/sci/ - Science & Math

That's a grain silo.

>>11317070
What a conjob.
If they ever get anything into orbit I will be stunned.

>>11317076
This. And Elon is currently talking about making hundreds of them.

AWW SWEET A TROLL THREAD

FUCK NIGGERS AND FUCK JANNIES!

>>11317077
If it works though, then fingers will be pointed at NASA and people will ask "well what was with the complex Saturn rocket then?"

>>11317070
Just wait until he unveils his fully electric rocket, you'll be sorry then.

>>11317094
Would an electric rocket work?

>>11317107
>high current arc heats a gas expanding it
It would be really shit but it could be done.

>>11317070
since this particular one blew up, i will take a wilde guess and say never

>>11317107
>>11317117
Remember, things like a small plasma arc torch still uses an inert gas, large plasma arc torches uses active gases like nitrogen. You'd be hard pressed to generate thrust out of just electricity inside our gravity well and atmosphere.

>>11317145
That is why I said you would need a gas, also why I said it would be shit.

>>11317192
Remember, I highlighted more than just your post.

>>11317125
It didn't blow up.

It's taking off right now holy sheeit!

>>11317070
What's ACTUAL progress? 3 decades of being a money sink?

>>11317087
the Saturn V was a seven stage nightmare built to go to the Moon and back in a single shot
also they invented a bunch of the technologies that underpin modern rocketry
>>11317107
not for getting out of the atmosphere
it works great once you're in orbit

>>11317294
YES

>>11317221
yes it did, dumbass
they had a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion while they were pressure testing it before flight with liquid nitrogen
>>11317629
thanks Dick

>>11317076
the reason it looks so shit is because the business methodology comes from software where you need to "fail fast" meaning you make a minimum viable product and beat the shit out of it until it fails, iterate the design and repeat until you reach a robust, useful product. It's the same reason Blue Origin has done fuck all in the past 20 years, because they've failed to apply this design methodology to engineering.

>>11317626
we need SSTM and we need it now

>>11317076
How is it a conjob? There's already considerable amount of functional hardware built for Starship (such as the Raptor), so that's much more work than needed to make a fake rocket.

>>11317664
do you have any webms of Raptor firings
I need that sweet sweet purple

>>11317145
>You'd be hard pressed to generate thrust out of just electricity inside our gravity well and atmosphere.
>inside our gravity well and atmosphere
You mean inside our universe.

>>11317674
look up resistojet, you can use electricity to heat up propellant
it functions just like a nuclear thermal rocket, but with shit T/W ratios

>>11317072
nah, looks like a water tower to me

>>11317684
it's a liquid nitrogen storage tank

>>11317107
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab_Electron

>>11317687
that's a chemical rocket with an electric turbopump

>>11317094
electric self-landing fully reusable rockets when?

>>11317674
Outside our gravity well, they work fine if not exactly sanic speed. But you're not getting out of our gravity well on one of them.

>>11317789
you can totally spiral out of the gravity well on ion drives
you just can't get out of the atmosphere with them

>>11317070
Compared to NASA, this thin is moving like a...wee, a rocket.
While I doubt that a chemically-fuelled rocket is of much value outside of LEO, there are some interesting idea's, notably, building the thing like a ship, instead of an aircraft.
He should be looking at a NSWR engineering plant for use in space.

>>11317087
that's unfair, considering the period it was made the Saturn V is and forever will be a marvel of human engineering, if an obtuse and expensive one.
Everyone who wasn't already shitting on the SLS however will rightly do so

>>11318001
>He should be looking at a NSWR engineering plant for use in space.
Fissile material is heavily regulated, and is pretty much impossible for a private company to get such material for spaceflight (and right now, getting the stuff from Earth is the only way). So it makes sense for SpaceX to avoid going down the nuclear route to keep their operating costs down.

>>11318001
>NSWR

>>11318014
>Everyone who wasn't already shitting on the SLS however will rightly do so
There will probably still be plenty of (non-Boeing, non-Congress) supporters of SLS who would argue that it's safer than Starship due to it's prolonged development cycle.

>>11318025
>safer than Starship
>reuses the solid boosters that used to go boom from the shuttle program
I'm sure they've worked out all the kinks this time around, right?

>>11318042
Most likely since the issue wasn't with the SRBs themselves but due to them being used in weather conditions they weren't designed for.

>>11318022
I want my lunarium fueled rockets, damnit!

>>11318048
>weather conditions they weren't designed for
Nothing says reliable like a fair weather system, right? I was excited for the SLS until I read they were reusing the SRB's.

>>11318052
I was excited for the SLS until it started taking awhile to develop. It's issues and limitations can be forgiven if it were developed like it was actually advertised as, a super heavy rocket that would be quick and relatively cheap to develop due to it reusing familiar parts. Kinda like the Saturn I, but bigger. When SLS started failing that, then I started losing hope for it.

>>11318059
They should just build Superheavy and a disposable upper stage, then build Starship afterwards.

>>11318068
too expensive, they already have Falcon 9 for every single realistic payload that could be serviced by that
better to just go ham trying to create a true TSTO shuttle in a field in texas lol

>>11317650
True. Overengineering seems to be a huge problem in aerospace. Why not just build mockups that "should probably" fly and then adjust as you go? If each part works in isolation, just put them together and try it. It seems better than spending 8 years engineering something, simulating it extensively, and going over every little thing and having your development time take twice as long.

>>11318268
the big advancement that Elon made was really raking the partmakers over the coals with their now unnecessary "aerospace grade" meme

>>11318274
You mean the ‘advancement’ that made the first Scrapship prototype unflyable and caused it to undergo a unscheduled depressurisation? There’s a reason why production at Boca Chica is moving inside and aerospace-grade TIG welding machines are being brought in.

>>11318291
no, like the air conditioning systems for the Falcon 9 fairing

>>11318059
your mistake was believing in government proposals

>>11317070
They made some:
>raptor engine is working well (that thing on its own is a huge technological advancement)
>hopper had a sucessfull test-flight and landing
>recent pressure-test of prototype tank exceeded specification
>new aerodynamic re-entry concept
>interesting new heatshield design
Sure, it has a long way to go, but there is some progress to be seen.
Compared to the shuttle derived launch vehicle that is quite a lot.
Keep in mind that they have done all that while bringing Falcon-9 and Dragon 2 to maturity.

>>11318313
the heatshield is a really boring high temperature ceramic like the shuttle tiles, but it's just a forty years newer composition so it's not quite so fragile

>>11318316
Nope, it's not only ceramic-based.
It's based on creating a cool boundary-layer out of methane and cooling the underlaying material by evaporating said methane.

>>11318352
incorrect, that design was discarded, the current plan as publicly communicated is ceramic based heatshield tiles mechanically fastened to the skin

>>11318352
I thought they went with those improved ablative hex tiles instead of the original steel belly liquid methane cooling, are they combining both then?

>>11318365
AFAIK, it's all ceramic tiles now.

>>11318365
they're ceramic, not ablative (cork)

>>11318356
>>11318365
They plan on using a combination of both systems.

>>11317107
Just build something like a really long and strong maglev track that slowly angles upwards.
Then once they're in space, use ion thruster or something.
Might work for small satellites?

>>11318699
incorrect, mass drivers need to aim horizontally once they're up in the air

When will this dumbass telescope make some ACTUAL progress?

Are space x stocks cheap?
I want to invest in elon musk because he's too rich to fail.

>>11319410
Isn't this ready yet? wtf

>>11320438
SpaceX is a privately held company

>>11320451
That's racist.

>>11320454
True, it's terrible discrimination against an African-American owned business. We should funnel more government money to it to help diversify our marketplace

>>11320477
I should be allowed to buy stocks in it yes.

>>11318001
Better off waiting to see if sheared flow stabilized Z-Pinch works out-u can make a hell of a rocket from that.

>>11320486
why not buy Tesla stock at the next dip, then?

>>11320489
I'm going to do that too.
But space x has no competition except NASA which is a waste of american tax dollars.
Tesla does.

>>11320491
Blue Origin exists
ULA is shackled hand and foot but sort of exists

>>11320495
But those haven't done anything have they?
I've never even heard of them in the news.
Elon musk has self marketing going for him.

>>11320499
Blue Origin will be launching in 2021 or so
ULA have been quite successful for their owners (Boeing and Lockheed Martin)
there's a lot going on in spaceflight right now

>>11320495
why do people perpetuate this meme that blue origin is competition? at this point fucking starship is further along than new glenn, and new shepard doesn't compete with anything spacex does

>>11320504
Starship and New Glenn are at roughly the same point

>>11320503
Okay I just bought tesla stocks.
I hope I don't get burned.
I have strong hands from crypto but I just had to get it when I saw it's not dropping below 500.

>>11320608
Tesla has literally nothing to do with spaceflight and you're a retard

Elon Musk Galactus DIldo

Elon Musk Galactus Dildo

>>11320504
>why do people perpetuate this meme that blue origin is competition
Because old space wants to stick it to SpaceX. SpaceX is the new hot kid on the class getting all As in his class when the average had been C or D before SpaceX showed up. Now they hear BlueOrigin, another new kid, MIGHT get As because he's studying. They're are betting all their money on it BlueOrigin because if BlueOrigin fails to live up to SpaceX's standards, then it would prove that SpaceX was the true exception to the field and everyone else is a fucking retard drooling on the floor. Its the same fucking shit with Tesla. Old car industry wants to hype out Rivian or Porsche in hopes that it would show that Tesla isn't really created by a genius.

Its just bruised ego and delusional hope.

>>11320622
Well if you're the same dude in the reply chain then ok dood

>>11317294
You're telling me this retarded looking thing took 3 decades to construct and still isn't done? Looks like a high school science project that's made out of tin foil and cardboard

>>11320635
no, he's talking about orange rocket

>>11320635

this is what SpaceX are aiming for with that trashcan

>>11320639
At least they're thinking outside the 4 man trashcan.

>muh spaceX
>can't even buy its stocks
Why would I jack off a company that I can't invest in?

>>11320639

>>11317070
Tell me about Starship, why does it have those fins?

>>11320657
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94TUSNxX01c

>>11320657
they're going to bellyflop that fucker through the upper atmosphere, wake up the entirety of either central Florida or US/Mexico border, and land it next to the pad it launched from

>>11320657
a lot of maneuverability for a pair of flaps

>>11317070
>Be me.
>Start space company.
>Hire mariachi band.
>Fly grasshopper rocket.
>Land it.
>First private orbital rocket.
>First orbital booster soft landing.
>First recycled booster flight.
>First orbital booster dry sea landing.
>First private automated docking with ISS.
>First caught fairing.
>First recycled fairing.
>Largest deployed satellite network.
>Launched car to asteroid belt for lulz.
>Test hop a new rocket big enough to need a zip code.

"You never do anything; When is this thing going to fly, loser?"

>In my defense, this is my side gig. I run a car company too.

>>11320866

>>11320904
>>11320866
>no you cannot buy a share
>fuck off
Fuck him too

>>11322276
if he made it public like he did with tesla, they would get bought out by oldspace boomers and probably still be developing the falcon 1

>>11322276
Going public means having public obligations to the shareholders that would get in the way of accomplishing the company's goals. If you ran the company, why on Earth would you ever go public if your goal was motivated by anything other than profit?

>>11322593
and not long-term profit, no, you must be motivated purely by short-term quarter-to-quarter greed

>>11322276
Only for employees. Want a share? use your big brain go work for them

>>11317070
T-this is the real thing? wtf.

>>11322612
It's how they design shit. Knock something together really fast, test it until it breaks, improve, test it until it breaks, rinse, repeat.
Who gives a shit if it isn't nicely painted white with fucking racing stripes on?

>11322612
Bait/10

>>11322620
How the fuck is that rocket science?

>>11322625
>How the fuck is that rocket science?
Rockets are just fancy plumbing. The complicated part comes from how quickly and violently fails if literally anything is wrong with it, and building it heavier is not an option.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P98JcBQPiiI

>>11322625
It isn't. It's engineering. Science is done on the drawing board.

>>11322631
>>11322635
>Ok so here's everything you need to know about motion and how it's affected by all these other factors
>oh, what's that? None of this theoritical knowledge will actually matter and you'll just to find out what works by simple trial and error? yeah, that sounds about right!
?

>>11322646
The fancy models and equations are always lower fidelity than reality. You don't know where your mistakes are until you try to build the thing. The cost of a team of engineers' time is greater than the cost of building and failing a few prototypes, which also help you figure out what the engineers should change between future versions, and keeps the whole team intimately familiar on the location and nature of the difficult or troublesome parts of the project. The engineer's ability to apply models to their problems are still impossible to replace when you're designing a part, but sometimes, it's better to just build and see what happens.

>>11322646
Too many factors play in to calculate shit on paper in the end, that's why we do iterate testing.
It's to avoid situations where a carbon filament structure catches on fire because it froze solid from the fuel surrounding it hitting a certain temperature or whatever.

The thing is we *don't* know everything and we never will, which is why we do tests and why SpaceX's style of quick iterative chop-shop testing is so efficient compared to the old design by committee shit of the olden days.

>>11322612
no, that was a manufacturing pathfinder and showroom floor mockup, they took it apart to test it and it blew up well below what they needed for flight
https://youtu.be/KxY3T1eCF38
you can watch the whole episode here
they've retooled to get their manufacturing out of the wind and upgraded some processes and blew up another one on purpose, and that test appeared to be successful
they're just cranking out bulkheads right now in a big tent

>>11322668
It helps that computers are so cheap and powerful these days that collecting mountains of data and working with ultra high fidelity telemetry makes it very easy to gather a ton of data and control a system with no human lives at risk.

>>11322679
They're not really cranking them out yet. They've been iterating on the bulkheads, and building them to higher standards of build quality between tests. The Mark 1's was a slapdash mess that failed way too soon. The test article that they blew up was markedly better, but still not at the desired level of strength. The latest one is the best yet, and they're poised to repeat their previous test to make sure all of the parts are up to par.

>>11322679
It also helps a hell of a lot to have everything in-house and not little bits and pieces designed by competing companies.
It's a fucking miracle the Saturn rockets even fit together, let alone got anyone to the moon.

>>11322685
Whoops, meant to point to >>11322672

>>11322658
>ok, here are all the objectively true; tried and tested equations built upon solid theories, repeated experimentations and if you question them, you're basically retarded. But trust the process, it's science.
>oh, what's that? Why did I manipulate experimental data to fit my theory? See, it's not data manipulation if you only do it a little. Otherwise it'd be social science, haha. There's no bias, trust me
>>11322668
>There's just too many factors to calculate!
>But ofc, we know all about those factors. It's just the calculations that'd take too long
This isn't the 90's anymore. PC hardware has come a long way since then. Scientific number crunching and simulations are faster than ever. Terabytes of data can be processed within a short amount of time.
The average gaymer probably has hardware more capable and cheaper than the macs people run simulations on.

>>11322646
The assumption is that there are problems with every design and these problems will only be found when the product is tested under realistic conditions. Getting to these problems as fast as possible stops wasting development time on inevitably failed lines of thought (ie carbon composite). In the end you get to the finished product faster and the money you waste destroying prototypes is saved a thousand times over by not paying engineers to do work that never sees the light of day.
>>11322687
Von Braun was a very special engineer. If Musk is as involved in the engineering part as we're told, he may be near his level, but those nazi scientists were something else.

>11322697
Got it, it's bait.

>>11322685
yeah that's what I said, they're cranking out bulkheads by aerospace standards right now

>>11322704
von Braun was but one man. Don't forget that those rockets were built by a shitload of competing corporations.

>11322709
>Nooooo! You can't say that! What kind of retard would expect science to be completely based upon the scientific method?

Edit: thanks for the gold kind redditor. Gosh, I just LOVE science!

>>11322697
You can't simulate behavior that you don't expect. You can only put in shit you're already aware of.
Do you think SpaceX was aware of shit that led to the explosion of the Falcon 9 carrying the Amos-6 in 2016 for instance?

That the LOX became so cold it burst through the helium containers and set fire to a carbon composite material? Computers are powerful as fuck, sure, but computers only know what you tell them.

>11322720
>hurr the scientific method means you have to simulate things to death before building them or else you're not being scientific hurr hurr

>>11322729
anyway they're doing the scientific method on manufacturing methods, the oldspace method of building rockets was too expensive so they're trying to figure out a cheaper way that'll still be strong enough

>>11322733
Soviets did the same shit, build cheap shit, stress test until it breaks, improve design, build cheap shit mk2, rinse repeat.

>>11322697
you can't simulate how nanometer imperfections in a material change the behavior at a large scale with heat and pressure. You can't simulate your supply line being unable to supply your demand for a part or a specialized worker. You can't simulate something turning out to be way more expensive than the estimate you were given by the producer, or a key partner going out of business or a natural disaster disrupting supply of a needed good. These are the things that get you in the end, not really the engineering.

>>11322738
they really needed to find cheaper ways to test that weren't blowing up a whole functional rocket every time, it really bit them in the ass on the N1

>>11322745
why spend 100 million dollars of R&D to find a way to save a 10 million dollar test rocket? Not only is it a waste of money, you also have to count the deficit of not having all your resources actively working towards the finished product.

>>11320444
apparently they are still working on those thin sheet reflectors. I believe one tore during stress testing

>>11322762

>>11322771
Take me to where the flavor is, Elon!

>>11322790
Nice find. Also some of the most enjoyable sci fi out there came from that very magazine and that very decade, 60's were good too

>>11322834
this image: >>11322771 was made because somebody found this image: >>11322790 and thought it looked hilarious.