/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11049281
Are we ever going to figure out what the story is with the ridge?

when the FUCK is a drawfag going to draw us a thicc Starship Chan?

>>11049287
Underground nazi moon colony, don't tell me you didn't know?

>>11049287

It's either accretion debris from an ancient ring system or the result of cooling fractures.

Until the first man is standing there with a hammer to crack open some of those rocks, we won't know.

it's aluminium retards

>>11049288
>thicc
NO

>>11049296
that (incorrect) spelling of aluminum is communist propaganda

What would be the best way to incentivise spaceflight companies to set up in a given nation?

>>11049303

Make spacecraft as idiot proof and cheap to manufacture as starship is and then they'll love to use cheap labor from third world countries.

>>11049303
public grants to build spaceports

>>11049303

Exemptions from flight regulations.

Informed consent should be all that is required to board a rocket, or test one.

>>11049297
T H I C C

H

I

C

C

>>11049331
no, anon
Starship is mooscle

>*Crinkle*

>>11049300
it's strange how their extra U chromosome expresses itself as an extra I in that word

>>11049281
From the thumbnail I thought this was an electron microscope magnification of a diatome.

>>11049281
Has anyone been able to corroborate some of the wild shit Bob Lazar revealed?
Namely, how far is MatSci?

>>11049354
no, Etherium is fake news, we will not be X-COM anytime soon

spacex pringles can

>>11049363
Get your hand right down in there to acquire the delicious methalox treats

>>11049288
Starship-chan is NOT thicc

>>11049392
Don't you dare post that thot here.

https://spacenews.com/air-force-selects-eight-launch-providers-to-compete-for-986-million-worth-of-orders/
>SpaceX, Xbow Launch Systems, Northrop Grumman, Firefly Aerospace, United Launch Alliance, Aevum, Vox Space and Rocket Lab have been selected to provide launch services in the Orbital Services Program-4 — a $986 million procurement of launch services over nine years.

>>11049347
Yeah what dummies. on an unrelated note, why don't they use titanum for starship?

>>11049521
shithead, it's spelled wolfram

>>11049521
Cost. Titanium is about 40-60 times more expensive than steel. Maybe future versions will be constructed of Titanium (especially if lunar mining takes off), but for now its too expensive.

>>11042598
Because you people forgot to link the previous thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Leonov
Russian astronaut Alexei Leonov as died today. F.

>>11049287
very tiny ice particles pieced together over time, that process is still going on I bet

>>11049310
>ehh I want to fly this rocket
>sure, just sign this paper and you're off
>actually puts a nuke in the rocket and bombs Washington DC

>>11049531
>especially if lunar mining takes off
???
Titanium is 7th least rare element, after magnesium. 5 times more abundant than manganese and phosphorus. Why the hell would you mine it on moon?

>>11049655
Lunar Starship construction. Depending on the alloying elements for the more critical parts of the Raptor, it may be possible to do mass construction on the moon with only things like electronics getting shipped in from Earth. Lunar basalt is rich in Titanium Dioxide, and samples from Apollo 11 and 17 had concentrations of TiO2 of anywhere from 9-14% according to NASA: https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/letss/mare3.pdf

>>11049281
Brexit is totally not based. Political squabbles like Brexit taking up all our time and money are why we're never going to Iapetus.

>You will never fuck a nine foot belter QT with your BIG EARTHNOID COCK

why even live bros

>>11049591
If that were the case the ridge would not have cratering consistent with being ~4 billion years old.

>>11049671
Earth is also rich in titanium, dude.
It's not rare. It's just difficult to refine because of how much titanium looooves to be bonded with oxygen. Doing refining in vacuum on the Moon would help a little in some ways and make it harder in other ways (your titanium pool is going to be off-gassing titanium vapors which are gonna be settling on and bonding to every surface in the vicinity, and won't be forming an oxide layer, so pure metal-on-metal titanium contact welding will be an issue to deal with).

>>11049576
>On 18 March 1965, he became the first human to conduct a spacewalk, exiting the capsule during the Voskhod 2 mission for the 12-minute extravehicular activity (EVA).
F

>>11049576

>>11049576
RIP

>>11049576
See you space cowboy

>>11049287
Its from the two halves smashing together and gravity is slowly making it round.

>>11049596
based

>>11048879
>one denied the moon landing and then proposed a commercial crew program
>"the energy use of space" (?)
>muh cost
Nuke Canada, I'm so sorry anon. Good question though, in a better world the clip of you asking and them fumbling the answers would make the rounds online and eventually TV.

>>11049907
>Nuke Canada
>Not launching Canada into space to jumpstart colonization

>>11049926
>first orbital colony
>primary inhabitants are moose

>>11049879
t. retard

>>11049363
Once you hop you just can't stop.

I'll just repost my question since no one answered it before the previous thread died.

Anyone know a database of ablators that can be used in rocket engines? In particular the erosion constants of those ablators.

>>11049955
>Dock with Canastation for that sweet space maple syrup
>Gets shouted at in weird French over the intercom
>MRW I accidentally docked with the New Quebec module

>>11050015
>Canada in space means exporting Quebec to the cosmos
I liked the nuke option better can we go back

>>11050018
>Dans l'espace, personne ne peut vous entendre crier.

estronaut got a interview with Big Jim. He honestly sold me on the Gateway. (Don't mention Starship here, because it won't be lunar capable by 2022)

Accounting for the capabilities of Orion and the SLS block 1a - there isn't a better option than Gateway, is there? What's the downside?

Interview of Everyday Astronaut with Jim Bridenstine https://youtu.be/TU_vOt3wSDg

>>11049281
>Brexit is based sub edition

>>11049296
>mock up is mock up
Thanks, Captain Alexei Korolev.

>>11050145
>>>/pol/ bot

>>11050161
was replying to the OP, and tight is right

>>11050137
If you're committed to launching people on SLS/Orion, then gateway is the only way to do a lunar mission, yes

btw, the SpaceX bid for the Artemis lunar lander is just gonna be Starship. Astronauts will launch on Orion, dock to Gateway, transfer to Starship, and land on the moon. It'll look ridiculous, but whatever, they're committed to Orion so it is what it is

>>11050015

>>11049287
Eyelid.
It's waiting for the fruit to ripe.
Not long now.

>>11050137

Build a bigger automated Gateway with Starship and man it whenever Starship is ready.

>>11050200
I read that SpaceX is making two bids, one literally just Starship and one Falcon 9 upper stage derived.

>>11050225
>So for this bid, I see you've...
>bid Starship, yeah
>Starship?
>yeah, the same one we made for Yusaku Maezawa
>the same Starship
>yes

>>11049576
Ф

>>11050225
from what I hear from my source there, that second proposal is dead

but it's been a little bit and they change plans fast so who knows

oh nice, /sci/ is playing in the autumn babby qualifiers

>>11050239
>literally the same starship, we're not bidding a design, we're literally bidding a rental of Mk 7

>>11050268
>extra charge to clean up after MZ's fifteen person space orgy before re-rental

>>11050255
>autumn babby qualifiers
The fuck is this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoxYdLGzuD8

>>11050288
The new "summerfag" maybe?

>>11050288
GO CARL SAGAN!

lmao

And fucking /d/ of all places is beating us.

RIP Alexi Leonov.

F.

>>11050302
no lmao we just scored a goal

>>11049955
EATING...

WALNUTS!!!

>>11049576
F.

oh yeah another goal for sci

>>11050225
Musk: Administrator, I hope you're ready for jaw dropped Starship.
Bridenstine: I thought we were launching on Falcon 9.
Musk: D'oh, no! I said "Starship 9."" That's what I call Starship.
Bridenstine: You call Starship "Starship 9"?
Musk: Yes. It's internal terminology.
Bridenstine: Uh-huh. What department?
Musk: Uh, engineering.
Bridenstine: Really? Well, I've worked closely with the manufacturing dept, and I've never heard anyone use the phrase "Starship 9".
Musk: No, not in the engine dept, no, it's an launch dept expression.
Bridenstine: I see.
You know, this rocket is quite similar to the ones they have in TinTin.
Musk: Ohohoho, no! Patented SpaceX rocket! Ooold Musk design.
Bridenstine: For "Starship".
Musk: Yes.
Bridenstine: Yes, and you call it "Starship", despite the fact it's obviously a space rocket and not a boat.
Musk: Ye- eh-
You don't th-
One thing I sh-
Excuse me for one second.
Bridenstine: Of course.
Musk: AAAAAA WELL, THAt was wonderful.
Good time was had by all, I'm pooped.
Bridenstine: Yes, I should be-
Good Lord, what is happening in there?
Musk: Starship construction.
Bridenstine: Uh-
Starship construction?!
In this part of the country, in the middle of a dirt field, localized entirely within your tent?
Musk: Yes.
Bridenstine: May I see it?
Musk: No.

So I'm 24 and want to be an astronaut. I'm not /fit/, but I'm a master in physics. I'm 160cm. No health issues whatsoever.

What the fuck should I do?

>>11050335
Keep buy Musk bars until you find a golden ticket to get a ride on the Starship.

>>11050335
get fit you lazy slob

>>11050335

Within ten to twenty years Starship will drop the pricing for a trip to orbit below 100k or 50k, maybe even less.

>>11050328
Based

>>11050268
I wonder how many he's going to build? NASA only ever built the five shuttles, shouldn't take long to completely blow that out of the water.

>>11050343
>>11050335
and within a year or two you'll be able to buy a seat on Dragon 2 for like $10m-$15m

>>11049281
Earth is flat

>>11050328
>daydreaming protracted hypothetical conversations where ebin tycoon man completely OWNS his opponent
BASED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOLY FUCKCINASNG BASED1111111111111111

>>11050374
it's a reference to a /tv/ meme I think

>>11050374
>>11050376
It's a steamed clams meme. It was everywhere last year.

>>11050360
we should gas all the flat earthers and render their bodies down to RP-1 so that they'll finally be useful

>>11050359
slightly used, only a little soot on the heat shield

>>11050328
>>11050374
It’s not even a somewhat realistic conversation either, considering there’s no stuttering and Musk is actually verbally coherent.

>>11050359
Crew Dragon costs $58 million a seat...

Starlink
>kills astrophotography
>no more shooting stars
>sometimes no more stars
Why? Fast porn downloads? Also why is so easy to just put whatever you want in the sky if you have money?

>>11050424
you don't even understand what Starlink is and what the effects will be

>>11050429
do not respond to low effort trolls, you fucking newfag

>>11050424
>Also why is so easy to just put whatever you want in the sky if you have money?
Sounds like someone hates freedom.

Wait and see how much shit is in the sky when every tom dick and harry can have a dosen cheap chinese cube sats in LEO.

>>11050424
>>kills astrophotography
It only makes Earth based autonomy more difficult but still possible. Space based astronomy would be unaffected.

>>no more shooting stars
No. The satellites aren't going to stop random stuff from falling to the Earth. And even if somehow they did, it wouldn't be an issue.

>>sometimes no more stars
No. Light pollution from cities blocks much more stars than a single satellite could.

>Why? Fast porn downloads?
Go live in a rural area where the internet comes from old burried telephone cable for a while and you'll understand why satellite internet would be a huge improvement.

>Also why is so easy to just put whatever you want in the sky if you have money?
Did you completely forget that SpaceX had to get government approval for Starlink?

cute

>>11050429
Yeah I understand that instead of enjoying the cold expanse of the night sky each evening I will be subjected to obnoxious trains of internet satellites. For what purpose? Light pollution is already bad enough.

I am not a photographer but imagine spending all night setting up long exposures that get totally fucked by these things. If something like a space elevator were to have a similar effect it would be understandable. But it's just fucking internet. Maybe try tunnels instead Elon, tunnels, always a nice option.

>>11050438
Thank you for illustrating my point. Some people don't deserve "freedom".

>>11050452
>obnoxious trains of internet sats
there are already satellites up there that can be seen with the naked eye
starlink is too dark to be visible once it's deployed

>>11050452
>Some people don't deserve "freedom".

Nothing to see here folks, troll or mentally ill like all authoritarians on 4chan.

>>11049513
>Xbox launch systems

>>11050410
NASA insists on buying a new capsule for every flight and has other onerous requirements

private, non-ISS flights will be cheaper per seat

>>11050447
I don't think you get it. Children will associate the idea of shooting stars with internet satellites. if you can't see how this is a telling microcosm of our current situation then you are lost. It's already obnoxious with very small trains and the fucker wants to put tens of thousands of them in the sky.
>>11050459
Incorrect
>>11050460
You are taking the position that outcomes from visual pollution to total kessler syndrome are totally ok because you need to protect the 'rights' of insect people to have their own satellites. I don't agree and am very comfortable with that. Viewing the world through the lens of freedom, which is a totally nebulous concept, is very shortsighted. Power on the other hand is real

>>11050424
>retard thinks telescopes belong on earth
1. Make space cheap with Starship and Starlink
2. Telescopes on the far side of the moon
Starlink funds the system that will advance astronomy by the most, and astronomers are buttmad because they can't plan past the 2 year timeframe

>>11050503
>I'm OLD and I do not like NEW THING. I like OLD THING.

>>11050503
>oh no chuldren will learn about science and technolgy instead of dah booty of nature
not an argument, you're just making emotional appeals to making keeping the sky "unspoiled" (read: undeveloped, holding humanity back)

our vision of the future leverages technology to reach ever higher planes of technological advancement and human welfare, you are scared of satellites

>>11050503
afaik the FAA regulate what satellites can or can't go to space globally to a degree. You have to check with them if you plan on launching something that it's not going to be a problem for other people.

They looked over starlink and it got approved. Everyone knows earth based astronomy is going to get harder as there's gonna be more planes and satellites in the future. No helping that. Future telescopes should all be in space anyways.

>>11050517
FAA regulates launches from America, the FCC regulates radio broadcasts from American satellites. Unless you plan to exclusively use laser uplinks and downlinks, you need FCC permission.

>>11050503
>Children will associate the idea of shooting stars with internet satellites.
lol. Says someone who has either never seen a leo satellite or a shooting star. A satellite looks like a somewhat fast moving plane that's deceptively far away. A shooting star moves like 100x faster, hense "shooting" star.

>>11050518
I recall the FAA being pissed at India over some stupid launch they did, and reading the sparently swing their weight around globally too.

>>11050503
>I don't think you get it. Children will associate the idea of shooting stars with internet satellites.
How is that a problem? Shooting stars aren't some magical event. On top of that people do get excited over seeing satellites reenter because it's cool.

>if you can't see how this is a telling microcosm of our current situation then you are lost.
"If you don't agree with my point, then your argument is void because you disagree with me." Interesting how you avoided the technical arguments and instead went for touchy-feely stuff.

>>11050524
It wasn’t India they were pissed at and it was the FCC not the FAA, it was an American satellite operator who launched their satellites on an Indian rocket without an FCC operating license.

https://spacenews.com/fcc-fines-swarm-900000-for-unauthorized-smallsat-launch/

>>11049996
email the matweb people

>>11050452
>For what purpose?
Reliable fast access to the entirety of mankind's accrued knowledge and cat videos, anywhere on the planet.

>>11050549
oh

>>11050452
>For what purpose?
>banking sector is looking really forward to this, stockmarket types will pay big money for this
>ships right now have shit internet and starlink could fix this
>remote parts of the world could get decent internet now
also the new competition on the market will push the old distributors to start competing again.

But i'm also kind of concerned on the impact of mega constellations on night polution.
Most people who have some understanding of this say you cant see it with the naked eye, and need hardware to ever see it but several animals with far better eyesight could potentially get confused by it.

In before
>muh animals.

>>11050549
also proves no, musk cannot simply ignore the FCC and FAA by launching at sea

Soon every university will have it's own space telescope program because launch costs keep dropping and astronomers are scared ground based telescopes might see a satellite they didn't want to

>>11050618
>2037
>a pajeet exchange student at "no white males allowed" university, previously called harvard.
>accidentally creates a kessler syndrome situation by slamming one of the uni's many smallsats in to shelby depot station.

>>11050664
Why do you think Musk is building Starship out of durable stainless steel? He knows what's coming.

>>11050717
>durable stainless steel
Sheet metal vs paint flack taveling at 17,500 mph.
Make your bets ladies and gentlemen!!

>>11050717
>Why do you think Musk is building Starship out of durable stainless steel?
There's no way that prototype was even CLOSE to stopping space debris. You could probably shoot holes through it, and bullets travel far slower then debris.

>>11050734
Thin sheets of metal (like Starship is made of) is actually the worst material to prevent space debris damage and cosmic radiation (because it produces dangerous neutrons when exposed to radiation), it’s gonna be funny to see Elon’s astronauts all get cancer, or end up like Colombia’s crew when Starship re-enters looking like a Vietnamese building due to debris strikes. Inflatable modules which are made out of multiple layers of Kevlar (e.g. Bigelow) are likely the best for protection.

>>11050762

>>11050774
You laugh now, but Elon’s past comments about cosmic radiation suggest his idea of preventing it is just a single shielded panic room and pointing Starship away from the Sun. Also, he’s never mentioned the danger of debris impacts before...

>>11050774
Sounds like something thunderf00t would say.

>>11050800
>send smokers
>make them stop smoking
>???
>lower cancer risks

>>11050838
Won't there be smoking rooms?

>>11050854
>send smokers
>don't make them stop smoking
>they were all dieing of cancer anyways, a few of 'em will just die sooner
still fine with informed consent, might be hard on the air recycler though

>>11050200
> the SpaceX bid for the Artemis lunar lander is just gonna be Starship
I legit laughed for a minute.
The thought of a billion dollar rocket launching a billion dollar space craft which needs to dock with a billion dollar(?) space station which then has a 100 million dollar XBOX HUGE space cruiser attached which is used exclusively for landing and ascending, is just too fucking funny.
I mean, I‘d say SpaceX were trolling and just wanted to rub things in, but then... I mean what the fuck are they supposed to do. I have no doubt in my mind Starship will be done in 4 years. And there really is no reason not to use it for this. What‘s dumb is all the nonsense NASA will do beforehand which is no fault of SpaceX.

>>11050982
Hey man, anything to keep those jerbs in Fucksister, Alabama.

When will the Artemis bids be released to the public, or would someone have to FOIA them?

>>11050982
SpaceX haven’t actually bid Starship for Artemis, they’ve bid a more conventional Crew-Dragon based lander because it fits what NASA wants and uses existing components. They’ve learnt from getting the middle finger from the Airforce in LSA Phase 1 and have realised that the government doesn’t currently need or want Starship. Likewise, Starship likely isn’t in their LSA phase 2 bid either, which is why their not phasing out F9/FH and are buying a bigger fairing for FH.

>>11051005
Likely in November, when the awards are made, 2 will be chosen out of 11 designs.

>>11051020
>They’ve learnt from getting the middle finger from the Airforce in LSA Phase 1 and have realised that the government doesn’t currently need or want Starship
Care to give a summary for those who missed that?

>>11051023
>2 of 11 will be chosen
oh so we already know it'll be boeing and northrop, with a good chance spacex and blue origin continue privately

>>11051033
>Given the glowing contractor reviews from NASA about Boeing pertaining to their amazing work on the Space Launch System, we have chosen them to develop the lunar lander exclusively in Huntsville Alabama.

>>11050982
Starship, when up and running will probably be cheaper than anything else NASA gets for Artemis. And that's no great credit to SpaceX either. A billion dollars doesn't get you very far in old space.

>>11050203
I don't know, can a darm?

>>11050800
I thought his plan was "go to Mars fast enough that it's not a problem", which even if you got transit down to like three months is still a dangerously long time.

>>11050800
No one cares. Debris impact means very little. Space is XBOX HUEG and debris is non-existent in scale.

>>11051323
Thoughts on this patent?

>>11051327
Please remember that under US patent law, the invention doesn't have to be proven to work to be patented. Also remember that the US military likes to give "Hail Marys" to random unproven technologies on the slim chance that it becomes a useful weapon.

Anyways, from the light skim off the patent document, it seems like a fusion device of some sort. I don't know enough about that area of science to really judge on it's merits, but it seems interesting. Interested in hearing about it again when it has been proven that it works.

>huff puff
Despite
>huff
making up 13%
>puff
of NASA's budget
>wheeze
SLS makes up 50% of NASA's delays

>>11051337
At this point either Lockheed Martin or the US Navy has likely already built a largely functional polywell-type reactor. This is probably just related to their already-existing efforts on that front.

can't wait!
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/09/sls-mission-improving-crewed-moon-mission-2019/

>>11051520
>That manifest showed that it would take until SLS-13 for the debut of the fully evolved 130mt version of the SLS, scheduled for 2032
>SLS-1, a 70mt version of the SLS, is still expected to debut in 2017
>The 2021 debut of SLS/Orion for the crewed version of this mission is now being pushed to the left by two years, with a launch date of 2019
>2011 article
Holy fuck, those comments aged as well as milk sitting outside during summer. I'm glad SpaceX came up and showed that aerospace development doesn't have to be stuck in development hell, or else shit like the SLS would've been seen as acceptable.

>>11050800
Debris and radiation are only a real problem if the ship decides to just stay in one place. If it simply moves in the same direction as the radiation, less will hit it. Debris only also really collects around planetoids. I think it'd be best to have starship have the stainless steel exterior, but have a kevlar layer to protect it from radiation.

>>3519236
I wish it was only 18mo

>>3780189
very much so yes

>>3773752
precisely

>>11051525
Aged? what are you talking about, it's 2011

>>11051544

Once crew dragon demo is done how often will we see manned flights? Will it just be to the ISS or do they have other stuff planned

>>11051565
twice a year

>>11051527
You almost got me to reply to that lol.
Nice work anon

>>11049765

Gib stretchy space gf

>>11051649
>not wanting a shortstack gainzstation spinpilled gf

>>11051415
underrated

post education / work level, how are you trying to get yourself into the space industry?

>>11050774
He looks just like that guy from Welcome to Eltington.

>>11051700
I have that book

>>11051700
AE masters (soon). Start as low level test engineer at NASA or Blue Origin, then work my way up. Worst case scenario, I sign up for a short term job at SpaceX and use that experience to get a better job. Absolute worst case scenario I join the Air Force.

>>11051705
wait I don't. Thought it was one of the pics from one of my two TTA art books

>>11051710
what discipline have you been pursing in your MS?

>>11051710
go for SpaceX off the bat, anon
it's so powerful to have on your resume
a week at spacex is worth 3-6 months anywhere else

>>11051721
Propulsion, although due to lots of propulsion focused professors leaving lately I've been forced to take some structures courses.

>>11051722
Thanks. I know how popular SpaceX is experience-wise, but from what I've heard about the work environment makes me abit apprehensive about perusing a job there.

>>11051729
>although due most of the propulsion professors
Fixed the wording.

>>11051729
the work environment is fucking terrible, but you should still grit your teeth and go for it anyway
the toughness of the environment, and their anal their recruitment practices are specifically why it's so valuable in the first place
were it some low effort casual job, it wouldn't get a second glance

>>11051737
yeah but frozen yogurt

>>11051661
How tall would Zero-G people get anyway and how much would genetics play a factor? Like would kawaii Japanese schoolgirls be 6 feet or 9 feet? I need to know.

>>11051759
We don't know
all we know is that their growth will be a very unpleasant experience
while overdone, the jello baby meme very much will apply here

>>11051729
>>11051737
I would discourage you from spaceX, your life is valuable and burnout is real
that being said if it's that vs defense contractor I think you know what to do

>>11051777
jobs that need security clearance > literally anything else
I dunno why but it gives employers the biggest boner to see

>>11051784
most lockheed/boeing/northrop jobs are incredibly depressing and cog-in-the-machine
raytheon is on a whole other tier of awful, I haven't heard a single good thing about working there

Any of you fags actually know rocket science? I'm looking for a practical resource on amateur model rocket design, something that offers just the theory necessary instead of an aerospace textbook. I know how CG/CP works, what's involved in determining thrust (broadly), etc, but don't know how to dimension a rocket (other than "if the stability value is in the right range go for it bro") or calculate the appropriate design of a solid fuel motor and nozzle. I'm working on a level 1 cert at the moment and want to launch some sugar rockets with different thrust profiles afterward, for which I'm thinking a longer burn would be better and so I need to build a fatter rocket.

>>11051700
The goal was to make a open source chip sized classical navigation system that was so easy/reliable/accurate that it would be literally retarded not to use it that would serve as a backup (maybe even tertiary) system. Doing other stuff though so don't really have the time to contribute or the will to live.

>>11051809
Nah were just here to shitpost about rockets.

>>11051809
>Any of you fags actually know rocket science?
Yes.

>I'm looking for a practical resource on amateur model rocket design
>but don't know how to dimension a rocket
Care to explain more on what you need to size up?

>calculate the appropriate design of a solid fuel motor and nozzle
Refer to pic. r_dot is end erosion speed (if the solid propellant grain were a cylinder and it's length shortens as it's burned), a and N are constants, P_c is the pressure inside the rocket motor before it reaches the throat of the nozzle, A_b is the burn area (in this case it's the circular area at the end of the cylinder), rho_P is the propellant density, C_star is the characteristic velocity (and based on which propellant you're using), A_star is the cross-sectional area of the nozzle throat. This should start with some basics. I have much more notes on this, but it's not really well organized to explain in the way that's best for you.

Do you have a thrust goal? Impulse goal? What parameters are you restricting your design around?

>>11051837
>what you need to size up
Everything basically. Beyond CP needing to be a caliber behind CG I know nothing about dimensioning rockets. Naturally it would start with motor diameter yielding a caliber but beyond that I don't know how much leeway there is in the arbitrariness or what would optimal.

>Refer to pic.
Material like that is roughly what I've been finding but with less explanation of the various constants. It's mostly table lookups, then? My goal is just to launch some sugar rockets with different thrust profiles (progressive, regressive, constant) and a long enough burn time to get some decent data. Beyond that, it's pretty arbitrary. Do you feel that 1-2s of burn is enough time and I should consider just reusing the level 1 rocket and reloadable nozzle rather than getting too deep into design at this point?

>>11051020
>they’ve bid a more conventional Crew-Dragon based lander
they most definitely have not. they're bidding Starship. where are you getting this bullshit?

NASA and USAF are two different customers with two different sets of needs and acceptable risk levels

>>11051710
>>11051729
get to SpaceX. yeah it's burnout city but there's nothing else quite like it. do it while you're still young. and hmu when you get there

>>11051875
>Material like that is roughly what I've been finding but with less explanation of the various constants. It's mostly table lookups, then?
Yes. That's the ugly reality of solid propellants, almost all of the performance models were empirically derived.

>My goal is just to launch some sugar rockets with different thrust profiles
That would require a bore to be added to the propellant grain, and those tend to be very complicated to model, but if you just want to throw something together to quickly test then designing an end burning motor, verify that it works, and then modling various bores in the grain would easily work.

>Do you feel that 1-2s of burn is enough time
5 seconds would probably be better while still short enough to be safe if anything goes wrong.

>I should consider just reusing the level 1 rocket and reloadable nozzle rather than getting too deep into design at this point?
That sounds better because it allows you to start from something that you know works and build your knowledge from there. Although what you can do is try to recreate (roughly) something that was premade and then modify the design from there.

Don't be discouraged. Rocket engineering is very complex and challenging, but you can make it there using small steps.

>>11051884
tfw 2.5 gpa no internships soon to be graduated mechE student that wants to do aerospace but is too stupid to do so. Maybe I can mop the grub farms on mars in 40 years

>>11051875
>>11051889
Adding to my post because somehow I missed this part.
>Naturally it would start with motor diameter yielding a caliber but beyond that I don't know how much leeway there is in the arbitrariness or what would optimal.
That's a good start. You should also scale your motor based on total impulse because lots of rocket saftey guidelines are based on that metric. Various certifications have rocket motor sizes which translate to total impulse (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_rocket_motor_classification).). Pick a total impulse thats in the middle of your certification to be safe but still have a potent rocket. For a motor thats end burning, its thrust is constant. Which means that it's total impulse is just the thrust times the burn time, so take your certified total impulse, divide it by your selected burn time, and you'll get the required thrust of your motor. This should serve as a good starting point.

If you need more info on sizing your motor, then just ask. I'll throw something together later. Good luck!

orange rocket needs engines

>>11051889
>>11051894
>very complicated to model
How so? The time dependence of the burn area or does it make the pressure calculation harder?

>5 seconds
That's more or less what I was thinking but then I'm looking at big fat motors assuming a bore.

>That sounds better
Except the part where I get a short burn. I suppose what'll be best is to design bored motors for the H/I reloadable nozzle and see how the data is, do my level 2, and later on design a full K/L rocket for a longer burn.

>>11049306
If that spaceX stainless steel reusable speesship works, that gets you there.
The goal for launch costs is fuel + wages.

>>11049596
What's the downside?

>>11050203
>bunch of gay-ass tiles that do nothing but add mass when it is clear the ship has no atmospheric capability

So I remember reading about how Martian fines are the worst hing ever, will fuck every machine and give everyone cancer. Out of interest I checked how big it is, ranging from 1-30 microns. In Australia we have a thing called bulldust, on dry roads where trucks run along it and crush dust, which settles back on the road, gets crushed again, etc... The average size of bulldust it turns out is 2-10 microns. Standard truck filters are perfectly capable of keeping the stuff out and while it does cause some trouble with seals, it's not a fucking total disaster, just accelerated wear.

Fines are barely any worse than fucking Australia so it's just FUDposting.

>>11052037
>Australia is a a worse place to live than Mars
Checks out.

>watch estronauts interview with bridenstine
>Half of the thing is Jim shilling for his shitty delta v tollbooth tin can as the future of space exploration
>This will be key to getting American astronauts to Mars
>Oh yeah, starship could be part of that too I guess....

Fuck NASA, glad whatever Democrat gets in next is going to nuke everything Trump has done to fund gibs and tranny dick chopping operations instead.

>>11052055
Credit to Estronaut. He’s making it with these big interviews.

>>11052055
>Politician does what politician has to do when interacting with the public
>I'M GONNA CUT MY NOSE TO SPITE MY FACE
Get out.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/10/11/spacexs-next-launch-to-mark-another-incremental-step-in-rocket-reusability/

>>11051030
3 companies got $500 million+ worth of funding each from the Airforce to develop their rockets, SpaceX’s bid lost specifically because they put Starship in it.

>>11051033
Blue Origin are actually the favourite to win, considering BE-7 is already being tested and they’ve received $10 million from NASA to develop ISRU technology for Blue Moon.

>>11052055
You really think a Democrat is going to be as accepting of commercial rockets as Jim? Lol. Also, LOPG is a fully funded bipartisan project that was conceived by the Obama administration and expanded by the Trump administration. It’s literally impossible to kill because it makes everybody happy.

>>11052104
So Jim is Republican Politician and not a career NASA man?

>>11052079
If only he could actually do a decent interview. Can't believe he got 15 minutes with Musk and spent half of it talking about fucking aerospikes I mean Jesus fucking Christ.

>>11052089
to be fair my face has it coming the smug bastard

>>11052089
If my face is NASA then forget the nose and just lop the head off.

>>11050328
Someone animate this and use text-to-speech deepfake. Free youtube meme money.

>>11052115
Yea what a shame. Still hopefully that video will be good.

I like What About It best. Scott Manley is objectively best but i don’t care for KSP and videogame talk.

>>11052107
>20 km flight in October 2019
kek
Always triple whatever Musk claims they're going to hit, at least

SSME #1 getting bolted onto the Artemis 1 launcher.

>>11052142
They weren’t even able to work at Boca Chica yesterday because there was high winds due to a storm and the power went out.

>>11052146

>>11052180

>>11049676
I don't want to be drawn into political discussion, but Brexit is pretty good for UK aerospace (no matter how much Airbus, i.e. oldspace central, screams about it harming them - good, let it harm Airbus, let's fund some real innovation here instead of European jobs programmes)

>>11052183

>>11052188

>>11052187
This. The UK retired with the Silent Generation and staying in the EU would just prolong pretending otherwise.

A national return to manufacturing will be the best for everyone.

>>11049287
welding joint left behind by the demiurge

>>11052138
I'm sad that the narrative/edited KSP content on Scott's channel died off, I'm a fan but the 3 hour long stream uploads are not worth anyone's time.
What About It is the comfiest space channel.

>>11050800
Danger of debris impacts is not high enough to be relevant. As for radiation. Elon's solution is a solar storm shelter coupled with using a fast trajectory to minimize GCR exposure. It is the correct solution.

>>11052094
4th reuse here we go

>>11052350
>Danger of debris impacts is not high enough to be relevant

Pic related for reference

>Elon's solution is a solar storm shelter coupled with using a fast trajectory to minimize GCR exposure. It is the correct solution

Have fun getting cancer without any proper radiation shielding...

>>11052146
>>11052180
>>11052183
>>11052188
>>11052190
On the one hand, this is really cool. On the other all this shit gets ditched in the ocean to launch an empty capsule around the moon and the next core is years away.

>>11052409
The next core is not years away. They are already building it, they’ve worked out all the problems with the first one, it will be a relative breeze.

>>11052420
The first core’s problems lie mainly in the fact that the engine section is apparently a bit of a plumbing mess, this is due to it being overbuilt like most early-run vehicles. The second core will likely have much simpler plumbing in the engine section and therefore, be spared the problems CS-1 has had.

>>11052380
Oh no! I went to Mars and back and now my lifetime cancer risk increased from 30 to 35%!
Might as well Sudoku right away.

>>11052380
>Pic related for reference

>fraction of a milimeter hole

wow, it's fucking nothing, also space is big

>Have fun getting cancer without any proper radiation shielding...

>>11052462

>>11052420
There will be almost a 2 year gap between Artemis 1 and Artemis 2 missions.

>>11052470

>>11052335
Can't agree more. I guess teenagers are the most profitable market. Well with donations it's without doubt but I just can't be hackin it.

>>11052104
>3 companies got $500 million+ worth of funding each from the Airforce to develop their rockets, SpaceX’s bid lost specifically because they put Starship in it.
What about Starship that the USAF didn't like though?

>>11052511
>so you're saying you want to do shuttle, but this time around you say it won't cost a bajillion dollars each launch?

>>11052511
It didn’t fit the Airforce’s requirements and was too high risk, which sunk their entire bid.

>>11052104

That 10 mil contract has nothing to do with Blue's chances to get a lander contract. NASA has various internal programmatic divisions pursuing small projects.

Like saying they're gonna pick Starship because SpaceX got a 3 million study contract.

>>11052104

There's a higher chance a dem president gets exposed to contrary information concerning what is going on at NASA. The intervening bureaucracy under a Republican president purposefully restricts options presented to a Republican president. Case in point: Trump wants a Mars plan, he only gets told that the way to go to Mars is through SLS/Orion/Artemis, and not told that his Kennedy moment is at hand with SpaceX's Starship. Obama was told that a plan that more feasibly realized his Mars aims was completely contrary to what was in the works at the time.

>>11052055
>>11052562

That said, there's no guarantee the dems will live up to partisan beliefs that they are strident opposition, and they could continue to muddle along the program.

>>11052562
>Trump wants a Mars plan

Because he’s retarded and doesn’t understand that we currently lack the technology to do such a mission. The Moon is far easier and a great place to test technology for a future Mars mission, which is why his own administration has ignored him and focused on the Moon. Trump wants Mars only because it’s bigger and better than the Moon, thank God Pence is in control of space matters.

>>11051649
>>11051661
>Get tall willowy zero-Gf
>Put her on the gainzstation
>Oats and squats
>Amazon space GF that can crush your puny skull between her thighs

>>11052575

A Mars plan would advance what is necessary to achieve the objective of Mars and move timelines up toward realization. A moon plan isn't the same thing, especially predicated on the current program of record based on SLS and Orion. ie Mars stays stalled if no one does much. Plus, with a better approach, there's room for achieving results that don't come at the expense of one another. There is better moon mission access and development under an alternative plan, even one with more earnest Mars inclusion, than the current supposed moon focused program.

Oh, and with Eloncorp we're on the doorway of Mars missions, it's much less a mountain than you think.

>>11052584
>Oh, and with Eloncorp we're on the doorway of Mars missions, it's much less a mountain than you think.

The magnitude of the delusion on display here is staggering...

>>11051700
>perfectly good book ruined by asshole publisher wanting some drama, so the nukes were added as an after thought

>>11052575
Kek every bit as possible as the Moon was for JFK. Go send your own money to Africa, hippy.

Trump aka the US Gov/Mil want the moon because China’s beating them to it. For real.

>>11052575
Although in general I don't like the "moon is the stepping stone to mars" meme, because mars is so different, and especially the "land on a moon base during your trip to mars" retards, there are a lot of things the moon can get us practice doing, when it takes less than a week to get there.
Of course we still need to be able to launch more than twice a year to do more than leave footprints, so Orange Rocket Bad.

>>11052575
>we currently lack the technology to do such a mission.

We are more ready now to land people on Mars than we were to land people on the Moon in 1961. And there is no technological showstopper, only proper allocation of funding is required.

>>11052589
"Mars mission" doesn't have to mean manned. Landing equipment and hopefully some sort of ISRU too in the previous synod will not only leave more stuff for a later crew mission to use, but will also show that the rocket isn't fundamentally flawed and can actually get there safely.

>>11052589

Imagine SpaceX Mars missions happening as they laid out they would happen on more or less similar timescales, with whatever work and implementation details is necessary to get to that point undertaken to achieve it. That would be the position of they are nearly here. I find their layout credible and they have a good likelihood. Take up criticism with that.

anybody else tuning in for this?
https://youtu.be/wqhCP48XXP0

>>11052643
Yes, the water deluge at LC-39B is massive because of the SRBs, their also testing the hydrogen burn off sparklers.

>>11052592
Nothing wrong with that sub-plot, Mercury is assholes.

>>11050328
holy fuck amazing

>>11052654
looks like it's starting

>>11052677
Chris’ breathing is weirdly ASMR

>>11052680
is it Chris there?

>>11052055
Fag

I rate that rainbird test as weirdly ASMR/10

>>11052682
Chris G is, Chris B doesn’t exist as far as I believe, he’s just a computer-generated chatbot.

>>11052735
>Chris G
>Chris B
What happened to Chris's A, C, D, E, and F?

>>11052738
They were defective, and therefore, were disposed of appropriately...

>>11052744
>new innovations in expendable reporters

>>11052765
I just don't understand this reusable reporter meme.

The amount of money you can save from reusing reporters isn’t enough to justify how much harder it makes it to complete the difficult articles that actually make money in the journalism world. I’m sure one day reusability will be more effective, but the truth is that when you have all the challenges that come with journalism in general, it’s almost always much more effective to throw away the reporter after it’s done its job than to figure out how to make recovery part of the mission. I know of no major technology on the near term horizon that would change that.

And even if reusable reporters are possible now, when reliability is THE number one priority (in this case the article takes up 2/3rds of the cost and the actual reporting only 1/3rd) it makes absolutely no sense. Like, look at this reporter (pic related). This represents some of the most advanced technologies in the reporting world. Do you honestly think that such a complicated machine can be made tough and reliable enough to be reusable? I doubt it. Best example in my opinion is condoms, sure you could reuse them but making sure that they do not suffer a drop in reliability will cost a lot of money and time.

Just because some company made reusing reporters popular, then that doesn't mean that we will have the sci-fi future of millions of articles per year. We'll be lucky to see more than a couple dozen per year. Dial down your expectations, don't buy into the reusability for reporters meme.

>>11052774
I fucked up, I believe them call them "journalists"

>>11052775
>I believe them call them
You fucked up again.

>>11052777

>>11050854
>the episode where Fee can't down a ciggie and ends up crashing her ship into some other thing just so she can bum a cig off a whale

SLOW & STEADY...

>>11051924
>The time dependence of the burn area
This. The directions of which the propellant burns and ablates away from gets more complicated with more complex shapes(as some directions point towards each other). You also have to take into account of heat transmitting through unburnt propellant which ends up making it burn sooner than expected. Pretty much you'd need a computer program to model it with any level of accuracy.

A circular bore, however, is doable on a spreadsheet as you'll only have to worry about two directions of the propellant burning (axially from the bottom, and radially outwards from the center of the bore), but it's still a chore.

>That's more or less what I was thinking but then I'm looking at big fat motors assuming a bore.
Then a circular bore is a good starting point assuming you can get the spreadsheet set up right. Remember that a circular bore has a progressive (i.e. not constant) thrust profile so the dividing the total impulse by the desired burn time to get the required thrust won't work here.

> suppose what'll be best is to design bored motors for the H/I reloadable nozzle and see how the data is, do my level 2, and later on design a full K/L rocket for a longer burn.
Small steps are definitely a good idea. The smaller motors don't even have to be flight-grade for testing so you can overbuild them to be strong, easily reloadable, and easy to study.

Again, good luck!

>>11052813
WINS THE RACE

>>11052815
>>11052813
what's this? Blue Origin facilities?

I love the RS25, such a retard shame to blow all the money on them and then toss 4 of them in the ocean for MUH BIG NASA MOON BUCKS!

Defund NASA and break up the ULA cartel.

>>11052827
Yes

>>11052831
The RS-25s used on SLS are leftovers from the Shuttles, they’ve already payed off their cost in usefulness many times over. Also, loads of them are just gathering dust in museums and storage, so isn’t better for a few to get the chance to go out in a blaze of glory instead?

>>11052738
And now you know the rest of the story!

>>11052774
kek

>>11052781
>That scene where Elon Musk locks 5 people in a room for an hour with only enough O2 for 4 people

>>11052146
>>11052180
I wonder how much money that jig cost.

>>11052906
It's expendable and will be disassembled, melted down, and recast as a new jig in order to guarantee American Jobs.

>>11052847

Wasn't there some further expense in using them anyways? Included in or plus something over a billion to keep using SSMEs.

I AM GROWING STRONGER

>>11052813
Far left of the picture and mostly obscured, is the now mostly complete painting booth. The scaffolding in the centre is the hydrostatic test stand.

>>11052815
This is the logistics facility

>>11052940
There was some money awarded to test and maintain the engines for SLS obviously, the billions figure you mentioned likely comes from the contract to restart the RS-25 production line to produce the RS-25E for later SLS missions.

I left this thread for a few months and my mental health improved dramatically.
What's the science behind that?

>>11052959
You had an unhealthy relationship with a Taiwanese ice skating forum and being away from it helped you recover.

>>11049576
F

>>11052959
expendable sanity

>>11052847
Plus, even if the engines were free, to actually use them you had to craft a specialized rocket around them and rig the entire space program around using it. Which cost tens of billions of still ongoing expense and diminished space program activities to some missions to a rinky dinky space station in the twenties and some midget moon lander in the age of starship and stands the prospect of derailing space program activities throughout this period and thereafter in your lifetime in that new age of spaceflight with unparalleled promise and possibility.

>>11053014
Jesus, can someone get rid of this schizo?

>>11053021
>complaining about Orange Rocket and Gatewat
>is a schizo

>>11053021
He's right but it doesn't matter because SLS and predecessors predate SpaceX as a whole, much less Starship

>>11053059
TBF for complaining anon, >>11053014 's wording is abit disjointed and confusing.

>>11053069
The wording makes me wonder if SpaceX have hired an evangelist as a PR spokesperson.

>>11053059
Is it actually called that?
How do you pronounce that if it's not gay twat ?

>>11053085
>SpaceX hires an army of energetic black evangelical priests to advertise the company
>"CAN I GET AN HALLELUJAH FOR MARS!"

>>11053091
It was a typo someone made in /sfg/ a few weeks ago. Gate Wat.
Gay twat is a different edit.

>>11053062

There were various shuttle derived rocket concepts in decades past, but SLS exists because of a specific timeframe where the intent was by crazed shuttle derived fan interest to lock in a neo shuttle program for the next decades or longer and lock out the threat of SpaceX to that plan. SpaceX was a known prospect then and a competitor to their exclusive shuttle derived rocket mania despite later rhetoric that nobody could have taken them seriously. The alternative to locking in SLS isn't necessarily to lock in SpaceX at that same timeframe, but to have a more flexible and timeframe flexible approach to launch procurement, of which SpaceX is a legitimate and viable option and competitor.

>>11053145
I told you guys he was a deranged schizophrenic...

>>11053094
I wonder if the black community would get behind "send whitey to Mars"?

>>11053189
african americans pray to jesus, a white jewish male.
Figure it out.

>>11053189
a rat just done did bit his sisters neck niggas wot u think in sheet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4

>>11053197
white/turk dna Ashkenazi fake Jews pretend they are related to israelites and pray to god knows who.

Figure it out.

>>11053145
>SpaceX was a known prospect then and a competitor to their exclusive shuttle derived rocket mania
in fucking 2011!?!? fucking kek. somebody's hit the koolaid way too hard.

>>11053234
And you guys didn’t believe me when I said he was a schizo...

>>11053145
>>11053234
this is what SpaceX was launching in 2011. It's tiny. no threat to SLS whatsoever
the embiggenng happens much later

>>11052666
It is just shit western ideology that all stories need strife.

>>11053247
A story is not interesting without a period of strong emotions.

>>11053262
4channel is a 18+ only website, kid.

>>11053247
don't speak shit about western ideology ever again. There's a reason for why we're ahead of the rest of the world.

>>11053262
Not that dork shitposting at you, but the initial exploration of Rama was a period of some fairy strong emotions imo. I still like the Mercury plot though, it'd make sense for some government nutjobs to want to nuke the damn thing out of paranoia. Fuck Mercury.

>>11053279
The first and second Rama stories in question have conflict even without the stupidity of the Mercury government, who or what are the Ramans? What is their purpose? Natural hazards of running around in a giant piece of unknown technology, fucking up with the biots, etc. Honestly why in the world did Mercury think it would be a good idea to preemptively strike an unknown spacecraft from an interstellar species? Their reasoning is completely inane, if the Ramans had any issues with humanity they could have lased all of our planets from interstellar distances till their surfaces were white hot, you're right, fuck Mercury, fucking autistic retards.

>>11053287
It's some duality of man shit, mankind reacting both with wonder/curiosity and paranoia/fear.
But yes, fuck Mercury, they were nuts for trying that shit.

Still no definitive date for planetary warden Elon Musk's next round of Starlink brand orbital shrapnel grenades. Extraneous sources point to sourcing issues in the ball bearing supply chain. Safe to assume armament of the ordnance is wading through the beaurocratic raqueteering that is Wilbur Ross's backwater and charmingly draconian National Space Council.

>>11053301
What the hell are you talking about?

Schizos get out reeeeeee

Boca Chica Girl is a ULA plant

Mods, can you ban the schizophrenic poster?

>>11049655
Easier to launch from if they plan on going somewhere that isn't Earth

>>11053305
LEO right-of-way. Can't explain, headed to a to the publically funded daily mirror polishing for the JWST.

>>11053313

>>11053313
Boca Chica doesn't exist desu

Could a 4chan rocket program work?

>>11053396
Yes, solid fuel tendie/peepeepoopoo mix.

>>11053396
The problem would be establishing who's in charge of the thing, another would be getting all of the anons together in one place to pool resources for a project. Normal non-autistic people find these tasks to be relatively easy, but it would be a lot harder for us.

>>11053234
They were gearing up to be a lower cost competitor to ULA which itself was a lower cost competitor to the shuttle industrial complex. Both of them specializing in launch vehicle development and launch vehicle operations. In the mid to late 2000s ULA was a threat as a superior alternative possibility to the shuttle industry that NASA at times sought to ignore and suppress. The activities both were engaged in were a nucleus for larger efforts.

Right before SLS was instigated and NASA was in a period of more open possibilities, NASA gave study contracts for bigger vehicles to a bunch of firms including SpaceX. These firms were the vendor base NASA would have solicited larger vehicles from. The goal of the SLS proponents was to cut these out down to their one so that a SLS like vehicle alone would be what went forward.

>>11053414
He’s back again, somebody help before it’s too late!

>>11053414
While there are elements within NASA that dislikes SpaceX and would like nothing more than to have the company go away, I strongly doubt that there was some kind of anti-SpaceX conspiracy within NASA to try to stop the company.

>>11053414
For someone who's claiming all this stuff, it really doesn't seem like you actually understand what was happening during this period.

The Obama administration wasn't just against SLS, they were against any heavy lift vehicles in general. Garver threw some figleafs to the states with NASA centers about "new SHLV" technology, but her real goal was to run-up-the-clock on the shuttle industrial base so there would be nothing left to use - something she was partially successful at and a big reason SLS has been such a clusterfuck.

The Obama administration at large didn't give a shit about NASA and wanted that funding for other priorities. Garver DID give a shit about space exploration (but only by the companies she liked), but SHE was the one who didn't want any competition with the commerical people. She was doing her damnedst to make building any shuttle derived rocket as long, expensive, and as painful as possible by taking a hatchet to every step of the shuttle industrial base.

Congress called her out on this, and fought back, but the damage was done. They only kept her from finishing the job. Basically, the patient was crippled, but its execution had been stayed.

Boeing fucked up (twice) MUCH later, and those delays are rightfully their fault, but just about every other issue with SLS can be laid at Garvey's feet.

>>11053439
>She was doing her damnedst to make building any shuttle derived rocket as long, expensive, and as painful as possible by taking a hatchet to every step of the shuttle industrial base.
Care to give some examples of what she did?

>>11053439
This is not the first time i read something about Obama gov not giving a shit about nasa&exploration.
But is it actually true?

>>11053445
The big one is this:

In 2010, all the MAF shuttle workforce that hadn't already been laid-off would by laid off by a certain date. There was originally going to be an announcement about SLS before that date. It got moved to be after it, and the entire MAF workforce had to be re-hired because of that.

>>11053447
Obama's campaign plan had a freeze on NASA funding for several years, and money from it would be diverted to education.
They also forbid NASA from talking about or planning missions to the Moon after CXP was cancelled. I mean, fucking ARM was the best they could come up with while having to deal with that restraint.
You'll notice that NASA can't shut up about the Moon now that they're allowed to talk about it.

>>11053457
Shelby's near-autistic obsession with Michoud makes more sense in that context desu famalampai

>>11053477
Shelby? He represents Alabama. Michoud's in Louisiana.

Unless there's something I'm missing...?

>>11053468
Then it's really low how dems lie their ass of in the media when it comes to nasa and space exploration while these fuckers are the ones trying to destroy it for more funding for social stuff.

>>11053477
>>11053483
Michoud maybe where SLS is built, but the program is managed from Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama and a good amount of the testing is done there to (pic related). Which is why Shelby is so obsessed with SLS...

>>11053439
>>11053457
>>11053468
What a massive shitshow if true. I understand being against the SLS but it seemed like the Obama administration just wanted to get NASA out of spaceflight (rather than try to stop the corruption and generally poor management of SLS and replace it with more sensible programs). Hopefully newspace will encourage that mess to get cleaned up.

>>11053496
I was on top of that test stand, it was pretty fun. The grate floors all the way down didn't help my acrophobia though.

>>11053502
It was kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. They sabotaged SLS and said it would be expensive and late, and it was expensive and late, mainly because they sabotaged it.

>>11053496
>>11053483
I think I got my job programs confused senpai

>>11053502
The Obama administration was correct in stopping the shitshow that was Constellation, but their main motivation for this: to end NASA’s super-heavy launch vehicle development because it required significant cash, which they wanted to spend on entitlements is inexcusable. Also, the fact that they wanted to end all such development is arguably what made SLS such a shit show, as because of this they didn’t plan a replacement for constellation to fill the capability gap, which opened the door for Shelby and Congress to write the rules for SLS, because nobody else did.

>>11053495
Most dems are actually pretty cool with space exploration. They're typically not as gung-ho as the repubs, but it's one of the only areas left that isn't partisian.
Obama was an exception - he clearly just never "got" the appeal. Even then, Garver was the one doing the real damage while letting him and Bolden take the blame.

>>11053520
I'd like to add that it was a totally reasonable fear at the time that the commercial people would be incapable of doing this kind of thing.

COTS was in its infancy, Falcon 9 was a tiny baby rocket with very few flights under its belt, and FH was both not real and planned to be not nearly as powerful as it would actually end up being.

The administration and Garver could've likely gotten something closer to what they'd wanted if they hadn't taken such a hard line approach and made Congress feel like they had to step in.

>>11053502

The honest truth is that space exploration is not worth the political capital of any administration. One poorly run government program is as bad as another and NASA was basically that. I am glad the inertia was strong enough for the commercial program which was the best thing to happen to spaceflight in about 2 decades.

>>11053532
Reading this and the other posts on this subject makes me glad that commercial space has taken off well. Imagine a world where that didn't happen and the SLS was seen as the only way to get beyond LEO and do big things in space again. It's delays and overblown budget would've been seen by the general spaceflight world as acceptable, and worse normal. Sure there would be detractors who would argue that SLS isn't good enough and that there are better ways to get to space, but they would be silenced when asked "Well, what's the alternative?" because there would be no alternative.

I really hope commercial space doesn't die. If for nothing else, to show that NASA's way isn't the only one and that it can do much better than what it's doing now.

>>11053447

Nah, it's all junk.

>>11051891
get a masters from a state school and fix your GPA/internships when you're there.
You're going to end up working HVAC or dead-ending at a small company making parts for desk chairs or something going into the industry with a BS like that

>>11053591
>Lori Garver

>>11053591
>t.Lori Garver

>>11053506
>>11053496
why does it have so many floors and trusses?
seems pointlessly complex & expensive for the amount of thrust/mass it has to support (except to feed pork to Marshall)

>>11053633
>why does it have so many floors and trusses?
I don't know, that part wasn't explained to me, but my guess would be that the floors allowed for a relatively quick visual inspection of the core tank as it underwent testing without having to take it off the stand.

>>11053412
>>11053396

There was a 4Chan space program and I was part of it.
We started out wanting to complete "simple projects".
-The first one was to get a High altitude Balloon to carry a payload into the edge of space, the payload consisted of a live frog and some smaller experiments + cameras and other measurement electronics.
There were several people competing for the best design including myself.

-There was a second project running in parallel to build a rocket, I designed the approach and the stages in which things should be done and a lot of options were discussed. some people wanted to jump straight into liquid engines, but I proposed something more modest first and we would learn along the way etc.
Proposed several things and I think I still have 3D models for some of the stuff.

It was one of the best experiences of my life even though it went nowhere. It's hard to get things build when we have no money.

>>11053598

Not the bogeyman she is painted as by the hateful vitriol. You're being told to hate benign figures who actually were the good actors who were trying to make the space program better.

I don't want to write four to eight essays, but, the Obama admin got on board with SLS by the time the legislation appeared and passed, and their Mars aims became the SLS predicated Mars program. Any negative aspect to the program being executed was painted as sabotage by the rabid self centered delusional and often politically partisan SLS fan community, when it was often simply due diligence or the reality of programmatic execution by NASA or decisions taken by the internal pro SLS management people. The SLS fan community at the time could not conceive that reality would not match their expectations. If it differed, it must be enemy action, when actual opposition was extremely diffuse or non existent. Everything you know is sourced from them. Some of that is because oppositional commentary was weak in that timeframe and the din was more dominated by the SLS partisans after their program path was selected and some of the others, I included, went home, so to speak.

Plus a lot of the commentary is conflating different time periods. No shit they wanted to do something else than shuttle derived when they picked their own plans and before SLS was created in opposition. A pro human spaceflight and pro human exploration admin with their own path goal would very well do something that doesn't involve a SLS vehicle at all.

>>11053633
I think it’s because the stand has to be very strong to test SLS at worst case scenario stress loads. Blue Origin is also building a similar stand for New Glenn in Florida as seen in pic related, let’s see if the design is similar.

>>11053651
If it ever got underway I'd probably suggest trying a hybrid propellant rocket, solid fuel and chilled liquid oxidizer, LOX might be too much of a hassle to deal with but something like peroxide stored under high pressure might do. Such a simple system might not even be sufficient for a karman hopper but it could at least be used to test things like staging in flight, engine temperature tolerances, pressure vessels and plumbing, etc, etc. A new project would benefit a lot from very public tiny rocket programs like copenhagen suborbital, who happily share a lot of the details of their equipment publicly, I've been thinking of a permutation on their swirl injectors, something they already discussed where instead of both propellants flowing in the same direction you have them enter counter to one another, a counter-rotating swirl injector. Not only that but perhaps with some kind of serration or other modification to the valve's nozzles to increase the number of small droplets produced. The public availability of their designs is great for anybody with enough DIY kit to experiment on their own.

>>11053651
>some people wanted to jump straight into liquid engines, but I proposed something more modest first and we would learn along the way etc.
Starting modestly and working up is the better option usually especially with rocketry. Although a NOS rocket engine shouldn't be that huge of a step forward to try.

>Proposed several things and I think I still have 3D models for some of the stuff.
Care to share? Would be neat to look at and study.

>It's hard to get things build when we have no money.
I know this too well... although right now I have a time problem rather than a money problem.

>>11053716
>I've been thinking of a permutation on their swirl injectors
How much easier would it be to manufacture that compared to something like a showerhead injector or a like-impinging injector? I've only been considering showerhead for a design I've been cooking up because it's pretty simple, but I've been told that those kinds of injectors don't respond to combustion instabilities very well so I'm looking for a better alternative.

>>11053633
>why does it have so many floors and trusses?
Maybe it was designed to be reusable for other rockets? (don't tell Shelby)

>>11053735
You know something, I no longer have my 3D software license, so I can't open the models any longer, but I have some screen shots for them :)
AND
I am not good at it, but here, have some.

This image was for the Shell that the balloon would carry, inside the frog would be inside his own containment area with the life support systems and cameras running.
Keep in mind this is one of many proposals, I only have pics for mine.

>>11053751
That looks great! Beats me having to draw stuff in paint for my proposals (not in the 4chan space program, other stuff). Good job!

>>11053735
>How much easier is it to manufacture swril injectors?
Well, Copenhagen Sub do theirs in I think three parts, the parts are then fitted together with appropriate coatings of silver solder and then sintered in a vacuum chamber with inert gas and tested using a high pressure water system that simulates the mass flow rates of the propellant and oxidizer, they've worked out a formula to figure out how much water would be equivalent to their props.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCrJieFgWs4
Notably, the solder paste has to be fresh, since this video they've gotten the injectors better and better.

>>11053762
Thanks :)
This pic is for the internals, not that they would looked like that. It is a rough sketch, but it has a "grey cylinder" for the frog, and then piping for air to circulate through 1 way valves. The box would have heating elements to keep a constant temp through the flight and some other electronics. we just wanted to cover the basics with this.
1 of the problems that we ran into was that the species of frog we had chosen consumed so much oxygen that we might have needed to carry an O2 supply on-board, we eventually settled for a small frog that consumed little O2 and it was cold resistant, just in case

>>11052115
welcome to the autism of spaceflight enthusiasts
it would have been better if he was a professional interviewer, but if he were one, he would not have gotten that interview in the first place

>>11052485
>14.7psi through a pinprick hole
>a threat
>a concern
just get some duct tape lmao

>>11053611
>>11053654
>You're being told to hate benign figures who actually were the good actors who were trying to make the space program better.
>benign figures who want to make the space program better
>Lori Garver
>the same person who went and wrote an op-ed that NASA should be a climate change agency right after being hired by climate lobbyists

yeah, sure buddy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/forget-new-manned-missions-in-space-nasa-should-focus-on-saving-earth/2019/07/18/79e55eb8-a995-11e9-9214-246e594de5d5_story.html

>>11053791
Yep, that's definately more involved than what a simple machine shop could do. But thank you for introducing me to this group, they seem to have lots of interesting stuff.

>>11053812
That pic reminds me of something...
That thing looks pretty neat though. Although, how can the frog be seen during it's flight? I thought that the event is recorded or livestreamed?

>>11053791
I wonder if it's possible to have one giant swirl injector instead of an array of them, kinda like some weird pintle injector. Although, that's probably super vulnerable to combustion instabilities.

>>11053909
I haven't looked in depth but I figured that if such a thing were both possible and somehow better it would have been tried at least a few times since the start of rocketry. I think your guess about combustion instability is spot on, for the same reason that chamber throat sizes can only get so great before combustion instability becomes an issue. The more space the vaporizing propellants have to fly free and spread out the less predictable their behavior.

>>11053916
It makes sense. I was thinking of maybe something that had some of the properties of a pintle injector (ease of manifolding mostly, performance isn't that much of a priority) while being easier for an amateur to make. Also, having to machine all of those holes on that F-1 injector plate must've been so incredibly tedious.

>>11053943
Definitely nothing wrong with a pintle, if it's good enough for a Merlin engine it's good enough for most things. I'm not sure if you could scale a pintle up directly, say have one giant pintle which basically makes up the entire injector plate of your powerhead, but it could always be tried. I think though it might not be done because you don't want the injector's spray to come into contact with the chamber walls too fast, having multiple cones of propellant droplets spraying into the void of the combustion chamber allows more intermixing and having smaller, tighter cones of spray keeps the soon-to-be-ignited propellants from collecting on the chamber walls, which is important because if too much of it does ignite there it will quickly melt a hole in your engine.

>>11049907
Fuck you buddy, the CSA is based. I'll fight all of you

>>11053955
>Definitely nothing wrong with a pintle
I know, but I was part of an amateur group that tried to design one for an engine and we've learned that pintle injectors are a massive headache for people who are new to rocket engine design (for example, you'd had to be careful on how it was mounted so that it doesn't end up vibrating itself into pieces inside the chamber) so that experience has made me somewhat biased against those types of injectors for my own personal projects.

>I'm not sure if you could scale a pintle up directly, say have one giant pintle which basically makes up the entire injector plate of your powerhead
It can be done, and I think the Merlin engine does that.

>>11053975
Shit, I can't quickly find any cutaways or diagrams of the Merlin to confirm, but if so then neat, that's a great simplification of design.
>Pintle problems
You'll probably run into the same with any significantly complex injector in a powerhead, as I'm sure you know liquids moving at high speed and high pressure tend to beat the shit out of metal components, especially if the liquid is ever forced to change direction suddenly. I think the injector problem is probably similar to the turbomachinery one, some parts are just a fucking pain in the ass to design. That being said most of the pintle designs I'm looking over are composed of more than three parts, this aught to give Copenhagen Sub's axial swirl injectors a manufacturing edge simply by having less components to make and assemble.

>>11053965
it's a pale mockery of what it could easily be

>>11053999
Trips of truth, I guess that means I should drop my bias then.

>You'll probably run into the same with any significantly complex injector in a powerhead
You have a point. I'll revisit different injector designs later. Right now I'm tackling ablative cooling modeling. I swear I found a way to analytically find erosion rate, but I lost it.

New bread, this one is on page seven and therefore officially stale:

>>11054114
>>11054114
>>11054114

>>11054118
>>11054120

New bread (again) which is likely to be improperly deleted (again), on principle:

>>11054161
>>11054161
>>11054161

Remember to link to the previous thread in the OP you imbecile

>>11054162
It aught to be, fuck you for making such a shit bread.

>>11053895

Read thread:
https://twitter.com/Lori_Garver/status/1151999797412286464

I would have a different vision and don't necessarily see eye to eye with her, but I would be open to considering her ideas for incorporation into the fabric of what NASA does. She's trying to rationalize NASA for a time ahead when any rational person can see it spending tens of billions to perform less than some self paying tourist jaunt since that's the cul de sac the program is being forced in.

Plus we're talking about a timeframe almost a decade ago when she was part of an administration with multiple person inputs that had sound policy, and she was on the side of goodness there, and all her critics were not. It is only because she was tepidly not for SLS that you think she is the devil.

anons, disregard the faggot thread and use this instead:

>>11054241

>>11054240
>It is only because she was tepidly not for SLS that you think she is the devil.
No, I think she's a piece of shit because she very clearly just does whatever she's being paid to do. Do you really think it's a coincidence that she wrote that after being hired by a climate group? If that's not an example of the revolving door I don't know what is.
You're trying to focus the argument on SLS. I'm not really pissed about her views SLS so much as I am at the methods she used to try and force her way through. And please, Garver being in "tepid opposite to SLS?" She's one of its foremost critics - always has been. Just rankles me to hear her complain about shit SHE started.

>>11053396
>4chan_sends_frog_to_space_on_baloons.flv-downloaded-with-offliberty.flv

>>11054162
>>11054244
Two faggot threads, one calls the other a faggot and forgets to /sfg/ in the subject line, both forget to link back
generals were a mistake

>>11053900
There were several options for the recording, including sticking a camera in with the Froggo, but later variations of that model do have a transparent container. we were thinking on using acrylic.