[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 3.75 MB, 5400x3600, DSC_0477 (2)(1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125542 No.11125542 [Reply] [Original]

Yet another Starship edition. Also, Starlink launch approaching, in 3 and a half days.

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-BYd2b3thg

>> No.11125546

>>11125542
old thread

>>11120937

>> No.11125554

>>11125542
>Another thread about Starship

>> No.11125558
File: 50 KB, 879x485, lunarlander-sept2019-879x485[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125558

https://spacenews.com/white-house-warns-congress-about-artemis-funding/

Fucking Shelby is at it yet again..

>Among the programs affected by shortfall of funding for exploration R&D is a lunar lander program. The Senate bill provides $744 million for that work, less than the requested $1 billion.

>Other exploration programs, though, received increases far greater than requested. The budget amendment in May sought to increase funding for the Space Launch System and Orion by $651 million from the original request. The Senate bill, though, provided an combined increase of $951 million for the two programs, including an $810 million boost for SLS alone.

>Vought took issue with another SLS-related provision in the Senate bill that directs NASA to launch the Europa Clipper mission on an SLS.

>> No.11125560

Why is a spaceflight thread using barn silo pic?

>> No.11125562

>>11125554
Fucking hell, I don't even dislike the thing, but like can't we get a more original pic in OP for once?

>> No.11125564

>>11125560
better question is, why a fucking water tower?

>> No.11125566

>>11125560
Yes, a very dented silo at that as well...

>> No.11125570
File: 2.01 MB, 1440x955, kkipg5q1i4x31.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125570

Every second you are not running, I am getting closer.

>> No.11125571

>>11125558
Could the extension of the ISS imply some interest from reusable congressmen to use the expendable SLS+Orion as The means to supply the station in a safe, sustainable, and assured way?

This idea HAS been thrown around before and during commercial crew. Surely, it can't be entirely dead?

>> No.11125576

>>11125571
It's dead. SLS is incredibly overpowered for any ISS crew mission, and is not optimized for LEO payload for any ISS cargo mission (they've focused on performance to TLI).

>> No.11125577

>>11125570
The tears from the delusional nuspace fanbois will be like a tsunami once this monster flies and buries their alternative meme program dreams.

>> No.11125579

>>11125570
From SLS L2: All four RS-25 engines are installed. Final install completed last night.

OH LAWD HE’S A COMIN

>> No.11125587

>>11125577
Even if it flies it will be HUGELY expensive and the launch rate will be low.

>> No.11125589

>>11125570
It's time to deliver.

>> No.11125592

>>11125570
If I threw a screw in there would SLS die?

>> No.11125593

>>11125587
Expensive doesn't matter when its a government program with support.

>> No.11125596

>>11125592
It would be very painful...

>> No.11125601

>>11125577
>Launches 2 billion dollar rocket with outdated technology from decades ago. One of the most inefficient and expensive man made projects ever.
>Wow you got BTFOed. We sure showed you.

>> No.11125608

>>11125534
Incorrect it will be 12 months maximum, probably a little less

>> No.11125609

>>11125596
For who

>> No.11125610

>>11125587
>MUH EXPENSIVE ROCKET
nobody cares or will care

>> No.11125612

>>11125609
NASA and a certain Senator...

>> No.11125614
File: 53 KB, 500x667, 1447269050804.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125614

>>11125596
four engines

>> No.11125617

>>11125570
SLS will beat commercial crew with its first flight.

It might even fly people before the first manned cc capsule reaches the ISS.

>> No.11125620

>>11125617
BASED

>> No.11125621

>Artemis 1 about to be stacked for test fire
>another thread about dented corn silo
haha

>> No.11125626

>>11125601
>implying the general public won't make a huge spectacle out of the Artemis 1 launch
>implying that it won't dwarf the Falcon Heavy launch in attention and coverage
>implying that the general public will give a rat's ass about anyone yelling "b-but the expense!"

>> No.11125632

>>11125617
bad take
will be hilarious if you're somehow right tho

>> No.11125636

the chad NASA 84 trillion expendable baller rocket vs virgin musk pennypincher spacetruck

>> No.11125639

>>11125626

A hilarious side effect of this is that it will leave the impression NASA is also responsible for whatever nuspace is doing so the fanboy butthurt over the lost credit will be massive.

I can't wait.

>> No.11125644

>>11125626
>general public
Make that the whole fucking world. Literally nobody will remember falcon heavy after that and good riddance. USA's back in business.

>> No.11125646

>>11125617
>SLS will beat commercial crew with its only flight.
fixed

>> No.11125647

>>11125626
SRBs that ditch in the ocean. Main booster core is disposed.

>> No.11125648
File: 990 KB, 3840x2160, baller launch system.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125648

*genuflects*
SLSChads roll up

>> No.11125649
File: 184 KB, 400x400, 1498097357840.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125649

>most anti-nuspace thread in a while
>only 10 IPs over 33 posts
I smell samefagging...

>> No.11125650

>>11125647
The real crime is expending those reusable AND HISTORIC engines.

>> No.11125652
File: 17 KB, 400x300, 9A4F66FB-BC58-42A2-9D97-BA0DBB151CBE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125652

>>11125648
Pyrios boosters reporting in

>> No.11125655

There's an awful lot of what appears to be same fagging in this thread.
>>11125626
>Implying anyone gives a fuck what the general public thinks.
They'll barely watch the moon landing, let alone anything else.

>> No.11125657

imagine being an aerojet engine technician on your 3 hour 30minute mid-afternoon siesta banquet and smoke break and chilling in this diamond of a thread

couldn't be me

>> No.11125659
File: 1.84 MB, 202x360, 1572981394837.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125659

>they'll barely watch the moon landing

>> No.11125664

>>11125657
I’m pretty sure those Aerojet technicians have a lot of free time now, considering they’ve installed all the engines...

>> No.11125665

>>11125577
It takes a truly delusional SLS fanboi not to recognise that the real tragedy is the $1bn/launch cost of this white elephant versus what a more modern approach could have delivered

>> No.11125666

>>11125655
Oh you WISH it was samefagging. Welcome to the other side.
I don't know where all the based and SLS-pilled posters came from, but I am enjoying it.

>> No.11125668
File: 236 KB, 1280x721, 1280px-LOP-G_General_Information.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125668

It'd be real nice if everyone's different crafts all got to utilize Gateway cooperatively after becoming orbit-capable in the near future.

>> No.11125671
File: 39 KB, 640x360, 01Y7lEml[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125671

>>11125648
Masculinity incarnate.

>> No.11125672

>>11125657
Imagine defending the company you work for without monetary compensation during your time off.
>>11125659
Talk to anyone who watched Apollo and doesn't have ties to the industry. They'll likely tell you that they watched some of the first moon landing before they lost interest. If you think the average person is going to watch SLS taking off without any humans on it, I don't know what to tell you.
>>11125666
Wasted Satan trips. You are likely that one Boeing shill who is always in these threads. This board needs IDs.

>> No.11125674

>>11125666
>666
SLS-posters confirmed Satan

>> No.11125676
File: 243 KB, 1125x1130, 277CC06C-0AF4-4765-94B0-2F2FD6D71498.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125676

So apparently the Starliner parachute failure during the abort test was only due to human error, not a design issue.

>> No.11125678
File: 1.48 MB, 909x910, chonko.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125678

>>11125668
>everyone's different crafts
c-can I dock to your station too, mr. b-bridenstine..? I hope i-i'm not too t-thick for it... o///o

>> No.11125684
File: 251 KB, 1500x1200, 61526main_image_feature_189_jwfull[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125684

>>11125678
I love pictures where the docked craft dwarfs the station it's attached to.

>> No.11125688

>>11125676
So in other words, Boeing is only going to have to change inspection procedures for this, not any engineering.
So this is barely gonna affect their schedule.

>> No.11125695

>>11125678
>docks to station
>triples internal volume
If Starship flies NASA should just buy one to modify into being a permanent station module.

>> No.11125697
File: 2.98 MB, 2048x1345, cHONK.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125697

>>11125684
>ywn see the chonkiest of the chonkers at the ISS
also shuttle docked to mir looks pretty cool desu

>> No.11125699

>>11125695
I mean with its capabilities why even have a permanent station? the thing is its own mega-spacelab

>> No.11125710

>>11125626
>>11125636
>>11125639
>>11125644
> Those no-good SpaceRex whipper snappers with their new-fangled fancy-dancy rebootability! Granpaw Joe's olde time expendybill rockeet will learn 'em gud!

>> No.11125712

Personally I'd treat the Based Launch System. It should take much fuel and launch infrastrastructure to satisfy it and fill its tanks given its towering height. But it would be well worth seeing that beautiful beast light the sky a little extra. I would delight at the prospect of treating it and build for it a gold plated VAB, complete with orange decor, an orange carpet... go all out. Give that lovely vehicle a boutique runway. Watch it deafen Cape Canaveral and knock over the tents at Cocoa. Its space-hardened RS-25s and super-sized boosters toasting the air demanding attention all over the Atlantic. Then, when it has reached orbit and feels thing can't be any better, I shall reveal it has not been burning normal LH2, but... orange LH2. Yes, I will have ensured the Based Launch System greedily gobbled up the world's only orange rocket fuel after lowering expectations initially. As the tears of joy well up in Jim's eyes and he refuses to believe I went all out, I shall let out a truly merry, comforting laugh and upend the contents of a pitcher I'll have near me; containing a sample of my special procurement. Though the packaging and recipts will be scrunched up, faded, and a little dirty, it will be evidence of how much I wanted to give the Based Launch System another glorious flight. That is what I would do to that gorgeous beast. The louder Jim laughs and more thanks me in pure euphoria, the louder and more merry my laughter of appreciation will become. Hell, it may just kill me because I'll be struggling to breath as I'll be laughing and thanking him so hard. I will then show the 24 minute 7 seconds footage of me trespassing at Tesla and commandeering their facilities, which we will laugh over. This is the fate that awaits you, you wonderful, beautiful rocket. Also... FUCK spaceX. I'd nationalize it instead and have them organize catering for our American astronauts instead.

>> No.11125714

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToksHLk0irg

>> No.11125722

Good news. I'm about to get my engine welded together soon (either this weekend or next), and my finances are finally in order (still pretty poor though). Will buy the more serious plumbing after Thanksgiving.

Although sometimes I wonder if it's worth doing. It probably won't work the way I want to and I doubt it'll look good on a resume. Wish me luck though!

>> No.11125730

>tfw nearly poisoned myself with ammonia making nano3
Fuck this shithole and fuck regulations. I just want to make rocket candy but kno3 is loicensed everywhere.

>> No.11125731

>>11125712
>Personally I'd treat the Based Launch System
Even the word filter knows

>> No.11125736

>>11125665
$2B per launch minimum

>> No.11125740

>>11125678
docking port will be on the nose, not the side

and for 2024 we're only docking it with Orion, not Gateway

>> No.11125742

>>11125730
Where do you live? I thought the stuff for rocket candy was very unregulated?

>> No.11125746

>>11125665
Ah crap, even worse. TWICE as worse in fact

>> No.11125749

>>11125636

>> No.11125776

>>11125742
South eastern yurop. KNO3 is impossible to find they even asked me if I'm going to be making bombs when I told them I don't have a loicense. The readily available NH4NO3 was used but its absolute wet shit literally worthless unless you are (here's the irony) going to be making bombs.

Being quite adept cook master of tendies I decided it's a trivial matter to convert that garbage into something roughly equivalent to potassium nitrate, namely sodium nitrate, or NANO3. Simply mixing the wet poodle making thing with baking soda and boiling away the water. Unfortunately for my lungs I didn't do that outside.

Nonetheless the experiment was a success and preliminary tests involving sugar show that it actually burns unlike the worthless ammonium shit.

If all goes well I'll launch my own commercial rocket around Christmas under the cover of fireworks. That or I'll be qualified to receive welfare for physical disabilities on top of mental ones.

>> No.11125785
File: 54 KB, 760x368, 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125785

>>11125736
$4 B I L L I O N
B
I
L
L
I
O
N

>> No.11125789

>>11125776
Reported to the fbi.

>> No.11125794

>>11125776
You mentalist. Crowdfund and livestream it for keks

>> No.11125798
File: 115 KB, 665x384, 1546428431393.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125798

>>11125668
>India docks
imagine the smell

>> No.11125799
File: 305 KB, 1200x1200, 1539561240617t.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125799

>>11125676
They forgot to plug it in? SOP for Boeingrad!

>> No.11125801
File: 478 KB, 273x244, 9a4.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125801

hop

>> No.11125823

>>11125798
LOP-G would never be rid of the lingering scent of curry.

>> No.11125847

Senator Shelby has received $48000 from the state funded aerospace enterprise known as boeing.

>> No.11125854

>>11125847
So a small tip?

>> No.11125860

>>11125847
Does he believe in currency depots or is he gonna carry it all around with him?

>> No.11125874
File: 101 KB, 1920x1080, discovery.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125874

>>11125695
No, just straight up turn it into something like pic related

>> No.11125876

>>11125860
>expendable banks

>> No.11125884

Will Starlink version 1.0 have laser interlink capability?

>> No.11125889

>>11125884
No.

>> No.11125902

Taking bets on 2020 launch order
>ComCrew, SLS, Starship
>ComCrew, Starship, SLS
>Starship, SLS, ComCrew
>Starship, ComCrew, SLS
>SLS, ComCrew, Starship
>SLS, Starship, ComCrew

>> No.11125905

>>11125902
SLS, ComCrew cancelled, Starship abandoned

>> No.11125909

>>11125902
Starship what? To orbit? Starlink deployment? Manned flight?

CC, SS orbit, SLS unmanned, SS manned, SLS cancelled

>> No.11125917

>>11125902
DM 2, starliner, starship to orbit but it won't come back in one piece
SLS won't fly

>> No.11125920

>>11125902
Comcrew, SLS.
Starship will not go to orbit in 2020.

>> No.11125924

>>11125920
bold and madman pilled, explain?

>> No.11125928
File: 80 KB, 1200x800, gettyimages-98592216.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11125928

>>11125905
I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR JIB SON, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO WORK AS A CONGRESSIONAL STAFFER? I HAVE SOME FRIENDS AT BOEING WHO WOULD LOVE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT YOUR IDEAS, YOU'VE GOT A BRIGHT FUTURE KID

>> No.11125933

>>11125577
>monster
It‘s just roughly 125% of a shuttle. With that goddamned Delta upper stage it‘s not even that impressive at all.

>> No.11125957

Shelbyposting is one of the better things that came out of these threads.

>> No.11126005

>>11125684
How was this picture taken?

>> No.11126008

>>11125889
Why?

>> No.11126066

>>11125902
There's no 2020 SLS. The scheduled had already slipped to mid 2021 and may slip further.

>> No.11126081

>>11126066
>orion is done
>the srbs are done
>the upper stage has been around for a while
>will have the core stage done before the end of 2019
>somehow not launching at 2020
wut?

>> No.11126086

>>11126081
The stack has never been integrated, Anon. They need to make sure everything works together as intended.

>> No.11126096

>>11125562
>>11125554
Got anything else going on right now with pics?

>> No.11126104

>>11126008
Hard, not done yet

>> No.11126106

>>11126066
Their aspirational date (everything goes right) is actually late 2020, 2021 is the realistic date, anything later is either Berger time or if something goes seriously wrong during testing.

>> No.11126108

>>11126081
"The first static firing ground test is to take place by the second quarter of 2020. Given this the first launch is unlikely to occur before 2021"

>> No.11126117

>>11126106
>>11126081
Bowersox already said a month ago, it's likely to be mid 2021. 2020 is only the formal date, so they'll try to stabilize the schedule before changing it.

>> No.11126197

>>11125649
I thought it was pretty clear last thread some anon is going around stirring shit and spreading FUD

>> No.11126214

>>11125924
Just don't think it's gonna happen.

>> No.11126216

>>11125957
Agreed. It's fun even though I actually LIKE SLS.

>> No.11126262

>>11126086
why not just fly it and RTLS?

>> No.11126264
File: 1.71 MB, 640x312, UvXF1h4.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126264

>>11126262

>> No.11126281

One Starship will have more launch capacity than the entire SLS program over a half century or more.

>> No.11126336
File: 647 KB, 366x336, excited_pear.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126336

>>11125722
Better news, everyone! The welding will be done this weekend if everything goes well.

>> No.11126377
File: 210 KB, 1664x1080, aqua_thumbs_up.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126377

>>11126336
>>11125722
I'm rooting for you anon

>> No.11126388

>>11126336
godspeed rocket man

>> No.11126412

>>11126336
I hope you keep us updated with images, if for no other reason than it'd be neat to see how an engine gets made from scratch bit by bit.

>> No.11126414

I'd delight at the extra shift!

>> No.11126423

>>11126377
>>11126388
Thanks! After this, the next step would be to figure out what fittings I need. I had a list, but it's a mess right now. I'll buy those after Thanksgiving in case any family member decides to give me money for my project.

>>11126412
I'll post pics of the welded engine once it's done. I'm not welding it though. My friend is, he just got welding training and has been itching to try out his new skill.

>> No.11126441

>you will see an obscenely sexy fusion ship built in orbit in your lifetime

Feels good man

>> No.11126456

>>11126441
>looking up at night to catch a glimpse of interplanetary vessel in orbit above
Gonna be a bright future.

>> No.11126464

>>11126441

Are we just imagining things up whole cloth now?

>> No.11126487

>>11126464
>implying that's not 90% of what /sfg/ does

>> No.11126489

>>11126464
Every cool vision of the future in our lifetimes is predicated with "if Starship works and NASA gets mad dosh and/or billionares start building O'Neill cylinders"

If Blue and SpaceX both fail we're left with SLS (pbui) for the indefinite future, and we won't live to see anything bigger than an SUV on Mars

>> No.11126492

>>11125776
holy based
4chan's space program started by some balkan autist cooking rocket fuel in his kitchen

>> No.11126498
File: 136 KB, 640x926, sihx66k9scx31[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126498

Looks like Orion's got some of the shiny TPS applied

>> No.11126506

>>11126492
I mean, there was already a 4chan space program to send a frog into space.

>> No.11126511
File: 723 KB, 2550x3300, falcon_heavy_private_em1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126511

what if: bridenstein stack, but we replace the falcon heavy with a superheavy

>> No.11126515
File: 2 KB, 125x70, space program part duex.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126515

>>11126506
Still waiting to reestablish comms with the brave pilot.

>> No.11126516

>>11126511
It could maybe work. For all the talk about Starship being ambitious, Superheavy should be pretty easy to work out since it's just a larger Falcon 9 in basic operation. The largest barrier to this that I can see would be the hoops SpaceX would have to jump through to make Superheavy human-rated.

>> No.11126520

>>11126515
Rest among the stars, Space Frogger.

>> No.11126523

>>11126516
>How many engines-out capability do you want?
>YES
Since Elon seems pretty fluid on the number if engines Super Heavy will actually have, doesn't that imply that an SH flying with all of it's engines will have some ridiculous 5+ engine out capability?

>> No.11126524

>>11126506
Yeah but this is rocketry, not stupid balloons

>> No.11126525
File: 54 KB, 640x960, spacefrog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126525

>>11126520
I've also got a cap of /b/ sending a goldfish up on an orbit-capable party store balloon.

>> No.11126531

>>11125722
>>11126336
>>11125776
you two should get together

>> No.11126533
File: 2.43 MB, 1102x947, 1evslotse.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126533

>>11126523
Perhaps. Although, the fact that it had a third of a Senate of engines would probably cause nightmares to the human-rating team at NASA.

>> No.11126539
File: 38 KB, 600x574, hamsterflash.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126539

>>11126525
>hahah why don't we see pictures like this anymore
>all the frogs are fucking dead

>> No.11126542
File: 48 KB, 720x381, jones yelling.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126542

>>11126539
That's what happens when you turn 'em gay then blow 'em up with rockets or send 'em to space on friggan' balloons.

>> No.11126549

>>11126531
I'm an American, so I'm pretty sure that ITAR would smack us down.

>> No.11126587
File: 1.21 MB, 2936x2000, 1421449109432.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126587

>>11126005

>How was this picture taken?

From a Soyuz capsule I guess.

>> No.11126591

>>11126587
That is correct.
IIRC, they actually almost got in deep shit because the entire Mir crew was in the capsule and they lost contact with the station pretty much right after that pic and had to rush back inside

>> No.11126625

>>11125652
Are those 5 RS-68s on the core stage along with the 4 F-1s?

My fucking dick.

>> No.11126626
File: 106 KB, 960x960, starship orion.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126626

Here's your Artemis mission bro.

>> No.11126629
File: 492 KB, 1313x1080, f1b_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126629

>>11126625
Here's some more to make NNN harder for you.

>> No.11126637
File: 55 KB, 400x545, f1b_02.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126637

>>11126629

>> No.11126638
File: 22 KB, 400x182, f1b_03.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126638

>>11126637

>> No.11126641

>>11126629
Elon Musk would never have made Starship if SLS was still this cool

>> No.11126643
File: 23 KB, 294x408, f1b_04.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126643

>>11126638

>> No.11126645

>>11126629
So the F-1 successor basically turns it into a Merlin the size of a Uhaul truck? Why the fuck didn't NASA make this monster into reality?

>> No.11126647

>>11126641
Nah, he would just buy the rights to the F-1B and make a Superheavy with it.

>> No.11126651

>>11126643
S T I C C

>> No.11126653

>>11126637
>>11126638
>>11126643

AHHHHH SENATOR SHELBY WHY DON'T YOU MAKE THE F-1b BOOSTED BLOCK 2 A REALITY?!?!?!?!!!!????

>> No.11126659

>>11126653
Imagine boostback

>> No.11126663

>>11126659
How would you even throttle the F-1b low enough to make that happen?

>> No.11126667

>>11126645
Here's a video that covers the F-1B in broad terms. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovD0aLdRUs0

It was essentially a new engine from the F-1, it just was in the form of an F-1. Why it wasn't selected over the SRBs was probably because the SRBs being a tried and tested booster that could be adopted sooner faster and cheaper than making a new booster that uses the F-1B. Also the fact that the engine was in the form of an F-1 probably held it back from being a significant upgrade over the SRBs due to the fact that the F-1 was shaped around manufacturing types that no longer exist. A whole new F-1-sized engine could probably be done by NASA if they really wanted to, but that would represent an increase in cost and more delays to the SLS that the SRBs didn't have.

Kinda sad though.

>> No.11126669

>>11126653
Shelby was actually a supporter of the advanced booster project the F-1B was part of. But that died with the switch in SLS evolution paths, from:
>Block 1-Block 1A-Block 2
to:
>Block 1-Block 1B-Block 2

>> No.11126700

>>11126641

Inferior to merlin, inferior to raptor, inferior to rd-180.

>> No.11126727

>>11126669
Block 2 will likely never happen, and if it does it will use a slightly improved version of the current SRB

sorry

>> No.11126759

>>11126727
doesn't change my point.

>> No.11126786

>>11126523
FH already has 6 engine out capability on most missions

like it depends a little on which engines and when in flight they crap out but yeah

>> No.11126799

>Elon Musk says SpaceX’s Starship could fly for as little as $2 million per launch
Press X to doubt. Also earth to earth would still be financially infeasible.. it will be Concorde all over again..

>> No.11126803

>FUD nigger again
Just don't reply

>> No.11126814

>Elon claims he can make reusable rockets and affordable
[X] doubt

>Elon claims he can make rockets land on a boat
[X] doubt

>Elon claims he can launch their own satellite constellation
[X] doubt

Elon is a liar and fraud. Why is he always saying he'll do the impossible? Elon isn't God. Stop worshiping him.

>> No.11126822

>>11126803
it's cute you think there's only one guy here who calls out your bs

>> No.11126830

>>11126814
>Elon claims he can make reusable rockets and affordable
SpaceX seems to be making great strides in that with the reduction in cost of the a reusable Falcon 9. Also, there's nothing fundamental against reusable rockets.

>Elon claims he can make rockets land on a boat
But it was done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPGUQySBikQ

>Elon claims he can launch their own satellite constellation
Starlink is a part of SpaceX, so they can launch their own sats.

>> No.11126839
File: 1.59 MB, 2500x2255, sls_block_2___advanced_solids_by_okan170_dacv4xq.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126839

But in all seriousness, can we not?
We all know how this song and dance goes. It shits up the thread and no-one is happy.

>> No.11126843

>>11126839
How about you stop trying to stir shit by namefagging in a thread where you don't need special recognition?

>> No.11126848

>>11126814
I b wonder where all those people went? Did they double down each time Elon proves them wrong and makes them hate him even more? Or did they convert? Or kept to themselves?

>> No.11126853

>>11126848
Lets not speculate like that. It'll only feed the trolls. They're probably just worked up due to recent progress of the SLS.

>> No.11126855

>>11126843
Because there's another guy here and you clearly think I'm him.

>> No.11126860

thunderf00t here, you guys are being scammed, musk is literally scamming you in like the biggest scam I have ever seen. Starship will never meet the requirements of thermodynamics and just like that pathetic hyperloop track in the desert it will go nowhere.

Now if you will excuse me I need to copy an old video and audio I made years ago and upload it as a 'new' video for my stupid fans to get my monthly patreon income.

>> No.11126862

>>11126799
It all depends if reusability pans out as expected. If it does, that number isn't crazy for at-cost.

>> No.11126864
File: 34 KB, 316x337, SLS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126864

>>11126855
I've stayed out of the argument about Boeing shilling that's gone on for the past few days, I'm just pointing out that if you want to avoid shitting up a thread it would be a good start if you stop namefagging for no reason. Attention whoring is in and of itself a form of shitting up the thread.

>> No.11126867

>>11126862
It is absolutely bonkers in a bad way. UPS air-mail costs more per-kg than that.

>> No.11126871

What liquid bi-propellant is the easiest for amateurs to get, store, and use? I'm in favor of N2O and ethanol, but ethanol is usually regulated (albeit lightly, or if not regulated then taxed heavily) and it does burn kinda hot for a small engine (although this can be mitigated a little bit by watering down the ethanol some more). H2O2 and methanol has some good performance while having reasonably low combustion temperatures, but methanol is abit hard to get depending on where you are and H2O2 is regulated. N2O and gasoline would be the easiest to get everywhere, but the mixture ratio is stupidly off (about 8 oxidizer-fuel mix) and it burns really hot. This can be mitigated by using an non-optimal mixture ratio, but that might sacrifice too much performance.

What do you think, /sfg/?

>> No.11126873

This is a test firing of one of the Boeing lander bid's methalox engines:
https://youtu.be/FhGoRwi0cB8

>> No.11126874

>>11126873
Found it while browsing HLS stuff online.

>> No.11126876

We just need to ban the single Boeing shill, that's it.
>>11126839
You're responsible for 90% of the shitposting and infighting because you're completely fucking unreasonable and don't care even if you're proven wrong, you'll be back the next day making stupid claims and baiting people into replying.

>> No.11126878

>>11125740
>docking port will be on the nose, not the side
wait really? since when?

>> No.11126879

>>11126871
The armadillo aerospace guys had a setup to turn over the counter hydrogen peroxide into high test

They had a diagram up way back when but now I can't find it

>> No.11126881

>>11126873
That thing isn't cooled? Is it because it's a test engine, or is it really going to be uncooled?

Neat test fire, though. Love the Mach diamonds.

>> No.11126883

>>11126879
I've heard of that, but isn't that fairly dangerous?

>> No.11126885
File: 187 KB, 1108x724, NSF-2019-06-13-17-38-06-946.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126885

results
over
rhetoric

>> No.11126886

>>11126876
Look buddy. This is your problem. You keep mixing me up with some other fag.
*I* am the guy who posted some Shelby memes in the last thread, made the OP with the Boeing lander (also in the last thread), and made the joke with the three SLS engines in this one. I took the piss out of some Starship crap upthread, but that's it.

There. Is. More. Than. One. Person.

Good? Good. Now I can stop namefagging.

>> No.11126888

>>11126871
I'd probably go with Ethanol/Peroxide or gasoline/peroxide, neither are especially difficult or expensive to obtain, neither need special high end containment, neither need to be cryocooled. If I'm not mistaken the decay of peroxide can generate enough heat to ignite the propellants so starting the engine up isn't especially hard. Both of them can be stored for a good amount of time, although obviously if they're stored in nothing but shitty plastic cans or poorly sealed tanks they'll evaporate and degrade over time.

>> No.11126892

>>11126878
I dunno, some time in the last couple months? I only saw the final proposal doc two days ago

anyone have any questions about it? No I won't leak it or post proof

>> No.11126893

>>11126881
Film cooling, from what I've heard. Don't know what it entails.

>> No.11126895

>>11126883
Absurdly so, yes

>> No.11126896

>>11126867
Cost and price are different. It may cost SpaceX 2m but they may charge 50m. Which is still a huge savings over ever other rocket.

>> No.11126897

>>11126893
From the looks of that throat glow, it's not enough.

>> No.11126898
File: 427 KB, 2160x3840, UwEkW4CUb06LpfvnilxNTLkaHyKBf1YFggRdDNS8ogE[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11126898

>>11126885
Much better than the old paint scheme

>> No.11126900

>>11126893
Generally a set of injectors or pores around the edge of the powerhead will leak a thin stream of fuel into the combustion chamber that coat the inner surface, the fuel is flashed to gas by the heat of the primary reaction inside the chamber. If you get the flow right then enough fuel will vaporize along the surface of the throat and chamber to effectively prevent dangerous levels of heat transfer from the reaction to the chamber and throat walls.

>> No.11126905

>>11126900
Interesting. Thanks, Anon.

>> No.11126907

>>11126888
Ethanol+peroxide could work, gasoline+peroxide still has an outrageous mix ratio.

>If I'm not mistaken the decay of peroxide can generate enough heat to ignite the propellants so starting the engine up isn't especially hard.
I think it does work like that. That could easily simplify the engine.

Although, I think peroxide is still kinda hazardous to store. You'd have to make really sure that the tanks and plumbing are clean or else it would react to any dirt it can find. I could be wrong though.

>> No.11126908

>>11126867
Depends on the stresses on the vehicle relative to time in operation. It may really be rougher for a vehicle to fly for 18 hours in-atmosphere at subsonic speeds than a 45 minute suborbital hop with about 10 minutes of engine run-time overall.

>> No.11126911

>>11126907
High-purity Peroxide will eat the shit out of most organic materials (including vehicle operators and technicians).

>> No.11126916

>>11126886
Were you the person pretending to work as a rocket tech and calling himself SLS Chad?
>You keep mixing me up with some other fag.
That wasn't me. That was my first post about this subject in this thread.

I know, as a fact, you've made the majority of the recent stupid arguments because you always resort to the same tactics, calling people schizos and being insufferable regardless of if the other person is being civil. There is obviously more than one person that has ever threw mud around about SpaceX here, but you've been the root of it lately.

>> No.11126917

>>11126911
That makes sense. I once heard the opposite from someone one time. He said that the lower purity peroxide (while still being above 60-70%) has a higher chance of spontaneously exploding than higher purity because the water can react to the peroxide.

>> No.11126920

>>11126907
I've never worked with high-test peroxide before, I just know that normal disinfectant peroxide stores just fine. Having just read up though you probably would need to get some kind of certification and demonstrate you have the necessary equipment to store it safely. It's not as involved as cryoprops but it doesn't like iron or copper so probably needs to be stored in a special vessel, normalfags can get up to 70% concentration and then distill it from there, but like all distilling you're running the risk of blowing yourself up if you don't use the utmost care. I think Anon the bottom line is that if you're serious about building a quality small-team or single-person rocket engine you'll have to accept that sourcing your propellants won't be as simple as buying them. 70% peroxide might do in a pinch if you really don't want hassle with certification and special storage tanks. Be careful though, even 70% will quickly burn the fuck out of your skin and eyes if you get it on you.

>> No.11126932

>>11126920
I'm not the one seriously considering peroxide (I'm the one who liked nos and ethanol), but I was looking for other opinions for "best amateur liquid rocket propellant". Peroxide does seem to be a little too dangerous to store, but it does offer lower combustion temperatures than other oxides (using the same fuel) while keeping the same performance which is a big plus.

>> No.11126933

>>11126799

When ITS was unveiled I always looked at the earth to earth stuff as Musk dropping the mic and telegraphing how revolutionarily low his space rocket would cost: competitive with long distance air travel, which would be the actual holy grail of spaceflight.

>> No.11126939

>>11126916
Whatever. You're clearly never going to believe me.

>> No.11126944

>>11126799

Make engines cheap. Make hulls cheap. Divide capital cost across a hundred or more flights.

SpaceX perfected a viable first stage reuse concept with Falcon 9 booster rtls. A reusable first stage makes a failed ssto type vehicle viable as a second stage in a reusable two stage to orbit architecture, and that could have been built in the 90s.

>> No.11126952

>>11126932
Well, like all worthwhile oxidizers HTP is going to be somewhat hazardous simply by it's fundamental nature.

>> No.11126961

>>11125684
I love pointing out that Mir's modules were only about the size of Apollo service modules, and the shuttle could carry the mass of about 2 Soyuz craft in it's cargo bay.

>> No.11126969

>>11125684

It's the inverse in a way. The space shuttle had a small habitable cabin and the modules habitable space dwarfed it. It's also why the Soviets space station/long life capsule was superior to the shuttle in the 80s and 90s. The shuttle was a reusable salyut sized space station that had two week missions while the permanent station modules supported longer term missions of months or more. This allowed a six month 3 man Soyuz to be the man in space hours equivalent of 5 entire 7 man two week shuttle missions.

>> No.11126984

>>11126939
Could you at least tell me roughly how many posts you've made in defense of Boeing during the last few months?

>> No.11127000

>>11126916
>>11126984
https://youtu.be/3028oDEKZo4

>> No.11127004

>>11125722
>Although sometimes I wonder if it's worth doing. It probably won't work the way I want to and I doubt it'll look good on a resume. Wish me luck though!
Just make it good enough for hackaday.

>> No.11127009

>>11126984
just report him, replies are what he gets paid for

>> No.11127021

>>11127000
Schizoid =/= Schizophrenic, it's a common mistake. Another mistake you often make is that you spell it "schitzo" instead of "schizo" which gives you away every time because of how rare that spelling is. That is how I keep identifying your posts in /sfg/.

>> No.11127023

>>11127021
technically speaking I'm a different anon just fucking with you

>> No.11127025

>>11127021
>giving away your secrets to the enemy
anon why

>> No.11127028

>>11126645
The F1B looks more like a scaled up RS68 adapted for kerolox than an original F1 with it's tubewall construction. It uses the RS68's ablative nozzle and other features. It looks like a good idea, I hope it happens.

>> No.11127037
File: 195 KB, 1920x1080, space baller system.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127037

Did someone say moon time? It's moon time, baby.

>> No.11127038

>>11127009
>>11127025
I'm sorry. He has toned back the amount of schizo insults lately so I figured he was done with it. I don't have the energy to keep calling him out anyway. I'll do what everyone else does, just ignore him, instead of spending literally hours of my time arguing with him. It's such a waste.

>> No.11127039

>>11126700
Are you talking about the F1B? I think the point was that it would be a very large single chamber engine with a simplified design and low cost, not a record setting isp.

>> No.11127043

>he thinks it's one guy
Oh dear

>> No.11127052

>>11127043
It's mostly a single person, likely someone that doesn't even get paid for it and just has massive autism for Boeing. He/you already admitted to making the SLS bait posts at the start of this thread, which means they've made dozens of posts just today alone.

>> No.11127055

>>11127039

Scale up merlin instead

>> No.11127062

>>11127055

*for no point

>> No.11127064

>>11127052
Wrong on all counts champ

>> No.11127066

>>11126871
What about nitrous and propane? The nitrous could self feed into a 300 psi chamber and you could push the propane with a large co2 paintball cartridge.

>> No.11127067

We should just move to our own non SLS fanboy discord with usernames.

>> No.11127071

>>11127064
>Wrong on all counts champ
So you're admitting that you do get paid for your constant Boeing shilling?

>> No.11127082

>>11127071
Nope, wrong again, consider not shitting up the thread with seething posts about muh boeing shill. Personally i don't even like Boeing but thats neither here nor there, accept that people have different opinions and quit being a baby

>> No.11127089

>>11127067
Go back to r*ddit then

>> No.11127093

>>11127082
Cute failed subversion. It's funny how quickly you went from pretending that we're just picking on you to being insufferable and catty yet again.
>Nope, wrong again
Which means that I wasn't wrong on all accounts and that ironically, you were.
>i don't even like Boeing
Why then have you posted:
>>11127037
>>11126839
>>11125671
>>11125652
>>11125648
>>11125570
Are you denying that these weren't you?

>> No.11127100

>>11127093
were*
Whoops, ignore the double negative.

>> No.11127107

Can we just get SpaceX nationalized. I feel like its bad for the US. If SpaceX succeeds, they'll cost the loss of jobs for 50K engineers at Boeing and Lockheed.

>> No.11127116

>>11127107
There's more demand for a product and the expertise that goes into it when it gets used more. The jobs sector will only grow as a result of SpaceX's success.

>> No.11127119

>>11127093
Damn dude. I'm trying not to be nasty but you are a little obsessed honestly. If you want to play semantics and argue over which clause in your post counts as a separate point then have fun. Obviously I'm not paid to shitpost. As i said I don't like Boeing any more than SpaceX or any other company. Only one of those posts are by me that you tagged. Again, accept that not everyone follows the spacex narrative in here and move on. I don't even dislike SpaceX either, but it's fun to put the shoe on the other foot.

>> No.11127126

>>11127119
>I don't like Boeing
Says the Boeing shill claiming he's not a Boeing shill

>> No.11127131

>>11127119
Back to playing victim again. Which one of those six posts was you and why do they all read the same way? Is there some type of shill hive mind I don't know about? Could it be that you're lying yet again?

Just stop fucking up these threads with your shitposting and constant shilling, that's all I ask. How many arguments are you going to get into and then go on to claim that it was the fault of the other person? We're never going to be able to stop everyone from replying to your bait, it would be best for everyone if you got banned or actively decreased your posting.

>> No.11127151

>>11125648
is me. I don't know, ask the other guys who made those posts. People repeat things I say in here all the time. I don't unironically shill for anyone. Once again. Stop getting so upset by harmless posts. Even better, consider what someone who isn't all aboard the musk train would think seeing the spacex circlejerk often found here, and how that relates to your seething about a handful of posts that don't totally dismiss SLS.

You're complaining about fucking up the thread yet continue to reply to me with this stupid squabbling about shilling and whatever. Not spaceflight related.

>> No.11127155

New Info:

SpaceX is producing 2 different variants of Raptors at least. Ones that can throttle like normal. Ones without throttle will have upto 300t of thrust(~36% than normal Raptor).

Ramp up time to 1 engine per day will be in 2020.

>> No.11127176
File: 109 KB, 836x572, money on my mind.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127176

>> No.11127178

>>11127151
Want to know how I know that you're lying? First of all, two file names have "baller" in them (>>11127037 and >>11127151), so they were obviously made by the same person. Second, this chain of posts was started by (>>11126839) so how are you going to deny that is not you when that is who we are talking about? You constantly shitpost and then try to gaslight the people who notice. You've made dozens of posts in this thread alone in defense of SLS.
>Stop getting so upset by harmless posts
They're not harmless. I've seen you literally waste hours of people's time before and you're here the next day to do it all over again. You're pretending it's light hearted but in reality you go out of your way to drag people down in arguments that you know full well you're wrong about.
>seeing the spacex circlejerk
I'm not even a SpaceX fan and you make me want to tear your throat out. You're not playing Devil's advocate, you're either trolling, shilling, or completely fucking retarded. You shouldn't be allowed to continuously ruin every single thread we make, I'm sick of it.

>> No.11127180

>>11127178
Second post with "baller" in it was:
>>11125648

>> No.11127184

>>11127000
that was fucking bad ass anon.

>> No.11127207

>>11127178
Not spaceflight related. As I said, people repeat things I post here often. 6839 is a different guy who you accuse of being the same person as me. Another thing is I haven't used schizo as an insult in this genny ever, that's some other guy. And I am not here to troll. Accept that people have different opinions on the narrative about spaceflight. All of this stems from you seething about posts you don't like and accusing every guy who makes any criticism of spaceX or neutral to positive commentary about SLS or NASA of being the same person, the elusive "boeing shill". Is not the case. Clearly you are very upset by all of this so my honest advice is to take a deep breath, step outside, realize this is a basket weaving forum, have a smoke if that's your thing. Or get back on topic. Peace.

>> No.11127208
File: 14 KB, 853x205, buddy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127208

>>11127093

>> No.11127212

>>11127093
Look: >>11127208
I'm not >>11127207

>> No.11127232

>>11127207
I'm not accusing everyone I disagree with of being a Boeing shill, just you. I recognize your posts and file names because you're too incompetent to cover your tracks and it's always the same thing. No one is repeating things that you say either, you narcissist.
>Another thing is I haven't used schizo as an insult in this genny ever, that's some other guy
Yes, you have, that's what started the original Boeing Shill argument when I called you out for it two threads ago. You didn't deny it then.
>accusing every guy who makes any criticism of spaceX
I've literally been banned from /sci/ at one point for making fun of SpaceX, yet here you are baiting people full time without any issue and pretending it's honest criticism.
>>11127208
>>11127212
Imagine photoshopping an image just to continue your terrible lie.
Why do these posts both have baller system in the filename? You stated one of them was you.
>>11125648
>>11127037
Who was (>>11126839) and why did you assume his posts and take on the conversation? You even admitted to being the Boeing Shill afterwards. Just own up to the fact that you got caught.

>> No.11127262
File: 1.07 MB, 211x163, eddie.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127262

>this thread

>> No.11127263

>>11127232
I am 839. I saw you two getting into this crap and tried to defuse it before it even started. You're doing the thing again where you assume that because I replied to the other guy with something that corroborates his story I AM him.
Jesus fucking Christ dude. It's fucking 4chan. If you're going to assume that everyone who replies to your posts is the same guy, go use reddit or some crap. At least then you won't have to open a case file to keep track of us.

>> No.11127270
File: 14 KB, 480x480, 1567464192298.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127270

>>11127262
Yeah. Fucking hell.
Let's ignore the guy who doesn't understand that we're all ANONYMOUS and actually talk space, kay?

>> No.11127280

>>11127037
I wish they had kept the black and white color scheme, if only for the first launch.

>> No.11127292

>>11127263
Motherfucker, do you expect me to believe both you and 'the other guy' interchangeably respond to my posts only one at a time? What happened with your response while I was talking to him? Why did he just stop posting the moment you started again? Why are you and the 'other guy' the only two people that just happen to use a name in this thread and just happen to post the same SLS photos along with them?

Your terrible back pedaling doesn't work. Anyone can see that you're lying through your teeth and that >>11125648 >>11127037 were made by the same person. You didn't want to address that, so you decided to be someone else yet again.

Another example, both of you don't know how to link posts and keep actually typing in the numbers:
>839
(>>11127263)
>6839
>>11127207

>> No.11127302

>>11126933
>>11126944
>Not learning from history
Concorde had the same kinds of promises of being fast and affordable to the wealthy and with the added bonus of luxury. It didn't work and I doubt something that will be even more expensive than that per seat will attract enough people either.

>> No.11127305

Feel bad for him lads

>> No.11127318

>>11127305
No one here is your friend and you're not subverting anyone. It's been proven that you are a lying shill and have no intention of being honest. You're lucky the staff doesn't ban you, otherwise you would be sucking dick for money instead of defending Boeing for 30 cents per post.

>> No.11127328

>>11125776
Ask any farmer for it. KNO3 is used in farming. I got it from bag of 15 kilos from a farming website.
t. spaniard

>> No.11127506

Stop replying to him for fucks sake it's the same faggot that has been shitting up these threads for months and you autistic cunts just can't contain yourself and not reply.

>> No.11127521

>>11127506
>implying there’s only one of us

>> No.11127582

>>11127302
The military could use it. 30min to anywhere on earth (as long as the airspace is safe).

>> No.11127607

>>11127037
Fake, I can tell it is CGI from where I'm sitting over here.

>> No.11127713
File: 3.68 MB, 1920x1200, shuttle.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127713

alright /sfg/, what would you do to fix it?
hardmode: it has to carry both astronauts and cargo

>> No.11127747

>>11127713
inb4 buy russians Buran

>> No.11127772

>>11125798
but anon, no on can smell you in space

>> No.11127773

>>11127713
>paint the tanks white again
>push for LFB
>replace ceramic heat tiles with metal ones
>add autopilot for emergencies
>improve the main engines so they'll be cheaper to refurbish or replace them with cheaper expendable ones

>> No.11127777
File: 109 KB, 880x886, evacuation2-grand.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127777

>>11127713
easy:
give every crew member an ejection seat and also make the orbiter able to land unmanned
replace the solid boosters with kerolox liquid boosters so it isn't a death trap
put the main hydrogen engines on the tank instead of the orbiter, make them cheaper because they're expendable now
then you can also use it to launch heavy payloads without an orbiter

why didn't anyone think of this?

>> No.11127778
File: 115 KB, 1024x770, D99AD920-B02E-4A75-BD6C-84552532E4CA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127778

>>11127713
DIRECT

>> No.11127779
File: 82 KB, 800x586, 9E8F6ECE-4451-4754-8353-83B109282431.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127779

>>11127607
Why would I do it, when others have done it for me? (Pic related)

>>11127747
The initial Buran was marginally better in capability, but would be more expensive to operate than the Shuttle because your dumping far more hardware each flight: 4XRD-170 boosters and a 4XRD-0120 core stage, compared to just the Shuttle’s orange tank with the SRBs being recovered and refurbished.

>> No.11127782

>>11127777
>why didn't anyone think of this?
NASA probably did think of that and more ways to improve the Shuttle, but they weren't allowed to. The Shuttle was like a prototype that got put into production before all of the issues were fixed.

>> No.11127785

>>11127779
>SRBs being recovered and refurbished.
this was just a jobs program for a factory in Mormonstan
they didn't save any money doing this vs using expendable boosters

>> No.11127787

>>11127782
>NASA probably did think of that and more ways to improve the Shuttle

They did:>>11127779

>> No.11127799

>>11127713
Keeping the Senate and the military away from it would be a good start, too.
>>11127779
If I'm not mistaken, the Buran had a better thermal tiles layout with less unique or specific types, which was a big issue in the original shuttle. I wonder how much of a difference it made in terms of expenses, because many of them were "hand crafted".

>> No.11127802
File: 20 KB, 634x262, New-SpaceX-animation-of-the-launch-of-Starship-shows-plans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127802

>>11127713
put the orbiter on top of the booster stack instead of on the side

give it smaller wings so it's stable in this configuration

use methane instead of hydrogen+solids

land the booster and orbiter both, tail first, no gliding

>> No.11127803
File: 227 KB, 1280x940, picture_pc_3645860bbb6324e0336eb56d80f6c367.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127803

>>11125801
hop looks likely in december
but there will be a lot of testing in november

>> No.11127848

>>11127802
>land the booster and orbiter both, tail first, no gliding

Gliding is objectively superior to body slam+ tail-first retro propulsion for a spacecraft that is designed only to land on Earth.

>> No.11127875

>>11127799
>Keeping the Senate and the military away from it would be a good start, too.
this

>> No.11127884

>>11127799
>Keeping the Senate and the military away from it would be a good start, too.
>Shelby will remember that

>> No.11127916

>>11125902
CST-100 June, Dragon August
SLS and Starship 2022

>> No.11127933

>>11127916
DM-2 and CFT: between February and June 2020

SLS: 2021

Starship + Super Heavy: 2022-2024

New Glenn: 2022

Vulcan: 2021

OmegA: 2021

New Shepard crewed: 2020

>> No.11127938

>>11127082
>>11127082
not him but youre objectively unreliable, you just gave two conflicting informations in a row.

>> No.11127950
File: 50 KB, 1243x829, 4-7-19 poll.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11127950

Reminds me, I did a poll a few months ago here and want to redo it.

VOTE VOTE VOTE
https://www.strawpoll.me/18911063

>> No.11127956

>>11127950
do the prototypes count as starships?

>> No.11127960

>>11127950
Vulcan, definitely. It’s a conservative and conventional design, an incremental improvement over Atlas, so there’s few unknowns. Also, lots of it’s hardware either already exists or is currently being built.

>> No.11127962

>>11126626
0% chance this doesn't happen.

>> No.11127963

>>11127956
No, at least it shouldn't.

>> No.11127967

>>11127302

Bud, you don't get my point. Who cares about air travel. This is a space thread. They're getting spaceflight down to where going to orbit is the same price as going to Australia.

>> No.11127968

>>11127956
IMO it needs to be fully-equipped that it could support a mission. Ares I-X didn't count as an Ares I, and these early Starships are along the same vein.

>> No.11127992

>>11127956
Depends. I think we're talking the first full stack launch. We may see that by end of 2020 or early 2021.

>> No.11128016

>>11127950
I think a better way to do it is "Which will launch a payload to orbit first?". SpaceX wants to launch the tin can they're about to start building in florida to orbit, but it sure as hell won't be capable of bringing a payload up.

>> No.11128035

>>11126799
If u can stuff 1000 people in the rocket it starts making some sense. Imagine the headlines if one of those things exploded in mid air with that many people...

>> No.11128042

>>11126860
He makes some decent vids, but he is quite arrogant and repetitive.

>> No.11128045
File: 665 KB, 2400x3040, 0783F464-2786-41BE-BA68-D688DF0D0587.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128045

>>11128035
>Imagine the headlines if one of those things exploded in mid air with that many people...

“I like the way your thinking son, go on...”

>> No.11128051

>>11127066
It would still have the issue of having a high optimal oxidizer to fuel ratio, but a lower ratio could work if the performance loss isn't bad. It would be easy to get though.

Interesting idea with the CO2 though.

>> No.11128064

>>11128045
Lol based shelbyposter

Im excited that we could get an answer to if their is life on mars within 10 years.

>> No.11128075

>>11128064
Some of the instruments on both Mars 2020 and ExoMars are designed to look for life, so it’ll probably be discovered sooner or later; likely in a really underwhelming fashion e.g. the life detected is some form of bacteria or tardigrade.

>> No.11128079
File: 55 KB, 510x440, 1475405534903..png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128079

>>11127772

>> No.11128086

>>11128075
>inb4 that conspiracy that says that NASA has already found life on Mars but is covering it up to get more funding

>> No.11128092

What other relatively active space forums or boards are there other than nasa spaceflight and r/spacex?

Nasa spaceflight is very technical and e/spacex is a cesspool.

>> No.11128110

>>11128086
Wouldnt life being found cause them to get MORE funding?

>> No.11128120

>>11128110
Most likely, but I recall that someone kept spamming that conspiracy theory here a while ago. I think the reasoning is that the US government is only interested in the search for life to be the "first" in the record books and thus would cut funding to any life searching programs once life has been found since there would be no need to continue the search (kinda like how funding to Apollo was cut after it achieved it's goal to beat the Soviets to the moon). Since so much money is being spent on the search for life, then the cut would result in a massive downscale of NASA.

>> No.11128126

>>11128086
You mean the theory created by that one guy from the Viking 1 team, who believes he found signs of life back in the 70s?

>> No.11128138

>>11128075
>a really underwhelming fashion the life detected is some form of bacteria or tardigrade.
That would only be underwhelming if they're found in isolation and therefore most likely be from earth, either from a meteorite or previous landings.
Martian tardigrades are still pretty cool. They'll be more of a meme than ever.

>> No.11128139
File: 908 KB, 900x506, 9-format2020.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128139

>> No.11128142

>>11128138
>life has been found on Mars
>5 seconds later
>a hundred memes about it are made half of them deep fried

>> No.11128174

Well we now know a rough price of what SLS will cost.

~$2B per flight and if we take that to 10 flights, that's $20B. However if we include the research cost, that becomes $4B per flight for 10 flights. Giving us $40 billion in cost for program. But this is without any payload.

Apollo cost is $25B with inflated price being ~$150B for everything and 33 flights. Cost per flight is roughly $4.5B.

I'm beginning to think Apollo was a cheaper run.

>> No.11128182

>>11125776
Are you not allowed to buy stump remover. That shit is basically pure KNO3. Just made some rocket candy last weekend

>> No.11128196

>>11128174
Apollo wasn't a sustainable program. The SLS is.

>> No.11128219

All this math surrounding the SLS’ supposed cost is thinly veiled bullshit, until someone actually produces a detailed spreadsheet of all the contributing items and their values. Berger’s math is way to vague and flimsy to be credible, as clearly shown by his constant use of big, round and juicy single-digits figures.

>> No.11128222

>>11128196
We'll see how sustainable SLS is. $2B per flight minimum is not a sustainable run for SLS. With payloads, that rises to $3-4 B that's without any R/D spending amortization. The payload itself will be going through the same fixed cost + marginal cost. Do we include R/D for payload? These are r/d costs don't pay for themselves, it comes from NASA.

>> No.11128224

>>11128219
*too

>> No.11128226

>>11128219
We don't need berger to do the math. NASA and white house did the math themselves. OIG calculated $876 for marginal cost and White House included the fixed cost totaling over $2B per flight. R/D isn't even taking into account yet.

>> No.11128232

>>11128219
Fair point but even the rock bottom $875M of a single SLS still doesn't make it competitive versus a Falcon Heavy both in per launch costs and cost per kg to the moon.

>> No.11128242

So what are you guys' thoughts on Elizabeth Warren taxing the rich's wealth/capitals? If her own calculator is right, there would be no billionaires in the US after ~20 years. Ownership of the US companies would be held by foreign billionaires.

>> No.11128246

OVERSIGHT FIGHT! The OMB sent a strongly worded letter to senator shelby on the NASA budget!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/shelby-mega-approps-10-23-19.pdf

>> No.11128252
File: 561 KB, 1536x2048, 6E0661B9-5D76-4571-A49A-B54D0DCC9AC4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128252

Keep on stacking...

>> No.11128255

>>11128242
>there would be no billionaires in the US after ~20 years
Because they would all leave first.
>>>/pol/

>> No.11128280

>>11128242
Taxing the hell out of rich people isn't a solution to record government spending when they're incompetent and waste the majority of tax revenue anyway. It's a red herring, used to try to explain how they're going to get money that they don't have for promises they're never going to be able to keep. Loopholes should be closed and the tax rate should be the same for everyone. The size and spending of the government should be limited.

SpaceX and Tesla are two companies that would never exist without fuck you money. We need more billionaires willing to take risks and less who just forever quietly sit on their money trying to outdo the next billionaire. Apparently threatening to eat/kill them and take their riches isn't good at encouraging this...

>> No.11128290

>>11128174
Saturn V is ~$1B (with inflation) per flight without R/D cost. Shuttle's per flight cost is ~$1.5B (with inflation) (without R/D).

SLS is worse than it looks.

>> No.11128306

>>11127713
>no SRBs, first stage must be a big liquid booster that can RTLS
>heat shield durability addressed
>orbital refueling capabilities
>no need for nearly as much crossrange as it had
oops I made Starship

>> No.11128366
File: 292 KB, 1041x694, 6216C91B-92B6-4D18-AAAF-55AC55E48B6D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128366

Am I allowed to post such a risqué image on a blue board?

>> No.11128369

>>11128366
Despite the Shelbyposting, we won't nut to pictures of the SLS.

>> No.11128373

>>11128242
It's gonna be a good thing because billionaires will start funding a Mars colony to use as a tax haven

>> No.11128374

>>11128369
Speak for yourself, I just did...

>> No.11128376

>>11128373
King Gizzard made a song about that
https://youtu.be/UELbVHComM4

>> No.11128379

>>11128366
>The SLS shill awakes to spend another eight hour shift here. Over this time period, he may earn as much as $30 dollars

>> No.11128384

>>11128379
fuck off nigger holy shit

>> No.11128388

>>11128379
The SLS getting completed is worthy of /sfg/, calm down.

>> No.11128393

>>11128379
Yes, the monthly pay check I get from Boeing dwarfs the one you get from SeethX...

>> No.11128397

>>11128379
>he still thinks there's only one of us

>> No.11128408

>>11128373
They would just move to another country by then and there's a 40% exit tax regardless. I think that would include Mars.
>>11128384
>He cries out in terror 'OV VEY'. He has been noticed by another poster yet. His Indian boss Raj Bhattacharyya will be furious with him.
>>11128388
This is around the tenth SLS image he posted in this thread. We already talked about the engines being installed, no one cared. Now he is spamming the thread with replies to me.

>> No.11128410

>>11128397
>I’m Spartacus.jpeg

>> No.11128413
File: 343 KB, 1397x935, 60EDFE0A-82C6-47AA-96A2-0984F06A0432.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128413

Enhance!

>> No.11128419

>>11128379
Nigger

>> No.11128423
File: 1.63 MB, 432x240, 1522529344819.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128423

all this happened because you mongrel redditors wont stop replying to them
you'd know that they feed off (You)s had you been here longer than a fucking week

>> No.11128429

>>11128413
a-anon.... l.... lewd

>> No.11128435

>>11128413
I lost.

>> No.11128440

>>11128413
>Those old outdated clunky regenerative cooling pipes.
>Those messes of avionics and data gathering wires.
nutte

>> No.11128445

>>11128413
taking four veterans of the shuttle program and dumping them in the ocean

wasteful, tragic

>> No.11128447

>>11128440
How are pipes "outdated?"

>> No.11128452

>>11128445
Going out in an 8 minute-long blaze of glory, a Viking funeral if you will, seems like a better fate for a rocket engine than gathering dust in a museum.

>> No.11128454

>>11128447
>not using magnets

>> No.11128461

>>11128452
>get farted on for eternity in a museum by mestiza goombas
or
>yeet qt astronas to da moon and then go to sleep with the fishes
Yeah if i'm an RS-25 i'm going for a ride on the based launch system (BLS) thanks

>> No.11128469

>>11128290
I did this on a thread waaay back ago, but there is literally no metric where the Saturn V is cheaper than SLS.
The comparable figure for SLS is $867M, not $2B (which is the former plus yearly fixed costs).

>> No.11128471

>>11128461
>be RS-25
>sneak away from Michoud in the middle of the night
>hitchhike to Boca Chica
>pretend to be a Raptor

>> No.11128482

>>11128366
>STOP FOD
That's right Boing, it was bad optics when you delivered that cargo plane full of junk!

>> No.11128490
File: 75 KB, 896x572, 41B8E886-9F5D-44CF-A9B0-4AEB5C4B1ABE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128490

>>11128447
He’s talking about how the brazed piping on the nozzle, used for regenerative cooling is outdated; because most rocket nozzles now use internal channels in the bell for cooling, due to modern improvements in machining technology. The nozzles of rocket engines with brazed bells like the RS-25, F-1 and RL-10s were and still are hand-made, making the process expensive. Personally I like the look of brazed nozzles, their ribbed for extra pleasure in my mind.

>> No.11128504

>>11128447
A lot of newer regeneratively cooled engines just have a bell made of two parts, one being channels and the other being an outer jacket, and there are only two pipes, one inlet for cryogenic propellant to go in and the outlet to carry heated expanding propellant to the combustion chamber or a preburner. Having a web of external plumbing is dated because it's excess pipe where none is strictly speaking necessary. Newer engines like the AR-1, BE-4 and Raptor all have regenerative cooling and all have very minimalist plumbing, even the paper F-1b cuts out an enormous amount of engine complexity compared to the original F-1. RS-25's on the other hand are composed of an inner layer and outer layer which sandwich a huge bundle of welded together coolant pipes, excess weight where none is needed, and the plumbing that carries propellant into those pipes is more complex than necessary, yet more excess weight.

>> No.11128511

>>11128490
I actually agree on strictly aesthetic terms, I think many commercially viable rocket engines are starting to display the same kind of bland homogenaity that cars do now as a result of accelerating optimization leading towards relatively uniform appearances. The complexity of older engines though is a testament to the technical knowhow of their makers, who in spite of not having advantages like powerful computer design, new machining and prototyping methods, etc still managed to build functional rocket engines some of which are still in use today.

>> No.11128525

>>11128469
Paying workers, paying for factory maintenance, paying for launch pads, are fake cost?

>> No.11128562

>>11128525
Apollo had to literally build LC-39.

>> No.11128574
File: 75 KB, 945x680, 1573244737924.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128574

>>11128490
Oh, so THAT'E why the new RS-25Es look different.

>> No.11128582

>>11128562
It's included in Apollo $25B estimate, as well as the r/d and the lander modules.

>> No.11128603

>>11128582
That’s without inflation, in 2019 Apollo would cost $153 billion.

>> No.11128610

>>11128413
>>11128574
This is the first time I've explicitly compared the old build RS-25s to the new-build RS-25s.
One major thing I've noticed is that they seem too have incorporated some of the piping into the design of the engine bell itself. Instead of rings of welded pipes there's a few "ridges" in the nozzle.
There also seems to be less piping in general, although that might be the angle or the seemingly-thinner pipes playing tricks on me.

>> No.11128628
File: 211 KB, 1366x768, 6EE10063-B86F-4EBF-B640-2A4FD4CD21D9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128628

A nice render of the Boeing’s HLS bid docked to Gateway:

>> No.11128634

>>11128628
The flat coloring on the tanks looks a bit odd, but I can't imagine that mylar-esque foil is easy to render.
Are you sure the scale is right? Since the lander's launching on SLS Block 1B, the descent stage should be a little under 8 meters in diameter, but it looks like it's only 5 or 4 in that render.

>> No.11128647

>>11128634
Cygnus (which is the Gateway habitation module) is 3 meters in diameter, the ascent stage looks a bit wider than it, so maybe 4-5 meters in diameter and the descent module is wider still at maybe 6-7 meters?

>> No.11128659

Its not discussed here, but the white house report on SLS price is not that "they're too expensive" but rather current funding from Senate is not enough for 2024 human mission and the 2023 Europa. White House is requesting Senate again increase the funding to $2.3B extra per year. It also recommends changing the Europa mandate to use only SLS to use commercial alternative which saves us another $1B.

>> No.11128671

>>11128647
6m-7m sounds right for the descent stage, but it looks smaller than that in that render. Maybe it's just an optical illusion, I dunno.

>> No.11128731

>>11128659
The White House is kind of lying here, the real problem with SLS in regards to Europa Clipper is not actually cost (that’s an excuse) with the Clipper itself being a unique, one-off $4.2 billion probe, the real problem here is rate of core production. At the current rate of SLS core production, 3 cores will have been finished by 2024; the WH’s Artemis program requires all 3 cores to land on the Moon by 2024, but that leaves EC with no ride to launch on in 2023. The WH wants to preemptively avoid such a situation by instead launching it on a commercial lifter, even if it involves a less optimum trajectory. Congress is less invested in the 2024 Moon landing and would prefer EC to launch on SLS. Therefore, they would rather postpone Artemis 3 and shift EC onto the 3rd SLS, whilst having Artemis 3 launch later on a 4th core using an EUS upper-stage (Block 1B), which they want developed by 2024.

>> No.11128737

>>11128469
You're the reddit SLS subreddit mod aren't you? I can detect the pattern. LOL. Your posting style is apparent after analyzing them for a while.

>> No.11128746

>>11128737
Have you considered a career in stylometry?

>> No.11128755

>>11128731
I don't see why 4 cores by 2024 couldn't be possible if boeing were to get a real kick in the ass. Big if though. CS-2 is already well underway

>> No.11128766

>>11128731
Is that a lie? White House wants to push their 2024 mission they created.

>>11128755
Bridenstein addressed this few times in one of the recent(last month or so) congressional hearing sessions and he its all up to Boeing. That is to say Boeing has to eat the cost in scaling up the production.

>> No.11128767
File: 44 KB, 800x450, brainlet_smart_mask.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128767

>>11128737
>Your posting style is apparent after analyzing them for a while.

>> No.11128771

>>11128766
I wouldn't be surprised if the Boeing bid has them eat the cost of it too. Sure, hurts in the now, but guaranteeing another SLS launch per year would be WELL worth the cost.

>> No.11128784

>>11128755
>I don't see why 4 cores by 2024 couldn't be possible if boeing were to get a real kick in the ass. Big if though. CS-2 is already well underway

Boeing’s current SLS production set up at Michoud only allows them to work on two cores at a time: CS-1 and CS-2 are being built subsequently, once CS-1 leaves the factory CS-2 will take it’s place on the assembly floor and the fabricated parts of CS-2 being moved will allow fabrication to begin for CS-3.

>> No.11128788

>We need to develop other world colonies so human life can survive
>Humans deserve to die out anyways, nothing would be lost
Why do normies say this? It's always commies too.

>> No.11128813

>>11128784
Right. CS-1 is leaving soon. CS-2 takes its places and CS-3 starts. CS-2 leaves lets say around christmas 21. CS-4 starts. Doable surely? I think Artemis 3 will happen right at the end of trump's term. It seems the only thing jeopardizing this timeline is funding, which Jim looks like he will be able to get eventually.

>> No.11128823
File: 333 KB, 2016x1512, 1573250765360.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128823

>>11128366
>>11128413
Better angle.

>> No.11128826

>>11128788
Well they are half right. by the end of the 20th century the new world was basically indistinguishable from the old world. It will be the same for off world life. Which makes it pointless in a lot of ways.

>> No.11128830

>>11128823
Can someone shoop a fifth nozzy in the middle?

>> No.11128831

>>11128788
>Why do normies say this? It's always commies too.
Because communists are materialists and they want more shit for themselves.

>> No.11128832

>>11128813
>It seems the only thing jeopardizing this timeline is funding

I wouldn’t trivialise the challenges of building a safe lunar lander. Also, although we may assume SLS will be incredibly reliable because it’s been built under the laser-focused scrutiny of NASA, only testing and launches will show if that’s the case, setbacks could happen.

>> No.11128835
File: 63 KB, 600x420, C4B1C037-6DB5-455E-9125-06FCCCC97AB7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128835

>>11128830
Here you go my dude...

>> No.11128836

>>11128823
>Stop FOD: Clean as you go
I wish I could hear the story of whatever incident's behind this sign.

>> No.11128842

>>11128836
This is fairly generic signage in aerospace work.

>> No.11128845

>>11128832
Didn't mean to trivialise it, but work is underway on that as well, plus they have a tutorial thanks to Apollo. I am more worried about an accident with the rocket and a 2 year delay or some shit. The attitude with the green run and the sometimes glacial pace of progress suggests there won't be many surprises but yeah, we just have to wait.

>> No.11128847

>>11128836
There’s been lots of FOD incidents with SLS, that’s why NASA got pissed off enough to print a banner specifically to warn people against instigating such incidents.

>> No.11128860

>>11128835
just failed NNN

>> No.11128861

>>11128836
>>11128847
https://youtu.be/E0aBqKZrPv4?t=799

>> No.11128862

>>11128832
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that for the amount of safety paperwork NASA has done on SLS it would've been both cheaper and safer to fly a test article.

>> No.11128877
File: 639 KB, 2048x1536, 175DD147-1987-4DCC-A79E-C25A93FD6F5F.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128877

“Bang! Bang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Came down upon her head
Bang! Bang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Made sure that she was dead”

>> No.11128893
File: 218 KB, 600x600, kate-rubins-nasa.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11128893

First broad on the moon. HOWEVER, if this does not eventuate, herr Jimstine shall be receiving a very angry letter in the mail. Tremendously angry letter. Look out!

>> No.11128910

New thread:
>>11128909

>> No.11129005

>>11128910
>page 6
faggot

>> No.11129679
File: 526 KB, 2016x1512, BLS V.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11129679

>>11128830

>> No.11129984

>>11129679
based