gets more payload to high energy trajectories due to the high dry weight and merely high ISP of Starship (single launch without refueling)

>>10989160
Was there even a single Russian rocket engine that was ever reused? Let alone sold to America first...
Big yikes.

>>10989911
This is more about wanting a supremely phallic symbol to deploy and utilize an even more literal phallic symbol

>>10990006
It has the feel of Heart of Darkness, IN SPESS.

>>10990310
The general sense of the Big Brains of Russian aerospace is that Russia rested on it laurels during what should have been a golden period to take advantage of better income that should have fed next-generation development.

>https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/with-dragon-russian-critic-says-roscosmos-acting-left-behind/

>>10989959
What is the small dots on the surface for?

>Orion rocket is xancelled because it resembles boobs, not dick

>>10990324
I guess they could still dust off plans for Energia II

When will crew dragon launch and BTFO Boeing/boomerspace?

>>10990378
Tentatively December 17th, but as noted it is tentative. Most expect the date to slip.

Even after the first successful launch, there will be an aggressive campaign of post-flight testing and analysis to confirm flight-readiness to NASA's standards.

>>10990409
The dates for DM-2 and CPT are under revision and whatever the new ones are, they won’t be in 2019.

>>10990356
transpiration cooling

>>10989959
What's that port for?

>>10990089
Planetes was comfy as hell. I'd become a space janitor on a dime if it was anything like that.
Any reccs for realistic space sci-fi like Uchuu Kyoudai and Planetes?

>>10990412
Like I said, tentatively.

>>10990439
seeing as not much other ports were added: it's the general access port to the tanks.
It permits maintenance, cleaning, etc that requires a human to do it.

>>10990035
ARSE is real

>>10990438
not at all, those would only be visible from a few centimetres away, and we know that the starship we have now is just a single layer of tank.

>>10990356
weld marks from some internal structure attached to the tank

>>10989999
Based Steely Dan digits.

>>10990035
They are planning to launch stuff from the NT somewhere

>SLS WILL NEVER FLY
>ORION WILL NEVER FLY
>NASA IS NOT GOING BACK TO THE MOON

>>10990603
What about JWST?

ohhhhh shit

>>10989829
>check'em

>here’s your flap bro

Crane on the left extended all the way out too

>>10990633
>>10990648
i am so happy right now

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqvGoTWWfdQ
>They Can Send Up Whatever They Want
Trump wants to go to Mars direct, however NASA has "convinced" him of the moon as a "launching pad"

>>10990633
>>10990648
HNNNNNGGGGGGGGGG

>>10990679
There's no reason he can't handle NASA going to the moon as a "customer", while still working toward Mars launches on his own. Given NASA's recent history, there is no guarantee that they will get any closer to the moon than SLS has for the past decade.

>>10989902
He probably jerks off his magnum dong

>>10990006
It looks kinda neat, I hope they get the physics at least passably right and the things in the movie universe are logically consistent (better than Interstellar holy shit)

>>10990085
So, quick question, any reason in particular why they're down sizing the fairing of Vulcan with respect to Atlas V?

>>10990360
More like designed and built by boobs, heyo

1 on, 2 being lofted

>>10990361
Anyone can draw a picture and title it 'reusable booster concept', anon. No serious engineering work was ever put into the Energia future concepts, they hardly even managed to launch two of the original stack before it was shit-canned along with the Soviet Union.

>>10990796
That will never happen in our universe. Fuck movie fiction.

>>10990108
Fucking hell just how big will this thing become?

>>10990079
All bullshit,they look something to counter Kosmos 2521 satellite.

>>10990612
JWST can launch on starship

>>10990854
JWST, if it ever launches, will launch on an Arianespace rocket because the contract has already been signed
ESA has their name on it and they got their name on it (in part) by promising to launch it.

>>10990837
What's up with this flap design, it's supposed to be a landing leg as well right? It looks like there are additional pieces to be added to it. A full monocoque design closer to the shape of the renderings should be lighter and stronger, so I wonder why it's like that.

>>10990866
we have no fucking clue

>>10990866
wait a week

>>10990821
Someday, anon, someday someone somewhere will have the budget and the autism necessary to make a movie set in space that both uses accurate physics and accurate spacecraft design, as well as NOT using meme plot devices.

I mean, in Interstellar for example, a wormhole pops up next to Saturn. Okay, that's fucked, but whatever, plot needs to happen. Later however it is heavily implied to the point of outright being stated that the wormhole popped up because humans in the far future developed the technology to both manipulate space-time and go back in time, and it was them that made the wormhole appear so that the plot could happen and save humanity in the first place. Okay, but why the fuck is it around Saturn? You're telling me the future humans couldn't throw the past humans a bone and put that wormhole between Earth and Venus or something a little more convenient?

Another thing; why exactly do they need to find a habitable planet at all, if they already have super capable SSTO spacecraft AND the technological ability to live in sealed orbiting habitats? I mean come on, yeah there's a blight killing plant life on Earth, so go ahead and harvest as much genetic information as you can from the remaining stuff and build some sealed habitats on the ground if you have to, do indoor farming and don't let the blight in. Interstellar could have accomplished its plot of saving Humanity from a dying Earth by sending the Endurance to the Moon, dropping off a bunch of cargo, using available gravel to cover a small dome habitat, and restart industry on the Moon from there.

>>10990866
My thoughts are that this big piece is probably not going to be actuated, it's just gonna be fixed in place. The tip of the thing will be actuated, and will provide the control necessary along with the forward flaps to allow for all the maneuvering in atmosphere they need to do. The bit that acts as the foot on the leg will also be attached somewhere near the tip of this flap thing, and will be extendable/retractable. Since that leg needs to take the entire weight of a fully loaded Starship in Mars gravity, it needs to be able to hold over around 1 million newtons of force per leg. Since they also want to make these things fast and rather cheaply they probably went with some very beefy beams instead of a monocoque design, since it's faster and cheaper that way, though perhaps less strong for its weight.

Otherwise maybe the flaps and the legs are no longer one thing, and this thing is thus no longer weight bearing and just needs that internal skeleton to hold against aerodynamic forces.

>>10989763
It would still need the boosters, because SSMEs are pretty weak, and SLS's first stage is supposed to burn for a long time. Akin to Arian 5, if you've seen any of their launches.

>>10990838
Hearsay is, they are for the booster.
Now, someone pointed out they look slightly larger than both Starship prototypes.
Answers next month, maybe.

>>10990902
Well, what would be the point of the fucking cylinder all along the ship, then?
Drag?

>>10990924
>what would be the point of the fucking cylinder all along the ship
what? the big cylinder holds the fuel

Can spacex land dragon2 to mars with falcon heavy?

>>10990934
>can
yes
>will they
no

>>10990932
Look at the fucking pictures.
The whole wing is attached to an actuated cylinder.
>>10990698

>>10990935
didn't NASA look into trying sample return with Dragon 2? I guess it didn't come to anything

>>10989763
Earth is flat

>>10990936
it's a telephoto lens, that cylinder is just right next to the speed brake
they're going to use the wing roots to hide their raceway and other pipes

>>10990902
>Otherwise maybe the flaps and the legs are no longer one thing, and this thing is thus no longer weight bearing and just needs that internal skeleton to hold against aerodynamic forces.
This looks like the case to me. It looks like a completed fin, and based on its mounting points it looks like it's intended to be actuated. There don't appear to be mounting points on it to extend it into a leg, and it wouldn't make sense to design it in separate pieces like that.
I'm guessing landing legs are separate and some new design.

>>10990940
Nevermind the cylindrical base of the wing.
You're a 100% wrong on that shit.

>>10990946
the base of the wing is cylindrical so it can actuate
it fits inside these things: >>10989803

>>10990951
Anon is saying this is the fixed wing for no reason.

>>10990955
oh, he's a retard but that cylinder is unrelated

>>10990957
I'm not sure.
Maybe this whole space will be filled with hydrolics.

This whole shit really makes you think at how low throttle the tin can operated at.
I mean, 3 raptors are supposed to be OK lifting it and it looks 4 time higher at least.

>>10990978
if this thing is 4 times higher, the garbage can was 10 times thicker
it was a battleship stage

>>10990979
Still, they were supposed to put 3 engines on it at some point.

>>10990911
>It would still need the boosters
Nah, SLS only needs the solids to achieve high-and-fast off of the pad, which the Booster can also supply. In fact using the SpaceX Booster as a first stage would get the remaining stages on a higher and faster trajectory than the solids would at burnout, so even though the core stage would still be full and not partially emptied it'd still have ~0.6 TWR with a 100 ton payload which is fine for a 2nd stage. You'd probably have to expend the Booster in order to get it up to the speeds where a normal 2nd stage TWR works, though.

>>10990998
Well, I'm gonna bet there would be a lot of gravity loss in this process.
Wasting fuel to keep high enough.

>>10990924
It's probably a line for the autogenous pressurization system. Warm vaporized methane and oxygen need to get from the engines to their respective tanks to pressurize them somehow, after all. We already know that the propellant lines are internal, and it wouldn't make sense to immerse your pressurant lines in a bath of liquid cold enough to condense your pressurant gas. In any case the small pipe is definitely NOT structural.

>>10990936
>>10990946
The flap would have a round end if it were designed to be fixed or mobile, because it's easy to build that way, literally a pipe at one end and a pipe at the other and sheet metal connecting them with internal stringers for stiffness. I'm not sure if these >>10989803 would actually allow the flap to move or not, it seems like there's be nowhere for it to move, could certainly be looking at it wrong though.

>>10990879
>realism for space fiction
Well, for the most part a, "slice of life," genre movie would be the best you could hope for. There's something sorta similar to that. It is the anime, "Planetes."

>interstellar blight plot shit
What got me was that they could toss shit into space and it was somehow blight free, but they couldn't make a blight free clean room on Earth. lol

As for the reasoning for colonizing a new planet, why not? If we can do it then do it. Footholds are good like that. Also please, stop talking about Interstellar. It is just a bad science movie that is sorta pretty and interesting in a gum-chewing manner at best. They had a good marketing team that touted it as, "accurate science," when it is as far from accurate science as you can get. Thus, it god nerd hopes up and raked in more money than it otherwise would have.

If you'd like something a bit more scientifically accurate, try, "The Martian" (2015), though the book will be far better than the movie. And, if you want books, try, "Orbital Decay," by Allen Steele

>>10991018
Look, your theories are cute, but we know at least two wings have to be actuated.
It's not unreasonable to believe this is one of the two, because of the cylindrical base.
Also, I'm pretty sure Starship has in-tanking, so they wouldn't need a bypass.

So you are saying you can make the largest most capable rocket ever just out in the open using half drunk barn silo welders and our janitors budget?

>>10991033
they need a bypass for the autogenous pressurization

>>10991034
Pretty much. I was amazed the tuna can didn't xpode half-way.

>>10990879
Humans can't live without Earth or at least Earth-like planet... Or love.

>>10991037
Yeah, and it's all inward.
Most likely have a tube feeding ch4 to the inner ch4 tank via no pumps at all.

>>10991048
hot gaseous oxygen pipe can't go through the methane tank
hot gaseous methane pipe should go in the top of the methane tank

>>10991050
That's what I said.

>>10990684
Congress is not funding the Artemis so expect direction shift if administrations change. If not expect more of the same.

>>10991053
there won't be any pumps at all, but it does need a pipe
and that pipe is going to go on the outside up a raceway, which will probably be combined with the flap roots

>>10991059
Look, it's easy
There are two states to Starship:
On the fucking launchpad, and launching back from Mars.
What doing out-body fuel lines does is not much when there's barely any fuel left.

>>10991072
excuse me I think we're talking past each other here
what the fuck are you talking about because I cannot understand you

>>10990671
>highly fragile aerospace components
>left on the ground under the sun

>>10990378
Problems with parachutes will cause delays. Boeing absolutely has to win for their own and for America's sake and the future of human spaceflight.

>>10991075
I'm talking heat transfer between fuel.
Starship will launch with liquid shit in it's tanks.
But when it's coming back, it will all be gaseous, if it's only two tanks.
It will require the pumps to run harderer, but they fucking know this.
And so they designed the Space Thermos:
When Injection burn is done, put all the fuel inside a inner rocket tank with void around it.
This will limit evaporation, and keep the fuel liquid.

>>10991096
you're retarded and we're talking about different things
also, what pumps

>>10991085
I know right that sun is going to melt the stainless steel, wtf are they doing!!???

>>10991099
Look, It's pretty much as I stated.
Having outward fuel lines doesn't help this shit at all.
There's a 5-10 minute window where's that's somewhat true, but Starship isn't designed to only get to orbit.
Look at that fucking picture.
They designed the inner tank to be just enough volume to get back from Mars.

>>10991085
>highly fragile
if it's highly fragile then you're doing it wrong
i'm not going inside a highly fragile spaceship

>>10991039
Good radiation shielding plus enough spin for gravity on a large enough diameter station and we'd be fine.

>>10991008
There'd be less gravity losses than the current SLS design. I agree that shoehorning the sustainer in a booster-sustainer design to be a second stage isn't ideal, but that's because booster-sustainer is a shit, the core stage is way bigger and therefore has more dry mass than it'd need otherwise.
Anyway, by running the Booster first stage to completion, assuming the entire burn happens at 330 Isp and assuming a 90% wet-dry mass ratio for that Booster stage (it could be better IRL but being conservative) it'd give the stack 3.25 km/s of delta V. In reality for most of the burn duration the Isp would be closer to 355 since getting out of the atmosphere happens fast. Anyway, even including gravity losses (which are low due to the high TWR of 1.65) staging would happen at a velocity of around 2.75 km/s. At stage sep the RS-25 engines only provide a TWR of 0.6 which sucks but isn't a deal breaker, you're just realizing the gravity losses that normal SLS gets by burning its core stage during assisted ascent.

If I were seriously designing this rocket beyond slapping stages on top of one another I'd add at least 2 RS-25 engines to the second stage, which would give it a TWR of 1.08 (assuming fitting 2 more engines adds 10 tons), but I'd be happier with 7 total because that gives a TWR of 1.26, very respectable especially at 452 Isp. This rocket by the way can provide a 150 ton payload 11.25 km/s of delta V, so can definitely get more than 150 tons into LEO but can't quite get 150 tons to the Moon (needs another 880 m/s, so you could probably do it with a 100 ton payload but I'm not doing the math again lol)

>>10991034
Yes, this is exactly how technology is. The one thing the internet has taught is that people of note are really just a bunch of morons who happen to get something right a small percentage of the time. Be that authors, doctors, scientists, or engineers who make rockets. The people who think, "you can't do that unless you...." are always wrong and were kept wrong via propaganda to prevent them from doing anything noteworthy.

>>10991115
Well, I'm not that much into math, but there's a thing I know, I hate low TWR rockets in KSP.

>>10990879
But Apollo 13 was the first movie to use a Vomit Comet to have actual zero-gee scenes, right? So when will someone do that with miniatures? I know, CGI is so much cheaper, this would have to be done for the lulz.

>>10991096
Something's off here. I don't know why pumps would run harder or why you'd want to move fuel from the outer to the inner tanks.

Once main tanks do their job which is very early on in the flight they are vented becoming vacuum insulator. Liquid fuel that was in the inner tanks will remain liquid and well protected by the resulting thermos.

Outer tanks might be pressurized using gas from the inner tanks for structural reasons during reentry.

Peculiar thing is that both methane and oxygen inner tanks will reside either in the main methane or oxygen tanks, which could lead to interesting mixes if things go awry.

>>10991020
>They had a good marketing team that touted it as, "accurate science," when it is as far from accurate science as you can get.
That's why me piss. I've already seen and read the Martian, it was pretty nice, although once glaring flaw is that while the bacteria in his soil would have died when freeze dried, the endospores they keep internally wouldn't have, and once the soil was warmed back up and repressurized/remoistened they would have revived. Also even if all the bacteria did die it's not like the nutrients they had already produced would not have still been there, and Mark himself would have eventually needed to take a shit, plus the bacteria in the soil he was living around would have colonized his skin and the inside of his suit by then.

>>10991107
I'm talking about the pressurant lines that run from the engines to the top of the tanks, anon
there will be pipes on the outside of the tanks to carry hot gaseous combustion products from the pre-burners to the top of the tanks to provide pressurization for the tanks, instead of using comestibles (high pressure helium or nitrogen bottles inside the tanks)
this gas is extremely hot, so the pipes are going to get extremely hot, so they cannot be run inside the tanks while they're full of extremely cold gas (because they'd get thermally shocked or something)

>>10991048
They can't run the gas lines through the propellant tanks because the cold propellant will condense the gasses too quickly (relatively high surface area to conduct heat through compared to when the gasses form a bubble above the surface of the liquids in the big tanks). You'd basically be running your vapors into a big condenser. If they need to add an outer aerodynamic cover to a few spots anyway, they won't lose anything by running the lines under those fairings.

>>10991140
90% sure the dorsal fin will be the main highway for these things. Maybe that's what we are seeing in the pics?

>>10991136
P=nRT.
When shit gets hotter, you get less stuff by volume.
Look, they addressed the problem.
They're doing inner tanks that will work like a thermos. It's all about dimensioning them right.

7 D A Y S

>>10991140
It's all gonna run from the inner tanks.

>>10991096
Dude, we're talking about the fact that Raptor boils a small amount of propellant to provide pressurizing gasses for the main propellant tanks. YOU are talking about propellant boil-off, WE are talking about how SpaceX replaced the helium system with an autogenous system. You can't just pump liquid propellant out of the tanks without replacing that volume with a gas, otherwise in atmosphere you will collapse your tanks and in space the internal pressure will drop so far that your propellant will start boiling and badly cavitating in your pumps.

>>10991150
they need to replace the top of the nose, add two more legfinflapcontrolsurfaces, add the top canards, add the three (3) raptors, RCS thrusters; what else?

>>10991137
>while the bacteria in his soil would have died when freeze dried, the endospores they keep internally wouldn't have, and once the soil was warmed back up and repressurized/remoistened they would have revived
If I recall correctly that can only happen if the freeze process is slow enough to trigger them to go, "dormant." So, flash freezing and flash freeze dehydrating, like what would have happened on the Martian would more than likely killed 99.999% of the bacteria. Regardless, there were, as you say, plenty of other bacteria sources that would have worked quite fine. The only thing it could have had to make it even better would be mycorrhizae, but that would just be a major plus and not strictly needed.

>>10991153
YOU are talking about fuels lines all over the place for no reason. When valves can do the job.

>>10991132
One thing different about Ksp vs real life is that in real life the Earth is much bigger than Kerbin and you have a lot more time in general to do things. Low TWR upper stages in Ksp are pretty useless because you're either pretty much in orbit anyway once the stage kicks in, or you have no hope of reaching orbit before you fall back down. In real life one orbit of the Earth takes an hour and a half, so if you have a trajectory that's gonna take you decently high you can spend as much as a dozen minutes accelerating with a low thrust stage and not end up falling back down before you can circularize.

>>10991144
they'll need to run sensors and other electric lines as well, and the flap root is the best place because it goes up the highest
>>10991148
Dorsal fin is completely unnecessary in this config, because it will always be in the lee of the body
I would not be surprised to learn that it was removed
>>10991149
shut the fuck up, you're either an idiot or just babbling
>>10991151
no, they'll need separate lines to the header tanks
>>10991160
valves will not do the job

>>10991155
an absolutely stupid amount of plumbing and general sensors

>>10991148
That's what we were saying, other anon thinks we're talking about propellant boiling off and being recondensed via pumps and cryocoolers because he's retarded.

>>10991172
they've been working on the inside out of view for forever. It might be pretty far along.

>>10991167
Hey, I don't know, man, maybe you do your own steel rocket.
But it needs to be drilled in your head:
Starship is for Mars, and nothing else.

>>10991176
$20 there won't be a dorsal fin and that's why Elon is sad because his meme Tin Tin rocket won't happen
>>10991177
that's true

>>10991160
What the fuck is a valve gonna do with no pipe attached, retard?
>>10991167
>the flap root is the best place because it goes up the highest
Agreed, it's a good way to keep things from making drag without adding additional mass

>>10991179
you need the pipes to go to the top for Mars as well

>>10991107
>refilling
LEWD

>>10991181
I dunno anything about what the design is gonna be, but I can tell you there gonna need a return line from the engines to the propellant tanks to supply hot vapor pressurant gasses.

>>10991187
ass
2
ass

>>10991185
I wish I didn't have to post this.
Did you know Elon's plan doesn't work without IRSU?

>>10991187
>After insertion burn
Her durrr.

>>10991192
>IRSU
>

>>10991201
Well, the inner tanks have enough volume to land you there.
But they need to be refilled to get you back to Earth.

>>10991207
>wanting to get back to earth

>>10991179
Look dude, the main tanks need to be pressurized, they can't rely on static boil-off to replace the volume of propellants being drained at cubic meters per second, so they need a pressurant gas supply. This is true of EVERY rocket, including Falcon 9 and even Starhopper (remember the COPVs?) On Falcon 9 they use helium gas, on Starhopper they probably used nitrogen, but on Starship the plan is to use autogenous pressurization. Some rockets already do this. It works by using heat form the engines to boil a tiny fraction of the propellant coming from the pumps, producing a shitload of hot high pressure vapors. These vapors then run up to the tanks and keep them at two or three bar, which helps to push the propellants into the pumps and reduces cavitation, as well as stopping the pressure from dropping so low that the propellants hit their triple points.

Everyone already knows that Starship has enough passive cooling capability that once in space its propellants WILL NOT boil off. We're NOT talking about Starship loitering in Space or on Mars, we're talking about when it is actively firing its engines in ANY situation.

>>10991190
I agree, and that autogenous pressurant return line will be going to the top of (all four of) the tanks in order to minimize the surface area of the hot/cold boundary inside the tanks
I personally believe that these return lines will be following the pectoral flap roots (because there will be no dorsal fin)
I guess we'll find out in a week
>>10991192
>IRSU
technically correct, I guess
Elon is well on his way to elevating himself to King of Mars

>>10991215
The main tanks ar only used initially.
For the rest of the trip, they're empty.
Hence why the inner tanks.
It will prevent evaporation from the Sun.

>>10991223
I'm done responding to you, retard
just this last one: the inner tanks acting as a thermos bottle to preserve propellant for EDL after interplanetary coast is well known and not at all what we're talking about

>>10991218
Okay, good, I wasn't sure if you where this other retard that seems to think that we think that Starship doesn't need auto-gen pipes because in space it acts like a thermos, not realizing that they are completely different and unrelated topics.

>>10991207
That's not much of a problem really. It is easy enough to send supplies prior to getting there, while you are going there, and after you arrive; baring window times obviously. From a safety standpoint, landing some supplies at the LZ, but keeping some supplies in orbit which can land somewhere else if there's an emergency crew landing somewhere else may be a good idea.

>>10991228
Look, you want liquid shit to go through your pumps.
Temperature is a limit, but so is space.
That's why the inner tanks idea is what you want.

>>10991223
The header tanks also need to be pressurized. Any tank that a rocket engine drains from needs to be pressurized. READ YOU FUCKING NIGGER READ

uh, the 7 refueling trips it takes to fill up a Starship in orbit will take a while, no? I'd imagine that Starship can hold fuel in the main tank in space just fine without major boil-off

>>10991231
I don't know why he thinks that auto-gen and header tanks are at cross-purposes
what a fucking retard, let's all laugh at him

>>10991235
That's exactly what I've been saying all along.
Niggers only thing this shit has to go to orbit to be validated.

>>10991238
It's Ok, but there's still some boil-off.

>>10991234
>Look, you want liquid shit to go through your pumps.
>Temperature is a limit, but so is space.
>That's why the inner tanks idea is what you want.
Yeah, and if you are trying to store liquid in a tank with no PRESSURE it will NOT be a LIQUID, it will vaporize until it cools off to the point of FREEZING. There fore you need to PRESSURIZE your TANKS to keep your propellants LIQUID, and since Starship doesn't carry any HELIUM it needs to use methane and oxygen VAPOR to PRESSURIZE the tanks, and since they will only need more of these gasses while the engines are FIRING and since engines are HOT they are using the ENGINES to BOIL about 0.1% of the PROPELLANTS to make hot VAPORS that are PIPED up to the TANKS to supply that vital PRESSURE.

EVERY TANK NEEDS PRESSURE, MAIN TANKS AND HEADER TANKS

PRESSURE COMES FROM GASSES
STARSHIP HAS NO HELIUM GAS, IT MAKES METHANE GAS AND OXYGEN GAS

THE PIPES FOR THOSE GASSES, FLOWING FROM ENGINE TO TANK, ARE OUTSIDE THE TANKS BECAUSE THE TANKS ARE TOO COLD, BECAUSE THEY'RE FULL OF CRYOGENIC LIQUID METHANE AND OXYGEN

>>10991242
>That's exactly what I've been saying all along.
No, you've been talking about boil-off and conflating it with autogenous pressurization, they're not the same thing

>>10991238
boil off is not a huge issue with methane and lox, although I think it will need some management, Apollo barbeque roll style
>>10991249
>>10991254
quit talking to the retard

>>10991249
You both are being faggots about this, but yes a cryo liquid needs to be kept in the same pressure range to stay liquid. Too little pressure and the boiling temperature goes down and it boils off.
That's why an auto-gen pressure system or helium tanks are needed.

>>10991267
this is uh
water? that's the only substance I know that has a solid phase line that slants down

>>10991274
Don't be a faggot, it's a representation of liquid/gas phases in general. Different materials have different angles for the lines but the important part here is that line between liquid phase and vapor.

>>10991284
oh, there's two lines
what? why is one dashed? I'm confused.

And here we are, arguing about a garbage can or two, that will fucking crash for no other reason that they're made of scrap.

>>10990798
they don't need it to be that big. Atlas V's fairing holds its second stage too (sometimes). That's a waste of money if you don't have to hold the second stage.

>>10991192
>>10991218
it's ISRU not IRSU. It stands for In-Situ Resource Utilization.

>>10991294
IRSU is the name of some egyptian guy, his name means "he who made himself"

>>10991284
yeah, I fucked up, it's P.V=n.R.T.
Just play some Stationeers already.

>>10991294
Yeah, anybody knew what I meant.

>>10991292
I guess, is Vulcan using a wider 2nd stage then? I always thought it was fucky that they'd put the payload along with a 2nd stage into a faring like that.

shit's lifting, yo

>>10991393
the fuck is that

>>10991404
hinge pin going in

>>10991404
Looks like a fin/wing.

>>10991404
mounty bit for the 2nd flaplegwingfin

>>10991415
>>10991393
welp, I was wrong, it's a hinge pin

>>10991415
Remember guys, it’s totally not that easy in rocketry. The fact that SpaceX hasn't bribed at least 10 Senators to have its production in their states for extra funding and that it hasn't done the thousands of hours of safety study for each individual failure mode at the minimum shows that they're all amateurs and will never leave LEO. SpaceX shouldn't be taken seriously because they're too rude to established and verified institutions.

I'm not nervously sweating, its just hot here in Alabama.

>>10991421
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1994748#msg1994748

sorry for saying it was a hinge pin I was just being dumb lol

>>10991434
He could break senator Shelby in half, with his bare hands!

>>10991434
I agree fellow American patriot and I believe enough is enough the government must take action immediately. We cannot wait until American lives are put at risk by these so called reusable rockets and depots!

nose on

>>10991459
Pan, piping hot!

>>10991439
ah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7fnlJ60RO8

>>10991488
perfect

>>10991488
I refuse to believe this couldn't have been made 50 years ago.

>big crane is needed for the trapezoid
>currently being used on the fairing
I assume they'll lift the nose soon and do the swap. Then the big crane goes back over to help with the zoids.

>>10991510
The chinese could have made spacefaring rockets if they really tried.

>>10991510
The Raptor is pretty tricky and the avionics the would be nearly impossible, you'd need a dedicated Booster Pilot to fly back Superheavy by hand. And of course well trained Starship Pilots to execute EDL. This isn't a simple capsule entry.

>>10991535
we had automatic plane landings with glideslope trackers in the TWENTIES. I don't think it would be a problem

>>10991488
>here's your starship bro

>>10991536
>If I can build a control loop for a stable system with primitive tech, then I can build a control loop for an unstable system with primitive tech too

>>10991535
Booster landing pilot yes otherwise been there done that.
As for the engines there is a rather bruteforce method that isn't elegant but it will work - separate descent engines.

Some things might get easier if you go for horizontal landing...

>>10991549
you think they'd need to do horizontal landing for the booster?
I also don't see the precision required to do hoverslams being real at that point in time

comparison to 2017. Bit of a stretch.

>>10991553
I don't think you could do a falcon 9 style booster landing using 1970 technology without wasting a shitload of rockets. Even then the repeatability of the landings would be very low.

>>10991553
F9 does suicide burn because twr issues. More efficient but not required. SS/SH should be able to hover and land gently and that is more tolerable for manual work. 60's large booster doesn't absolutely need vertical landing so go for wings and runways and leave the rocket landings to the rocket boys that really need it.

>>10991571
human pilots don't have the precision, and it's the best way to get a spacecraft out of orbit
I guess the Apollo guidance computer did it...

>>10991570
I'm sure someone took notice of the tank domes during construction and measured the volumes.

How much fuel do we have now?

>>10991580
a lot, there's a lot of autism somewhere on NSF because people got extremely confused because they didn't see the header tanks get put in

>>10991535
>The Raptor is pretty tricky
You can get better Isp from a gas generator hydrolox engine than you can from a FFSC methalox engine. You can also get decent chamber pressure too and good TWR from a gas generator, just look at Merlin 1D. Sure, hydrogen is a meme propellant, but if you NEED the Isp because you don't have the other options, then a simple hydrolox engine can work just fine. Hydrogen sucks from a density point of view but the real reason why SpaceX didn't choose it for their vehicle is because storing hydrogen for months at a time on Mars is a non-starter, it's simply too difficult compared to methalox.

>>10991590
Hydrogen isn't an option for Starship because of density. It's already fuckhuge. Hydrolox Starship would be Sea Dragon tier.

>>10991599
>low density/fuckhuge fuel tanks
On the plus side you'll be fluffier on reentry.

>>10991599
Literally not an issue, just make it wider and you're good to go. The only affect is the dry mass goes up, which like I said isn't ideal, but as SpaceX has clearly shown there's really no issue with building a bigger rocket unlike what those Boing jews would tell you. Elon has already said that after Starship is operating the next step will probably be an 18 meter diameter (but still methalox) vehicle, Big Chungus. As >>10991602 put it a big low density fuel tank means you can actually get more surface area per unit mass, considering the payload mass does not increase in step with the tank volume if you switch to hydrolox.

Overall switching from methalox to hydrolox has the following effects; More expensive for a given total propellant mass, because the tanks need to be much bigger and bigger does cost more, though not prohibitively more. Larger vehicle per unit payload, so aerobraking gains an advantage. Difficult to store hydrolox in space for long periods, requires active cooling, that's added cost and complexity if you want that (all but impossible for a lightweight system to store hydrolox on the surface of Mars, deal-breaker for SpaceX). Specific impulse goes up, increase in performance (even though wet-dry mass ratio goes down, it's still an improvement, just not as much as a 1:1 Isp increase with the same density). Harder to make a high thrust engine, easier to make a high efficiency engine (thrust doesn't matter so much because total mass for equal performance is lower, but is still important).

To put it simply, in my opinion a reusable two stage launch vehicle could have been done a long time ago using hydrolox's Isp to make up for some of the drawbacks and shortfalls of technology of the time. This vehicle would be capable of placing large amounts of payload into low Earth orbit for cheap compared to any modern launch vehicle, but would not be capable of long term propellant storage.

>>10991590
>hydrogen
Ouch oof the embrittlement

>>10991645
>To put it simply, in my opinion a reusable two stage launch vehicle could have been done a long time ago
Yeah, but that would make space more accessible which would drive up costs to maintain a large spaceflight infrastructure. It was cheaper in the long run to restrict spaceflight to force the leading space agency to use a terrible launch vehicle that would kill any dreams of exploring space beyond LEO.

>>10991647
Just use non embrittling metals lol

>>10991668
Sure, if you goal is to spend as little money as possible then you should not even have a space program. If you want to reduce the amount of money you're spending but still do things then you want to waste as little of it as possible on launch capability, which means you want the cheapest and most effective launch vehicle possible, which means reusable TSTO.

>>10991590
the Soviets honestly would have had a better chance than the Americans would, they had the materials science necessary for kerosene oxygen rich staged combustion engines

>>10991645
I'm not sure you could get the thrust density required for Super Heavy out of a hydrolox engine

pic with details

>>10991700
Not him but kerosene solves that.

Many options were on the table for spaceflight and expansion but in the end the ICBM centric ones were all that remained, until now.

>>10991711

>>10991711
Not gonna lie the tenty VAB is making it look more aerospace grade like.

>>10991711
This is the one that'll do suborbital hops, right?

>>10991129
Amen brother.

>>10991711
>>10991715
these... are not load bearing
just aerosurfaces
>>10991717
there is, in fact, any amount of building on-sight at all which instantly makes it 400% more legit
>>10991713
kerosene upper stage?

>>10991719
it's a prototype of the orbital variant
Elon makes it sound like these are going to orbit and coming back, but I expect a major refit involving aerosurfaces that are not riveted together after the suborbital hops and before the orbital hops

>>10991722
>on-sight
on site

>>10991719
20 km and possibly higher to 100 km

>>10991715
>>10991711
>>10991608
It looks so ugly and janky, and it seems like building that cost less than a single RS-25.

I love it.

>>10991722
Not a big fan of hydrogen even for upper stages but the post >>10991713 was specifically about the booster and how a switch to kerosene helps with the thrust problems that will be experienced with lh2.

So how is Starship supposed to survive reentry? Wouldn't pail stainless steel melt like wax in mars's atmosphere? If it survived that, it get torched in earth's atmosphere

>>10991729
>20km flight insurance - 250 million
>100km flight insurance - 5 years worth of sls budget

a fucking penguin

>>10991744
No

>>10991742
so it's basically back to kerolox for both because the natural gas infrastructure was not in place in the 70s and 80s to support a methalox rocket

>>10991744
I have no idea how Mars EDL will be handled
Earth EDL is going to be ceramic tiles for LEO and I don't know if there's going to be a different solution for GTO or Lunar trajectories

>>10991751
Well, if it works...

>>10991291
What's your point anon.

>>10991750
Wings is too big, I'd say the wings ought to be ~30-40% smaller.

Landing legs are too weird.

>>10991760
true, but at least he got the top of the wing right

>>10991756
it's just a cheaper shuttle until you get the automation to the point that SpaceX style flyback hoverslam boosters and upper stages is viable

>>10991755
If it can do moon returns it's going to work out fine. They are comparable to returns from mars.

>>10991748
$250M? $300M way too low to pay for the risks to human life! Can you honestly say to the families of those lost to your contraption that their dead was worth a mere $500M? I'm sorry, but it aint going lower than $750M. Everyone else pays their $1000M insurance fee because they actually care about safety, and you should too!

>>10991763
Yeah
I'm hoping we'll get some information next week.

>>10991744
>Wouldn't pail stainless steel melt like wax in mars's atmosphere?
mars atmosphere is pretty much inexistent. If it can survive Earth, it will survive Mars

Presumably this prototype is gimped in various ways compared to the final version? I mean it's not going to be doing the full speed reentry so that must be at least one difference?

>>10991773
there's probably mass to be shaved in the aerosurfaces, I mean they're riveted together right now
and I think there is aluminum in there, which might not hold up to full EDL

>>10991773
To my disappointment it doesn't seem to be getting any windows, or payload bay doors.

>>10991782
>windows
Human version Starships are almost going to be bespoke designs, they won't share much with the cargo variants

>>10991750
>Elon was just dusting off the Silbervogel this whole time

>>10991786
>Passenger Starship flies
>NASA shits itself because SpaceX hasn't done the mandatory 100 safety meetings per month

>>10991796
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T BE COMPETENT NOOOOOOOOOOOO WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HOLDING SPACE

>>10991810
>crack
>siiiiiiiiip
Yep, that's one fine rocket.

>>10991738

>>10991816
>not a clean room full of highly specialized engineers
I bet they don't even have a torque-meter so they can precisely tighten the bolts to the exact amount.

>>10991816
>>10991824
Would they switch to friction welding once the prototypes shows spaceworthiness? It would make more sense for mass production because you don't have rivets or possible flaws in the arc welding for the skin and tanks

>>10991851
stainless responds better to thermal welding, I would imagine it would completely gum up a stir friction welder

>>10991744
Windward side is getting thin ceramic tiles, leeward side doesn't need anything.

Windward side needs to deal with thermal conduction, meaning the surface needs to be highly emissive (radiates heat strongly) and have a high melting point while also not conducting heat very well (this limits you to ceramics). Unlike Shuttle, which had a very heat-intolerant structure of aluminum and used a type of glue to attach its tiles that wouldn't stand up to heat soaking through a thin tile, thus mandating tiles as much as six inched thick, Starship has a steel structure that can soak up to several hundred degrees no problem and is affixing its thermal tiles with much more heat-tolerant adhesives, meaning more heat can soak through the tile without a problem and thus the tiles can be far thinner.

On the leeward side all of the heat exposure is radiative, that is to say nothing hot actually touched the skin of the vehicle it just glows with infrared light. Polished steel is strongly reflective to infrared, so it simply doesn't heat up much on the leeward side, and as I mentioned it can go up to several hundred degrees without issue anyway, so nothing extra is needed to protect it.

>>10991750
The anon that made this miscalculated the size of the flaps, and made Starship far too short and squat.

>>10991773
It's a bit heavier and less fine tuned in terms of structural engineering. If it can go to orbit and return at all it's basically as good as Cargo Starship will ever be, except 'real' non-prototype versions of Starship will be built using more traditional methods (using machines) and will weigh significantly less as a result. It'll also look prettier but that's not important. Oh, and these prototypes don't have any functionality beyond propulsion and propellant handling tech, they're basically engine module test vehicles, everything else including the ability to carry cargo comes afterwards.

>>10991851
>>10991865
Stir welding steel does work, however it's a lot slower compared to doing friction stir with aluminum, and it requires more expensive equipment. Just watch this video to get an idea of how long a weld takes to complete, and imagine doing all the welds for an entire Starship like that. Arc-welding still takes a while sure, but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and several times faster than this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVxFu5HR98E

>>10991867
>much more heat tolerant adhesives
they're using mechanical fasteners
MECHANICAL
FUCKING
FASTENERS

BOLTS

>>10991890
And glorified stove insulation to fill the cracks.

>>10991870
it's a twitter image, you can go call him out if you want

>>10991890
>>10991892
heres ur rocket bro

>>10991750
Still better looking than anything NASA has made for the past 100 years

>>10991934
How does it feel to be objectively wrong?

>>10991711
oh baby

also i like how the best pics are coming from an autistic thot

>>10991952
tfw no space autism gf

>>10991879
they do have a bunch of empty space inside the nosecone/fairing section, so when they're ready to launch payloads they can cut a door into the leeward side

>>10991952
isn't she somebody's grandma

>>10991940
meeeh, powerful but meh

The fairing top bit is off.

>>10991989
oh i was thinking of the other one

the one who writes poetry about spacex

>>10991711
>Here's your rocket bro

>>10992055
>Here's your rocket bro

those tubes aren't for holding the flaps. ?

>>10992077
Since when did Starship drop from 4 fins to 2?

>>10992082
three rear flaps to two, plus two forward flaps
it's speculation, but I agree with it

any Starship render where it's in space but doesn't have massive solar panel arrays unfurled is silly

>>10992091
just bring a literal few tons of batteries, it'll be fine

flop when

>>10992124
oct

>>10992124
ah shit, here we go again

>>10992124
But Anon, SLS has already flopped and it hasn't even been assembled yet.

>>10992144
MY TIME HAS COME

>>10992221
ARE HOP MEMES COMING BACK?!?!

SOMEONE SAID HOP

>>10991645
The fuck is "methalox?"
Are you high or something?

>>10992287
methalox is methane / liquid oxygen
hydrolox is hydrogen / liquid oxygen
take a wild guess what kerolox

>>10992301
>kerolox
Corn syrup and liquid oxygen?

>>10992309
yeah

>>10992309
kerosene but sure corn syrup would probably burn in a rocket

>>10992301
>methalox is methane / liquid oxygen
>hydrolox is hydrogen / liquid oxygen
Oh, so it's subhuman speak for propellant types?
Like calling CO2 "carbon?"
Kill yourself.

>>10992077
Looks kino as fuck, hope they are going with the two rather than three fins.

>>10992338
>kino as fuck
Kill yourself.

>>10992323
it'd fuck the rocket plumbing and engines in the ass so fucking hard its not even funny

>>10992324
pretty sure both terms appear in Ignition! so you're basically commiting blasphemy

>>10989763
Not science or math.

>>10992348
it's the spacex sperging containment thread, you thank your lucky fucking stars we have one or there would be a thread for every fucking roll of steel elon trots out

>>10992324
It's a standard way of speaking about those propellant mixtures.

>>10992347
Imagine being so pathetic as to view this shit as a religion.

>>10992363
What standard are you referencing?

>>10991750
Looks like something batman would fly

>>10992368
well I'm not about to worship Superman or Jesus, so I might as well worship this big stainless steel trashcan

>>10992368
It's not a formal standard, it's just a shorthand way of referring to propellant mixtures that was gradually agreed on, mainly by the American spaceflight industry. Like how Sterling Silver came to reference a specific silver alloy.

>>10992342
Someone get this hothead outta here!

>>10992368
>gets inordinately upset about terms he doesn't like
>takes every comment hyperliterally and doesn't understand jokes or memes
you are strongly displaying several diagnostic symptoms of autism, frienderino

>>10992368
ISO 3103

one week left

>>10991750
>mfw it turns into the shuttle

>>10992342
Seethe

>>10992558
>Here, breathe in some metha/LOX exhaust
>Thank you Elon

they’re welding the new nose on. Some work on the main body occurring too

>spacex daily/hourly development updates
Wish Blue Origin would follow this step, instead of hiding behind yearly "updates" of 1 image/1 liner statements

Anyone know how hot model rocket starters get? Like one the ones from Estes.

>>10992678
but then we’d realize how far behind they are with NG

>>10992622
finarry

>>10992678
SpaceX isn't giving us any updates, we're just observing the work being done from afar. Wherever B(ody)O(dor) is working on N(i)G(ger) is simply not out in the open and they don't let people take pictures. Because they're retards. And they hate free PR and continuous public interest.

>>10992713
>And they hate free PR and continuous public interest.
To be fair for Blue Origin, their primary customers aren't from the public, but from government agencies and those people don't care about PR really (in come cases being so public and PR heavy is probably seen as a bad thing for them).

>>10992685
hot enough, typically
are you nitrous rocket man

>>10992763
Yeah, eyed some cheap Estes starters at a local Hobby Lobby. Like $4 per starter plus $15 for the electrical equipment, that blows the $40+ of silver out completely (it's safer also).

Sorry for the slow progress lately, got sick and ended up severely behind in classwork so I had to focus on that. I'm better now so engine work will resume. Gonna find someone to weld up the parts of my engine so I don't have to worry about sealing them.

>>10992767
well it's less than buying dinner

>>10990603
>that iridescence from the heating of reentry

finally concept art for Starship that takes wear into account

>>10992791
Yes. Now I can afford two pizzas, or more sensors for my engine.

new thread
>>10992807