/sci/ - Science & Math

who here would sign up as a janny on a generation ship, knowing that your grandchildren will only see the new world at the end of the destination.
If you manage to hook up with one of the other passengers that is.

>>11417108
>If you manage to hook up with one of the other passengers that is.
>become janitor on sleeper ship
>impregnate all girls while in transit to new colony
>they wakeup halfway into pregnancy
>become hero because colony survived

>>11417108
nah, generation ships are dumb. In the time it takes to get there, a new technology will be developed that will get there faster than you do and it will already be colonized when you arrive.

>>11417118
Then put it in a scenario where earth is fubar and the ones who get to board the generation ship are the last hope of humanity.
happy now?

Loaded and ready for testing

>>11417133

>>11417133
>>11417156
pressure test?

>>11417163
Probably. They want full stack by march.

>>11417163
Of course. You really think they‘d not immediately pressure test the thing after they had the core back together after it blew up the last time?

F

Will there be horses on Mars?

I heard that starship can't really land on the moon, because it would cause too much dust thrown or something, it is true?
I find it hard to beleive it would be such a huge problem.

>>11417197
it could land on the moon if something else goes there first and builds a landing pad

>>11417197
Bold predictions by some nobody huh

>>11417133
Just the paperwork for moving it will take six months.

>>11417225
they've already done the paperwork—road closures for a bunch of days between yesterday and feb 29th have been filed.

>>11417201
Like another starship that landed before it without giving a fuck or just by using rcs for the final touchdown?

>>11417197
there was such rampant speculation prior to Apollo, but no such incident happened
the same screeching has picked up again now that the vehicle is an order of magnitude larger, and I predict the same result: a whole lot of hot air from the peanut gallery and a wide, shallow crater being excavated by the exhaust.

>>11417118
There's no guarantee that ftl technology will be developed anon

>>11417234
>there was such rampant speculation prior to Apollo, but no such incident happened

>the same screeching has picked up again now that the vehicle is an order of magnitude larger, and I predict the same result

You do realise that the aforementioned ‘speculation’ is based on our current knowledge of lunar regolith, most of which came from Apollo...right?

>>11417244
nobody's talking about FTL, it'd just be dumb to take a trip via light sail taking hundreds of years when .1c or greater engines would probably be only a few decades away, reducing the trip down to just a few years. And it's not like you can stop mid trip and pick them up.

>>11417250
I look forward to being proven wrong

>>11417234
NO!

The danger is far too large to simply play with fire like this. There is a real tangible risk of the Moon becoming inaccessible because of large amounts of debris being thrown into orbit around it and maybe even back to Earth where we risk back-contamination from lunar material. We are on the brink of disaster by the name of Kessler Syndrome and possibly even worse.

We must carefully study the potential impact and over the years slowly and safely build scientific understanding that could one day allow us to land larger and large vehicles on the Moon and maybe even return human beings to surface.

What made it a "white elephant" among launch vehicles?

It was supposed to drastically reduce the cost per pound of orbital payload delivery... but it did the exact fucking opposite.

>>11417256
by the nature of the beast all material that doesn't reach lunar escape velocity will collide with the surface within an orbit
material that reaches lunar escape velocity will eventually either burn up in the atmosphere, collide with the moon, or escape into space eventually

>>11417261
the cowardice of NASA in the 70s

>>11417261
It was meant to be cheap while it was on paper. Once they started making it, it was known it won't be cheap but nobody actually cared.

>>11417261
>What made it a "white elephant" among launch vehicles?

It really isn’t, it’s definitely divisive but loads of people rightfully love it.

>>11417268
Lots of people don't know its gone too.

>>11417270
Lots of people think NASA closed down when it was gone.

>>11417268

Yeah, but it failed its main mission - reduce launch costs.

>>11417267
>>11417277

So how do you make a reusable heavy lift spacecraft that's cheaper per launch than expendable systems and isn't a total deathtrap?

>>11417082
So could we feasibly reach Alpha Centauri or not? By that I mean without generation or breeder ships

>>11417286
Prioritize making reusable heavy lift spacecraft over contractor's and political interests.

>>11417286
two stage to orbit
be true to the original design of the Shuttle instead of the aborted large payload recovery testbed that was the final orbiter design

>>11417293
yeah, all you have to do is reach a tenth of lightspeed and you get there in a few decades although the experience is actually shorter for the people on the ship. This is feasible now, although it would take a lot of money and slowing down on the other side is still a problem.

>>11417082
No link to the previous thread.. not cool bro... not cool

>>11417250
and the speculation back then was also called research and based on the best knowledge available at the time

>>11417304
at .1c it'd only be a few months shorter

>>11417352
>>11413236

WE'RE NOT GONNA NEED NOSECONES WHERE WE'RE GOING

>>11417261
Mainly three things IMO.

>NASA's distributed method of manufacturing and operation
NASA has always strategically selected locations for their various facilities, not because it's practical or cheap, but because it gave them more favorable political standing. This resulted in development and maintenance cost being much higher than it should be, but it gave NASA the leverage to get a higher budget at the time.

>Shuttle's troubled development
The Shuttle was a kind of vehicle that was never done before, that'll make any development risky and unsure. However, during development, NASA took on massive budget cuts which strained the agency in making this vehicle. All of a sudden, not only was this going to be NASA's next launcher, but it's only launcher. It had to do everything NASA wanted to do in space, even if it meant a less efficient vehicle overall. To get more funding to actually properly finish the design, NASA had to sell it to the USAF and DOD who then requested changes to the design that ultimately drove up vehicle costs even further.

>Reluctance to upgrade
While the Shuttle's design was flawed, what really damned it was that NASA never seriously perused upgrading it in any significant way. The RS-25's were marginally uprated, but never in a way to reduce the refurbishment time. The tiles were never simplified nor improved, so each Shuttle still had thousands of unique fragile tiles that each have to be inspected. The list goes on. It's not like the technology wasn't there. The X-33 displayed many technologies that could've been introduced to the Shuttle, but they weren't Why? It's complicated, but its most likely due to fear in NASA that Congress would just cancel the Shuttle if the agency seriously pushed for upgrades with no replacement.

One of these issues would've been bad for any project, all three made the worst launch vehicle in history. And there's much more detail that I'm missing.

>Starship SN1 tank preparing for Raptor attachment & static fire
>SN2 tank integration starts this week with much less circumferential pucker. Thanks Fronius!

SN1 is just a pressure/firing test article then. Ah well. SN2 will get the 3 raptors and fly. I guess they think SN2 will be finished soon enough, and that SN1 has a high likelihood of destroying 3 of their raptors?

Its really happening isn't it?

Footage of the first Martian city being built (Elongrad), circa 2043

>>11417478
When is the 20km hop supposed to happen?

>>11417478
well he's on track so far... we'll see

>>11417118
>he really thinks that great leaps and bounds in technology are inevitable and predictable
Anon . . .

>>11417513
I expect spaceship engines to enter a Moore's Law type state of advancement once space travel matures enough that it's routine and engines can be designed exclusively for vacuum

>>11417506
March/April somewhere around there.

>>11417128
In that scenario your generations ships aren't going any further than the asteroid belt, because that's the closest place to Earth to feasibly grow from a bottled colony starter kit into an actual robust civilization again.

For example, say we'd built a large rotating space habitat at the Earth-Moon L5 point (stable) using materials launched from a small Moon surface colony and of course from Earth. Earth goes oof. If Earth is uninhabitable to the point that it's easier to just stay in space, then what will happen is the population living on the Moon will want to beef up the space station at L5 (because it has Earthlike artificial gravity inside), move to it permanently, and then move the entire station to the asteroid belt for easier access to water ice and other important volatiles that the Moon lacks.

So the station leaves the Earth-Moon system and heads out beyond Mars' orbit. It parks into a nice Ceres orbit and deploys some surface landing ferries. There ferries were designed to be launched towards the Station from the Moon with the help of a long electromagnetic accelerator track, and return to the Moon propulsively. Since Moon's gravity is way stronger than Ceres gravity these ferries have more than enough delta V to do a round trip from station to surface to station. The ferries transport a bunch of ISRU hardware to the surface in order to start open-quarry mining ice and hydrated minerals, then using that water to generate the propellants necessary to make the transport system sustainable.

As Ceres orbits the Sun many smaller asteroids will make close passes at low relative velocity, low enough that the round trip delta V is easily within the budget of those surface ferry vehicles. These asteroids will be scouted out continuously, and ones that seem particularly rich in certain resources will be visited and have some of their surface material scooped up, thereby supplying the colony. From there it's just growth calculations.

>>11417163
>>11417175
Raptor attachment & static test fire. - Elon

>>11417564
looks like this first one only has the starhopper style one engine thrust structure instead of the three or six engine thrust structure they'll need for the 20km/100km hops or to get to orbit

>>11417572
yeah - >>11417470

>>11417574
lame
I wonder if he's waiting for High Bay 1 to finish construction

>>11417286
You have to go all in and do full reusability.

Shuttle's problems pretty much all stemmed from a single fact; developing two reusable stages was going to be too expensive. Developing a reusable upper stage that sat atop an expendable booster looked too expensive. Developing a reusable lower stage that used an expendable upper stage also looked too expensive (remember, this was back in the day when these stages would have actually been large rocket powered space planes).
That left one compromise option; develop a reusable upper stage, but mount it to the side of the stack, and shit the main engines onto the upper stage instead of on the booster core. This made everyone as somewhat happy; no monstrously large space plane first stage would be needed, the big expensive first stage engines would be retained, they'd get their cost reductions, and the thrust deficit on the pad could be made up for using big dumb solid boosters.

Unfortunately this introduced problems like foam strikes, booster failures, huge abort black zones during ascent, vastly increased complexity, and propulsion performance requirements that pushed engine technology to the extreme, making those engines even more difficult to build and very difficult to maintain and service.

Ceres lacks an atmosphere for aerobraking
It’s easier to go to Jupiter than Ceres
Faster too

The asteroid belt thing is a giant meme

>>11417580
>developing two reusable stages was going to be too expensive
that wasn't the problem, the problem was that NASA was too cowardly to propose developing two full reusable stages
they should have started with a reusable lower stage

>>11417589
is that a file path
legendary
anyway it's the pressurization control panel
probably full of either valves or gauges or both

>>11417593
googled it and it seems a J. Wiswall works for spacex. funny stuff, guess he's in charge of the fluids control stuff or something

>>11417589
https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnwiswall

I would like to think that the reason some parts say "PLUS WY" instead of "+Y" is because something was lost in translation at one point.

wow this looks way better lol

>>11417586
There's also the issue that Nixon wanted NASA cut down extensively. So they might not have had the capability to develop two reusable stages, and the weird stage-and-a-half probably seemed like a good compromise.

>>11417614
it wasn't
they should have stuck to their guns and either saved space forever or died on that hill

Literally months to weld together some grain silo lol

>>11417622
an extremely thin nearly flight-weight grain silo

>>11417470
My understanding is it's being pressure tested to spec, not destruction. Assuming they confirm it meets requirements (which it should considering even the monstrosity on the left >>11417608 did) they'll finish assembly on it.

>>11417659
the monstrosity on the left did not meet requirements

>>11417667
My bad, sort of, the original was orbital spec but they'll probably be testing this one to crew spec.

>>11417672
no, you're thinking of the smaller test tanks that were tested to destruction just before construction on this one was started
the big old wrinkly one that exploded did not meet orbital specs

>>11417457

So privately funded designs would be better?

Meanwhile in Alaska...

>>11417683
At the time? I don't think so, because the market in that era seems like it wouldn't be able to support even one private launch company like SpaceX. Such companies would have to serve the government extensively and that puts them under the whims of political winds.

>>11417581
You can't aerobrake at Jupiter, you'd be moving >50 km/s and you'd need to pass through the radiation belts (actually infeasible unlike Earth's) in order to end up on any kind of useful orbit.

>>11417688

>>11417688
Too small to be relevant to the future of space development

>>11417691
That engine arrangement confuses me. There's no even symmetry, so if one engine needs to be shut down mid-flight then the thrust imbalance can't be fixed by shutting down the engine across from it. Why would they go with this configuration?

>>11417699
Because engine out capability is silly when you have reliable engines.

>>11417695
Gotta start somewhere.

>>11417699
That isn't a flight-ending situation if you have enough gimble range

>>11417688
neat little company, i wish them luck.

>>11417133
I love how all the hoppers look like R2-D2!

>>11417691
I don't recall any other rocket design which had five-fold symmetry. Atlas has (and had) two-fold for two and three engines, Soyuz and Saturn had four-fold for the five engines (cross), and Proton has six fold for its six engines.

>>11417829
Atlas V only has one engine

>>11417712
Merlins are pretty fucking reliable engines. There's only ever been one mission-flight failure of a Merlin series engine, and that was a Merlin 1C on CRS1. The 1Ds have never had a in-flight failure.

>>11417856
they're talking about the new electric pump engines from Astra space

>>11417833
I was actually thinking of the older all-American Atlas rockets first, the stage-and-a-half ones. But both Atlas, Delta Heavy, and Antares all have two-fold symmetry at least for their engine bells.

>>11417873
>for their engine bells
yes good that is the correct wording
>I was thinking of the older actual Atlas rockets first
yes good, the newer Atlas rockets aren't Atlas at all

For a pressure fed rocket, how big is the pressurant tank relative to the rest of the rocket? Most diagrams I see depict it as being fairly small, but I was doing some math for the design of a pressure fed rocket and the pressurant tank is almost as big as the propellant tanks.

pic semi-related

>>11418100
the traditional solution is helium stored at about a bajillion atmospheres of pressure

>>11418104
I have mine using nitrogen at 16MPa, so you may be onto something.

>>11418112
You can use gasses at pressures that they would normally be liquids at if you also provide some kind of heating to keep them above their vaporization temperature,of course in that case you'd better make sure your math is right because you effectively have a steam kettle bomb

>>11418172
But with enough steam kettle bombs you have a rocket

>>11418172
Thanks for the idea. I'm not seriously designing anything (yet), just having fun making a spreadsheet that covers most details of a liquid propellant pressure fed sounding rocket, and exploring design consequences.

>>11418196
Now you're thinking like Mike 'Rocketman' Hughes.

>>11417727
Judging by the cutouts in the bottom panel, the engines only gimbal one direction. I shouldn't even call it a gimbal when it's just a hinge. It might be an access cutout though.

When the fuck is Elon going to b invent hovercars already? Literally all I want is a Blade Runner style car. I'll trade all of rocketry for it.

>>11418266
never

>>11418279
Why not :(

>>11418283
the fiction of your childhood lied to you

>>11418266
would an all eletric vtol be good enough for you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ukmS9ZJm40

>>11418283
some cities have started trying to adopt quadcopter taxis

>>11418283
Because you don't touch yourself at night to stuff like this.

>>11418288
I do but the closest I'll ever get to it is on the beach at Cape Canaveral. A hovercar is something I could conceivably own one day.

>>11418285
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdg0_hjuksQ

>>11418288
Please Anon stop posting Starships I can't coom anymore tonight.

a space fleet would be perfect to colonize the rarest of moons.
the earth like moons of gas giants.

>>11417691
How is it that we can have these small start up companies of 200 people make missiles yet literal nation states pf millions cannot.
Are fucking white people just that amazing pragmatic and methodical.

>>11417118
uh no, why do you think this will always happen, scifi? If we could build a generation ship that actually worked and could legitimately last generations with no serious health problems then the tech would likely be at a ceiling that only tiny refinements can improve. The real possibility is that a new ship is made with a budget 1000x the original one but even then it won't be able to pass the original in distance.

>>11418303
Would the moons remain Earthlike though? This assumes a thicc hydrogen boi would remain within it's star's habitable zone, when they seem to end up either migrating in and becoming hot giants or migrating out and becoming cold giants like Jupiter and Saturn are currently. Any moons of similar composition to Earth would either be blowtorched until they more resembled Mercury or freeze into cold rocky ice balls. On top of that the planet would either have to orbit in such a way that it slips through the gas giant's radiation belts (which should be substantially more powerful than Jupiter's due to proximity to the host star) or outside of the belts, in which case temperatures are going to flux pretty hard as the planet orbits it's host giant, seeing as how it's distance from the home star will change significantly in short intervals.

I think that while through some extreme quirk of orbital mechanics this might be workable, it would be extraordinarily improbable compared to the way our solar system is organized.

>>11418311
Autism, and also it's easier to get the work done in a developed country compared to a failed state, developing country, or new country. A lot of the basic bitch research is easily available to public scrutiny, and the western mode of socioeconomic organization makes it much easier for the average citizen to accomplish such an ambitious project.

>>11418315
>the tech would likely be at a ceiling that only tiny refinements can improve
This "tech ceiling" meme is such a myopic, doomer wishful thinking take.
>The end is just right around the corner!
said every pessimist ever, throughout history, just before they were wrong.

>>11418311
Because America is the greatest country on Earth

>>11417607
WHY ARE ALL THE RING JOINS ALIGNED

DID THESE NIGGER NEVER PLAY WITH LEGO

YOU HAVE TO STAGGER THE JOINS CUNT, FUCK

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>11418335
the ring joins are not aligned

>>11418335
just a bad angle; from the sides you can see the alignment offset.

so, what is this thing

>>11418367
I think that's half of a hinge joint for one of the Mark 1's wings.

>>11418388
yeah, big pivot sleeve in the center and the actuation padeyes up top
the rivets tell me mk 1 flappy bits
Nomadd's being coy about it tho

do you think they have enough steel here

>>11418395
no

>>11418401
each of those rolls is as tall as a man, the hole in the center is large enough to climb into

>>11418395
16+ rolls, with an output of three ring sections per roll; they're good for 48 ring sections, or one to two more ships depending on the scrap rate.

>>11418335
I don't see any joins, just plumbing.
You know they're doing single-welded rings now, right? ...which means the joins could be on the other side? I've seen them staggered a lot while they were building these rings.

>>11418303
that's nice, but we don't have any earthlike moons in this solar system. Only the Moon has the highest gravity of a moon in the solar system and it can barely hold an atmosphere.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1232556310874533888

>It's a "Mexican welders didn't have the voltage and feed rate settings right" episode

>>11418311
Back to /pol/

>>11418463
>Only the Moon has the highest gravity of a moon in the solar system and it can barely hold an atmosphere.

Titan has even weaker surface gravity than Luna yet has an atmosphere thicker than Earth’s.

>>11418395
Would I summon kraken if I snap ties on one of those?

>>11418315
>Muh tech ceiling

No such thing. Life isn’t an RTS

>>11418481
Based tradie poster

>>11418481
it would be very painful

>>11418395
They are going to need a few container ships full of steel rolls as well as large quantities of heavy machinery so they can fortify boca chica while civilisation collapses around them and they try to build and launch supplies off world.

>>11417082
So, say, we manage to build a fleet of 100 huge ships, each weighing one or two fuckloads of kg.

Mass of earth will reduce significantly. Orbit will change accordingly. We will lose resources. How can we justify this?

>>11418474
tell me why he is wrong
North Korea cant make shit work, Iran cant make shit work, China kills people and destroys their peoples houses with every other fucking launch.
Japan seems to be the only competent asian nation

>>11418500
>Mass of earth will reduce significantly.

No it wouldn’t. Let me put it this way.
We produce about 1.5 billion tons of steel annually.
Mercury is the smallest planet, with the least mass. If we removed 100 billion tons of steel annually from Mercury for a MILLION years, it’s mass would be reduced by around 1%.

>>11418474
>>11418503
Also I guess Japan has only 1 private company launching amything and absolutely everything else is fone by their NASA equivalent.

>>11417181
robot horses maybe

>>11418285
shouldn't be called a jet, it's just a bunch of electric motor driven props.

>>11418395
i hope it's for superheavy

>>11418500
>Mass of earth will reduce significantly
lol

Stop getting excited about a simple fuel tank of highly questionable quality.

Spacex is years away from producing flight worthy hardware and that's only if they don't go bankrupt in the next 10 years.

>>11418555
no I'm sorry but TIG welding gets me horny

>>11418555
Okay, Boeing.

>>11418500
We can counter it by lifting large highly reflective balloons in earth orbit to catch the solar wind. Since they are attached to the Earth through gravity they will transfer the sun's wind force applies to them like ship windsails through a mast. This will allow us to move in any direction we want. It's already happening with all the small satellites and the effect will increase when starlink is up so it's better to start thinking about the effects right now and putting it to good use otherwise one day you might wake up seeing venus or even jupiter in the sky.

>>11418555
>NOO YOU CAN'T JUST MAKE ROCKETS CHEAPLY AND EASILY

creepy

>>11418680
Our blessed father Nurgle has sent us a premonition fellow believers.

>>11418680
Kino.

>>11418395
No, pls buy more so I don't get laid off.

>>11417589
An URL from their internal website

>>11417111
>thinking that you could just "sign up" for a generation ship

Do people really think getting on one of those things would be like applying to be the assistant manager at OfficeMax, and that there wouldn't be an extremely rigorous screening process in order to maximize the genetic health of the seed population?

>>11417118
No, they're dumb because you could send a seeder ship to grow the humans upon arrival, and you just saved yourself a boatload of vital resources by not having to invest in a sophisticated life-support system that has to run flawlessly for decades on end. Maybe enough to help build and launch another seeder ship?

>>11418500
Earth gains more than a starship + payload's worth of material every single day. Planets are big.

>>11418465
>custom heavy duty planisher
Smooth boys incoming.

>>11417683
Even a government funded design would be better so long as it wasn't design-by-committee. That style of management is death for basically any project, not just rocketry. Remember the Bradley.

>>11417304
>and slowing down on the other side is still a problem.

Just burn backwards.

>>11417513
Technological advancement is inevitable and predictable. Within a million years, we’ll be able to make our own universe.

>>11418860
You'd have to be carrying something like 30,000km/s worth of unused propellant with you, plus a safety margin. It's not an insignificant design issue even for a fusion torch or antimatter torch ship.

>>11418860
can't burn backwards with a light sail

>>11418868
>what is turning around

>>11418206
>Mike 'Man Rocket' Hughes
ftfy

>>11418868
>can't burn backwards with a light sail

ACTUALLY YOU CAN
You can decelerate a laser-powered lightsail craft using deplorable mirrors

>>11417179
Scientifically speaking, he didnt fly so good

>>11418866
>You'd have to be carrying something like 30,000km/s worth of unused propellant with you, plus a safety margin

That’s achievable with modern and near-future electric propulsion, and doubtless with far-future propulsion technology. Ion engines with specific impulse values of over ten thousand are currently constructable.

>>11418465
kek

>>11418816
I first read that as custom heavy duty punisher. That might work too, right?

>>11418882
>deplorable

>>11418500
>>11418809
Because Earth is not flat, it is fatt.

>>11418899
Damn talk about a deep trench

>>11418899
now we know how bermuda triangle looks like

>>11418680
It's the Musk Signal!

>>11418888
Holy quads, it shall be so.

>>11418868
When you get to the other star, just turn the sail around?

>>11418916
sail is powered by a laser on Earth

>>11418921
You can decelerate in that scenario via mirrors.

>>11418868

>>11418888
>m0/m1 = e^(30000000/(g*10000)) = 6.48*10^132
NOPE

>>11418907
reddit comment

>>11418899
Only correct answer in this thread

How long until Musk turns boca chica into full on rocket factory assembly plant churning out like 1 startship a week?

I heard he wants to increase the staff working on starship program from 300 to 3,000 by the end of the year so it shouldn't be that long.

>>11418996
iirc he wants one starship a DAY

>>11419012
That's probably way down the road when he has actual machinery and robots building it like the Tesla factories, but by then SpaceX will have probably moved onto something better than the current Starship design.

>>11418463
ganymede and titan would love to have a talk with you.

>>11418319
there is a way for it to remain stable.
the gas giant has to be the size of saturn to 8 times the mass of jupiter, it had to be around a martian orbit and earth orbit compared to its host star, the moon has to have a stable retrograde orbit around its gas giant, the moon rotation cycle will be complicated since the world will have summer and winter depending on which side of the gas giant it is located but it will still be livable, the earth like moon will probably be like a fusion of all the big moons of jupiter.
geologically active, have earth like conditions, the magnetoshpere will protect the moon from the radiation emitted from the gas giant, etc...
I suggest you to watch this video, its explain it better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Evq7n2cCTlg

>>11418319
>This assumes a thicc hydrogen boi would remain within it's star's habitable zone
After a star system forms, planets tend to stay put. During the chaotic formation things like migration can happen, but afterwards things stabilize. All wee need is a Jupiter-like planet to find itself in a stable orbit within the habitable zone of a star.
>On top of that the planet would either have to orbit in such a way that it slips through the gas giant's radiation belts
Unnecessary, as even a thin atmosphere would fully block the type of radiation that gets trapped in a magnetosphere, so an Earthlike atmosphere would completely protect any life on the surface
>or outside of the belts, in which case temperatures are going to flux pretty hard as the planet orbits it's host giant, seeing as how it's distance from the home star will change significantly in short intervals
Dumb. Earth's distance from the Sun changes by millions of kilometers during the year, and the temperature changes that result don't affect Earth's climate as strongly as our axial tilt. A change in distance one tenth as big over a much shorter time scale would drive the effect down to being so small as to be meaningless.

>>11418463
Io has stronger gravity than the Moon by a decent amount.

>>11419084
depending on the proximity to (and angular size of) the big boy and the temperature delta from day to night on the surface, the thermal flux radiating off of the gas giant could change the seasons wildly

>>11419084
Gas giants migrating after planetary formation is a thing. Jupiter would have bodied the inner solar system without Saturn's influence.

>>11418500
Earth gains hundreds of metric tons per day, brainlet.

>>11418555
>Spacex is years away from producing flight worthy hardware

>>11418888
cringe, you need specific impulse in the millions to get delta V budgets that large
>>11418961
based, math ain't lie

>>11419099
Considering the amount of heat radiating from all of the planets in the solar system is negligible, I choose to throw your statement into the trash as irrelevant.

>>11419167
it really depends on the temperature of the gas giant and how much sky it takes up
if it's half the sky, even if it's radiating at 40C that'll be a big issue

>>11419175
>half the sky

No large moon would orbit that close, even in Io's sky Jupiter only takes up a few degrees of arc. Heating from tidal forces will become dominant over radiative heating in every case (Io is a volcanic hellscape, for example).

>>11419184
cool

>>11418555
At this point and after having been proven wrong so many times, I have to assume that posts like these are only made because some anons have sexualized being wrong. Don't hate this anon. He just has a very complex relationship with his balls and needs special conditions in order to coom.

>>11419224
The "they'll be bankrupt in 10 years" bit is a clear sign that the anon was bullshitting. Even if Starship is a big flop, SpaceX can just fall back on the Falcon 9 and still be profitable because it's still the most advanced lifter in the world.

>>11419239
They're not going to give up on Starship and refocus on F9, it essentially is the vehicle to fulfill the mission statement of the company. They also don't need it to pay for itself any time soon, it can basically remain a research project while starlink takes over as the income driver in the intermediate future.

>>11419256
even then, Tesla will probably continue to rise and Musk can bankroll another 10 years of operations on his own if he really, truly needed to—and I think he probably would.

>>11419140
That's a welcome reminder anon.

>>11419301
Tesla shorters have lost 12bn+ over just the past couple months and are reeing pretty hard about "muh eebil Tesla cultists why won't you fucking zoomies stop investing in things you want ahhhhhhhhhhhHHHH." Even after two months of nonstop losses some of them are still shorting too, it's like a /biz/ meme in real life.

When will we get a competitor to SpaceX?

>>11419423
Bezos is trying

>>11419423
when BO launches something into orbit

>>11419423
Hard to tell, Blue Origin's mission statement explicitly states they aren't interested in competition per-say, and they're the best equipped and funded outside of SpaceX. Assuming Corona-Chan doesn't crash China with no survivors, they might eventually figure out their own reusable heavy lifter and start shitting those out in enormous numbers, but that's just pure speculation. SLS will be mogged by Chadship and no other country is trying anything remotely as ambitious as even SLS right now at the government level. SpaceX is lucky enough to exist in a market vacuum because NASA took an age to tool back up and actually build their rocket, Blue is taking is slow and steady and is more of a passion project than a business at this point, China is having to race to make up 50 years of lost ground, Russia's space program is starved completely of funding, and there's still not enough rocket engineers or part manufacturers to allow tiny startups to build medium or heavy lifters.

>>11419439
I hope China doesn't get BTFO by the corona virus as I want to see how their space station does

>>11419423
>When will we get a competitor to SpaceX?

What do you mean by a competitor? Arianespace is currently competing with SpaceX to launch commercial satellites, ULA is currently competing with them for government payloads, OneWeb is competing with them in the LEO broadband market etc

>>11419439
Pure, unfiltered autism...

>>11419457
we mean a competitor in DIRT CHEAP LAUNCH

>>11419463
But you don’t need to be dirt cheap to compete? Just ask these guys:

https://spacenews.com/ula-wins-competition-to-launch-nasa-mission/

https://spacenews.com/spacex-loses-falcon-heavy-customer-to-arianespace/

>>11418507
That anon won't reply because he doesn't know how to beyond "that's racist"

https://twitter.com/northropgrumman/status/1232729546383859714

>History in the making: Our MEV-1 has successfully docked with the INTELSAT IS-901 satellite in geostationary orbit – a first for the industry.

https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/space-logistics-services/mission-extension-vehicle/

>>11419445
China should be taken over by America, a real country.

>>>11419423
>>When will we get a competitor to SpaceX?
Never

>>11419439
>Assuming Corona-Chan doesn't crash China with no survivors

Does anyone actually believe pathogens in the modern day are significant?

>>11418479
Yes and Titan's atmosphere is degrading.

>>11419486

>>11419486
they put their probe up its thrust chamber
that's lewd

>>11419496
Not significantly. It’s over three billion years old and it’s still got a thicc atmosphere, and the reason it loses mass is down to its atmospheric composition.

>>11419486
https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/space-logistics-services/mission-extension-vehicle/

>>11419486

>>11419521

>>11419523

You know, I really just want to traverse space. I don’t care how humanity does it. Maybe if we all could just unite; Neo-nazi’s, (x) supremacists, and spend our energy and resources aggressively improving our technology, and become advanced enough, then each race can all fuck off to different star systems and live harmoniously in an earth-like planet.

>>11419528
Even if Nazis lived in peace on some desert island, they should be invaded and hanged.

>>11419534
What a spicy and controversial opinion, so brave.

>>11419546
Not sure that’s controversial but okay

>>11419547
No, it totally is, and it's BEAUTIFUL!
Can you tell us anything more about your bold new opinion? Maybe shock and awe us with the revelation that Hitler was in fact a BAD man?!
I don't know if we can handle it anon!

>>11419525
lewd

>>11418654

>>11419528
Fascists should all die.

>>11419534
>>11419594

I still think we should give them their own planet. It won’t be long until they begin to start fighting among themselves and changing the requirements on what it means to be Aryan until they destroy themselves entirely.

Even still, my post implies that we are cosmologically light years away from extremists of all sides, so really, why waste thousands of light years just to hang some fucking stormniggers when you could be exploring your own galaxy?

>>11418654
I really hope that the meme of rockets having to be made from "advanced" materials dies in a fire soon. I'm tired of seeing stuff like.
>Hey, we can make the rocket out of this relatively common alloy. It works and it'll be much chea-
>NOOOOOOO! YOU CANT DO THAT!!! YOU MUST MAKE IT OUT OF THIS BLEEDING EDGE MATERIAL THAT NO ONE KNOWS HOW TO MAKE IT WORK YET OR ELSE WHATS THE POINT!!!!

Purely out of curiosity, do we have any rockets with enough delta V to actually collide with the sun?

>>11419486
SpaceX starlink team should do this, but instead of use grappling hook. Then use thrusters to bring it in for deorbit. The starlink can then recharge the battery and increase its altitude once again for another satellite debris catching. Cheap/effective way to bring down debris.

>>11419618
yes, it's theoretically possible to do gravity assists out to Jupiter and then gravity assist off of Jupiter so as to collide with the sun
it's also possible to use repeated earth/venus assists to collide with the sun (this is what Parker Solar Probe is doing)
by the way, for varying values of "collide" and "sun", Parker Solar Probe has already accomplished that

>>11419609
Posts like this reek of retardation
Can you even tell me anything about the NSDAP or Fascist italy, or Imperial Japan, can you tell me anything about the Afrika corps allied divisions

>>11419616
Shame too, because the government has been more than tolerant of Boing's multi-month delays, while the X-33's functional COPV tank was finished with a delay of only a couple weeks.

>>11419140
mach diamonds make my dick diamonds

>>11419659
I wonder if it will even be possible to discern the individual plumes coming off of Super Heavy
will there be enough atmosphere at stage separation for the vacuum raptors to have mach diamonds?

>>11419534
>>11419594
Hmmm, Jew or redditor?
redditor. Go back to plebbit.

>>11419534
>>11419594
Hmmm, Jew or redditor?
Go back to plebbit.

>>11419534
>>11419594
Go black to plebbit

>>11417688
Just as the Falcon 9 dimensions were dictated by ground factors (overpass clearance), Astra's Rocket was designed to fit fully stacked in a standard international shipping container. Pretty clever! (Though it seems like overkill to also fit the fairing. That could easily be left off until arrival at the launch site, since they need to do payload integration there anyway.

At 11.6 meters in length, I think it is second only to Japan's recent SS-520 as shortest orbital rocket ever. And that could only do 3kg compared to Astra's 100kg.

>>11418465
I know he's trying to do it on the cheap but skilled labor isn't where I would be saving money. Having worked with boilermakers constructing chemical plants I can tell you those guys knew their shit, right down to getting a copy of the production metallurgy reports so they used the right filler.

>>11419709
>SS-520
A CUTE I TELL YOU. A CUTE!

>>11419616
They didn't actually want a shuttle replacement though otherwise they'd have gone with rockwell's considerably more realistic proposal instead of the it's-never-gonna-work monstrosity that lockheed offered. Rumors say the conventional fuel tanks would have had higher performance than the failed composites but they would have made the thing look more like rockwell's.

>>11419415
It's not a loss until you close your position.

>>11419618
The recent solar probes are almost grazing it so with some work yes.

>>11419750
Parker Solar Probe is inside the corona, which is effectively Sol's atmosphere

>>11419730
>Rumors say the conventional fuel tanks would have had higher performance than the failed composites
Yeah, because the composites of the test tank failed in tests they decided to also make aluminum tanks for the first test vehicle, turned out the aluminium tanks were lighter and stronger then what they wanted to achieve with the composite ones.

From what i understand the vehicle was like 85% done, and congress pulled the plug for bullshit things like how they would stop funding if they used aluminium tanks instead of composite ones, totaly ignoring that the aluminium solution was the cheaper and better option.

The army also stepped in and wanted to fund the project to save it but congres cockblocked that too, they really didnt want the X33 to fly not even one test flight.

The thing is, aerospikes could be a meme, but at least after some real testing we would be sure, now we can only speculate.

>>11417179
thats how i lost my first kerbal, pressed space accidentally and deployed the parachute too early

>>11419794
Kerbals can survive terminal velocity falls if you get them through the thermal wall
this is known as "doing a Yuri"
if they've been to orbit and back before they will also have parachutes, which makes it really easy instead of using RCS to pivot them to maximize air drag and hoping while thrusting

>>11419730
>>11419771
Don't want to run into Hanlon's razor, but it seems like Congress never wanted space flight to begin with.

>>11419839
>but it seems like Congress never wanted space flight to begin with.

Congress obviously does want spaceflight (if it didn’t, nothing would get funded), just on their terms.

>>11417082
Daily reminder that science fiction has nothing to do with science and belongs wherever philosophy goes (not /sci/) or fiction (Same difference, am I rite?)

I haven't met ONE scifi fag who actually studied any science having anything to do with space, or even observed the night sky with any commitment. Scifi fags just want a background for their stories and fantasies and don't care about science.

>>11419854
Scifi here should be good as long as its science is grounded and harder than diamonds. Like in http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/

>>11419854
does studying electrical science so I can become a moonbase/mars base solar panel installer count?

>>11419871
>CLANGCLANGCLANGCLANGCLANGCLANG

>>11419867
You don't appear to know how language works, or science.

>>11419871
Your delusional fantasies of being a special space snowflake don't count, no.

>>11419879
we'll see

>>11419882
Old space flight concept art was quite something. Had so much character to it.

>>11419889
Just typical bread and circus fantasy bullshit. Scifi fags ignore the ACTUAL substance of space that can be experienced by amateur astronomy. They don't care about actually understanding and exploring the universe, or else they'd be doing it themselves, they just care about their space fantasies and "aesthetics." It's the equivalent of /lit/ posers who DON'T FUCKING READ.

>>11419876
There was nothing wrong with the wording of his post, though. You ESL? Go tantrum somewhere else.

>>11419920
Fiction: literature in the form of prose, especially short stories and novels, that describes imaginary events and people.
Speculation is NOT SCIENCE.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32346/the-air-force-and-spacex-are-teaming-up-for-a-massive-live-fire-exercise?xid=twittershare

Military demand for starlink is a huge win for SpaceX.
OneWeb can't do it because they're based in the UK (which is too small to care or support it for such operations) has worse latency and is potentially compromised by ruskies.
Of course military won't pay for the entire thing but once they start relying on it it's gonna be indispensable to them.

>>11419915
You seem to have some anger issues, you should work on that. Nothing wrong with indulging on some well written scifi.

>>11419931
>Nothing wrong with indulging on some well written scifi.
The problem is the delusion that this has anything to do with science. This discussion belongs in /lit/ and has nothing to do with science.

>>11419937
But, which discussions here are specifically scifi? What triggered you? Because while we do talk about it here, we usually talk about how it relates to actual space flight.

>>11419927
How the fuck do speculation and science oppose each other? That doesn't even make sense. Hell, if no one gathered what they knew and extrapolated it to make a hypothesis, essentially a form of speculation, how exactly would science exist?

>>11419951
>Tone arguments
>Loaded questions
>Diversion tactics
/pol/tard tier discourse.

>>11419958
I think he's either a very angry child, or a troll.

>>11419958
>How the fuck do speculation and science oppose each other?
Another loaded question with completely false premises. The problem is not separating speculation from science, i.e. fantasy from reality.
Are you a literal teenager?

>>11417181
>>11419931
Not all science fiction is about the impossible, only the worst of it. But then we have shit like the movie Gravity which very intricately renders some very impossible orbital mechanics.

>>11419968
Perhaps, but most "scifi" is just ideological / philosophical fiction that tries to use a veneer of science to justify itself. Usually it's propaganda, as was much of "classic" scifi.

>>11419930
>OneWeb can't do it because they're based in the UK (which is too small to care or support it for such operations) has worse latency and is potentially compromised by ruskies.

OneWeb satellites are built in Florida, at KSC....Also:

>Now the commander of the United States Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command is expressing interest in using these commercial space internet services to provide communications in the polar regions, where satellite communications have traditionally been more limited. Gen. Thomas O’Shaughnessy is seeking $130 million for the effort, which he has listed as his number one unfunded priority for fiscal year 2021.

>In a Feb. 11 letter to Congressional defense committees, O’Shaughnessy explained the money will be used for polar communications experiments and the fielding of prototype terminals capable of utilizing Starlink and OneWeb satellites. Additionally, the commander expressed hope that these experiments will incentivize further commercial investments in satellite communications and internet in the Arctic.

>>11419968
>only the worst of it.
What worst of it has been discussed in this thread?

>>11419965
As it progresses I tend to agree, dude is way too persistent and obsessed with reddit-tier debate tactics.

Guess who this impressive collection belongs to...

>>11419984
(You)?

>>11419973
Irrlevant. Congressman wants jobs program for a British/Japanese satellite operator launched from a Russian rocket.

>>11419973
Oneweb should theoretically have better arctic coverage, assuming it actually makes it that far, so it kind of makes sense in his position. I say "assuming" because I think they have a lot going against them positioning themselves as a starlink competitor and iirc for the same reason they don't do SpaceX launches.

>>11420048
Oneweb seem to be prioritizing arctic coverage at first, which is stupid
you should only need maybe three planes of satellites to cover the entire arctic

>>11419854
>I haven't met ONE scifi fag who actually studied any science having anything to do with space
Plenty of SF authors come from space related science background for example Robert L Forward
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Forward

Or G. David Nordley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._David_Nordley

>>11420051
>Oneweb seem to be prioritizing arctic coverage at first, which is stupid
They're gunning for military contract first over public. Meanwhile SpaceX is doing both.

Darpalaunchchallenge.org

Are they going to launch today?

>>11420048
>>11420051
>>11420086
OneWeb’s interest in the Arctic region seems primarily commercial:

https://spacewatch.global/2020/01/uks-oneweb-signs-distribution-agreement-with-alaskas-pacific-dataport-inc-for-arctic-coverage/

https://www.alaskajournal.com/2020-01-29/microcom-oneweb-partnership-promises-alaska-coverage-year-end

https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/4/20849142/oneweb-arctic-internet-coverage-space-2020

>>11420109
No, they’ve been delayed to the 28th by bad weather. No official announcements have been made, but NOTAMs are active.

>>11420115
Kk, they mentioned the 28th on the live stream just now.

>>11420140
Based and nuclear Starship-pilled.

>>11419973
>>OneWeb can't do it because they're based in the UK (which is too small to care or support it for such operations)

Huh?

Inmarsat plc (LSE: ISAT) is a British satellite telecommunications company, offering global mobile services. It provides telephone and data services to users worldwide, via portable or mobile terminals which communicate with ground stations through thirteen geostationary telecommunications satellites.

The Inmarsat head office is at Old Street Roundabout in the London Borough of Islington.

>>11420196
The biggest issue with OneWeb is that it launched by russians.
It means that russians know exact specifications of sats and even have direct access to them during integration.

>>11419973
>>OneWeb can't do it because they're based in the UK (which is too small to care or support it for such operations)

Also SSTL

We have our own Satellite Operations Centre located at our headquarters in Guildford. We have accumulated over 200 years of in-orbit satellite operations through our automated Satellite Operations Centre, monitoring satellites 24 hours a day.

'Our Satellite Operations Centre has access to SSTL Ground Stations located in the UK and Svalbard. In addition to these, SSTL is part of the Viasat Real Time Earth (RTE) network, hosting one of the RTE ground stations at our Guildford site.

We offer a range of managed in-orbit spacecraft operations services for our customers.'

>>11420223
OK I see, yes UK cannot launch independently (atm) . But in terms of satellites UK is plenty capable of building and operating world class tech, and does so.

>>11419771
They pulled the plug because the damn thing wouldn’t have reached orbit

>>11420230
As far as I know OneWeb wanted to switch to Ariane 6 as soon as it become available.
But I pretty sure it will be an option only after initial contract for 21 Soyuz launches will be complete.
Also, obviously, you can launch Ariane from Baikonur or Vostochny so even in the future some of sats will have to go on russian rocket.

>>11420230
>UK
>cannot launch
Aren't they they only country that reached orbit then dropped their entire space program?

>>11420223
>The biggest issue with OneWeb is that it launched by russians.

You’d be wrong, the satellites are actually launched by Arianespace, a European company using a Russian rocket from a Russian cosmodrome.

>It means that russians know exact specifications of sats and even have direct access to them during integration.

Even if all this was true, it wouldn’t matter because the US military aren’t going to be attaching any payloads to Starlink, OneWeb etc, just using them for extra internet bandwidth to enhance their existing capabilities provided by state-owned satellite assets. For example, the US military already buys bandwidth on regular commercial GEO satellites for this purpose. The DoD are actually planning their own small satellite constellations (e.g. DARPA Blackjack) for other specialist functions and OneWeb are involved...sort of. OneWeb’s satellite bus is made by Airbus, who are free to sell it to other customers like the DoD and they’ve received a contract from DARPA to study integrating military payloads onto the OneSat bus, as a precursor to Blackjack.

>>11420230
OneWeb are simply based in England, they’ve got offices all over the globe and build their satellites in Florida. They’ve got Floridian and Alaskan politicians supporting them.

>>11419486
>>11419523

Are these the first pictures of a satellite above leo by itself? Either way it looks really weird.

This time next year:
>NASA is getting disbanded
>SpaceX is getting nationalized and moved to Alabama
>Elon is getting executed
How does this make you feel, /sfg/?

>>11419854
>Scifi fags just want a background for their stories and fantasies and don't care about science
You only think that because you think starwars and shit-trek are SF, they're not.

>>11420303
yeah but they're in Russia
the KGB is going to get to fondle them

>>11420256
>As far as I know OneWeb wanted to switch to Ariane 6 as soon as it become available.
>But I pretty sure it will be an option only after initial contract for 21 Soyuz launches will be complete.

OneWeb will switch to Ariane 62 when it becomes available because Arianespace are going to phase out Soyuz in favour of it. The Soyuz launches are also being operated by Arianespace, but are being launched from Vostochny in Russia. I believe OneWeb have actually booked the first Ariane 6 launch.

>>11420306
I would not be surprised if Bernie will cancel Artemis or at least will significantly cut it down.
But it not a bad thing, Artemis is big waste of money with almost zero pay off.

>>11420306
>SpaceX is getting nationalized
I take it you are not American and have no clue how companies work. lol

>>11418500
No reason to build them out of Earth based minerals. Capture/process asteroids.

>>11420351
anytime somebody says "nationalize" they're either a child or a Russian troll

>>11420351
The "SpaceX will get nationalized" meme keeps getting pushed, but has a company ever been nationalized by the US government?

>>11420367
yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nationalizations_by_country#United_States
the government bought up all the roads in the 17th century
during the world wars a bunch of german owned companies were bought up and then privatized independently of the parent companies
the railroads were all owned but not operated by the government
AMTRAK is a government thing, but that was because the rail lines were going to just stop doing passenger rail
airport security
a bunch of financial market shit during the recession

>natural satellite that was pulled into Earth's orbit three years ago
>the asteroid is likely between 6.2 feet and 11.4 feet in diameter
Why aren't Arcturus Mengsk and Khan prying the catalytic converters off this thing with a subsidized crowbar

>>11419915
Why so seething

>>11420382
Interesting. Seems like most of the modern nationalizations were done either by economic or security concerns. However, SpaceX isn't a massive company with lots of economic weight, and there's no massive security concerns that would require nationalization of the company. So I think SpaceX is safe from that.

>>11420400
yeah, it's the government cracking down on the turnpike highwaymen of the early colonies and then a bunch of "it's fucking WW1" and then some "goddamn trains quit shitting the bed"

>Boeing Skipped Crucial Software Test of Starliner Spacecraft
>NASA has learned that Boeing did not perform a “full, end-to-end integrated test” of its astronaut-ferrying Starliner spacecraft with the rocket that’s supposed to launch it into orbit, the United Launch Alliance’s Atlas V
>Members of NASA’s safety advisory panel told journalists that such a test is needed to ensure that all software systems respond to each other for every maneuver.
OH NO NO NO NO NO NON ONO

What an ABSOLUTE shitshow.

>>11420410
Link?

>>11420287
Yep. It's Liberace gay

>>11420411
https://futurism.com/the-byte/nasa-boeing-skipped-crucial-software-test-of-starliner-spacecraft

>>11420410
this sent my friend into a twenty minute long flashback/rant about how awful it was to work for Boeing

And the award for the weirdest looking lunar lander goes to...

>>11420410
Holy shit, how did Boeing shit the bed with it's software development so hard? You can not string a sentence with Boeing and software together without it being some negative thing

>>11420410
This is just official confirmation of what we already knew. They only arrested an error that could have destroyed the capsule on re-entry because they started testing after the first anomaly, in flight.

>>11420428

>>11420434

>>11420428
Lunar headcrab is kinda cute desu

>>11420428
I prefer the skyscraper personally...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/fa0p1c/spacex_met_the_fcc_to_express_concern_that_it/

Gee I wonder who could be behind this...

>>11420437
What about the Masten monstrosity?...

>>11420410
If it's Boeing I ain't going.

>>11420441
Or NASA presents the ‘food tray™‘

>>11420446

>>11420410
>>11420418
What the hell is even happening at Boeing's coding department?

>>11420449
Maybe ‘The Immigrant’?

>>11420303
I'm not saying they're 100% British. I'm saying the idea a UK company couldn't do it on its own (which is what the other anon seemed to be saying) is a questionable claim when there is at least one example (Inmarsat) that have been operating a global satcoms business from the UK for decades. That's forgetting the launch part but that's not what other anon seemed to be referring to

>>11420452
The ‘Satellite on a stick’?

>>11420410
>NASA apparently signed off on bypassing an end-to-end integrated test of Starliner in a Systems Integration Lab with ULA’s Atlas V rocket.
History repeats itself.

The Cherrypopper?

>>11420451
Boeing doesn't understand how to code
I can't go into more detail on account of my source being my friend venting to me in private
they really just don't understand the point of testing

The Sunshade?

>>11420464
Your friend who works at Nintendo?

>>11420469
my friend who worked at Boeing

The Title Drop?

The Masochist?

>>11420469
More like Bethesda.

>>11420479
Wrong Washington...

>>11420464
I'm sure they understand the point of testing, they just don't do it because nobody pays them enough to like 99% of the industry. If you don't have interns to force to write unit tests, why bother?

>>11420475
New Glenn launching from Bezos Island, circa 2021.

>>11420490
Unapologetically phallic.

>>11420486
yeah that's basically it
just push it to production, who cares that it costs $500 million for every launch of Starliner, it'll cost us a $few million to properly test our shit and it'll be perfect anyway so that'll just be a $few million down the drain

>>11420410
This is crazy, crazy stuff. Anything beyond a week or two of work and outside of a few special cases (maybe a desktop app where writing unit tests is far more onerous than manual testing) I'd be getting pretty nervous without having a proper test harness. These are some of the most basic hygiene practices in commercial software development, not any kind of fancy or difficult to master methodology. If it's really as bad as it sounds then wtf how can a number of managers at least not be out the door? Is competition for competent personnel that fierce or do Broeking pay that badly?

>>11420496
Boeing have absolutely abysmal employee retention strategies, they're so wrapped up in bureaucracy that it would take multiple years for them to get the permission to give you a promotion

>>11420493
Mine doesn't look like that

>>11420429
they gave it all to pajeets

>>11420503
W-wait. Your's doesn't have fins near the head?...

>>11420500
>Boeing have absolutely abysmal employee retention

Well that’s one thing them and SpaceX have in common...

>>11420493
Blorigin is onto something. A scale model of this thing only needs removable fins to have all the right dimensions for a dildo. Hell, give it a button "realistic rocket noise" that comes with vibration. Merchandising on another fucking level.

>>11420306
Fuck off to your board.

Software engineer average salaries:

Boeing- $75,000
Blue Origin- $135,249
SpaceX- $115,619
ULA- $108,036

>>11420526
yikes

>>11420526
F

>>11420526
I should have moved to the US years ago. Salaries are piss poor here in the UK by comparison. And before anyone says it I don't give a shit about the stupid NHS either

>>11420543
yup
Uncle Sam will eat between a third and a half of that
and a nice vehicle is either compulsory or housing and public transportation will eat what you would have spent on the vehicle

>>11420526
Virgin Galactic- $125,791
Rocket Lab- $90,000
Lockheed Martin- $106,610
NASA Marshall/SLS- 103,573

>>11420543
I'll sponsor you anon

>>11420526
OH NO NO NO THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF BOING!

>>11420560
what is this

>>11420551
I reckon I'd still come out ahead

>>11420557
Brave

>>11420561
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/aviation/12104200/Inventor-unveils-detachable-cabin-concept-to-save-lives-in-plane-crash.html

>>11420561
Isn't it obvious Anon, it's designed so the front falls off.

Is it impressive for an amateur to make a cold gas thruster on his own?

>>11420591
I made a cold gas thruster once
had a compressed air hose break on me, thing went flying

>>11420457
Always wondered this. Why don’t most probes have long, visible fuel tanks like in Kerbal Space Program? Where do they fit the propellant?

>>11420684
Moment of Inertia.

>>11420684
>Where do they fit the propellant?
In weird unconventional ways to make it fit in a small volume. I worked on a smallsat team and the sat we were working on had a tube for the propellant tank which snaked around all of the parts of the spacecraft on the inside.

>>11420834
That’s interesting. I guess you’d have to clip parts into the probe core or attach them radially, but I always dislike clipping parts because it feels like cheating with density even if it’d be really useful and end up sticking a standard fuel tank on it.

>>11420911
you can get some pretty good dv out of the mk1 lander can with baguettes radially attached
then you can put ants on it until you have a decent T/W ratio

eloooooon

>>11420985
it's a really common act of vandalism among people who use ur-rents
nobody fucking uses ur-rents for this reason

>>11420990
penis jokes transcend time and space

>>11420985
A classic construction industry prank. Seen this on shitloads of hired equipment.

>>11419854
Daily reminder your anecdotal experience is worth fuck all.

Daily reminder you are so stupid you cant even select the right demographic. An entire generation of stem fags was inspired by star trek and the futurist age 50s-60s

>>11420560
and the pilots?

>>11421367
Don’t reply to bait. Debbie Downer’s can’t wait until they die.

>>11421421
Expendable

>>11421421
The point is to save the massive amount of people that are in the passenger section, not the pilots.

>>11421421
Maybe they have chutes

>>11421421
>>11421455
>>11421462
>>11421513
>"No, they expect one of us in the wreckage brother."

>>11421462
I don't get this reusable passengers meme

>>11421583
It'll never take off. Look at how much Boeing has invested in expendable passengers, and they think someone's just going to swoop in and change everything now?

>>11421562
>>11421587

Kek

>>11421605
doesn't have the same effect without sound, anon

>>11421639
Then you haven't been here long enough.
I heard it just fine.

https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/media/SpaceX_Falcon_Program_Draft_EA_508.pdf

>>11421754
the big fairing looks incredibly ugly

>>11421755
It’s just longer and pointier

>>11421757
ugleh

>>11421755
At least one of the flaws of the Falcon 9 is finally fixed.

>>11421755
I think it looks fuckin beautiful. SpaceX's fairing always looked a bit undersized, at least on FH. This feels like how it should look.

I also love the vertical sperm whale they use to mount the thing.

>>11421754
holy shit, what a huge load of bullshit to wade through. I understand that this is the difference between the US and China dropping rockets on villages, but I would not want to be the person tasked with putting together this report.

>>11421754
Good way to start an international incident

>>11421771
oh man does this include the SSO dogleg paperwork?
reentry right off the coast of cuba, dang

>>11421771
Bay of Pigs II: Electric Boogaloo

>>11421771
Yeah this ain’t gonna fly, looking forward to when the Cuban navy intercept OCISLY, drag it back to port and ship the recovered booster off to China, Russia or Venezuela.

>>11421779
is Cuba still like that? Surely multiple generations have died and the disdain of the US has mellowed out by now

>>11421781
Nope, the Venezuelan situation has massively increased tensions. This has lead to the US sanctioning them and banning cruise ships from visiting, plus loads of other stuff.

>>11421773
There's some discussion about the noise impact of a launch parallel to the Florida coast, as well of another one of these diagrams showing noise impact on the Bahamas, but I don't see anything on the dogleg itself.

>>11421562
>have we started the parachutes?
>yes, the cockpit rises

Something is getting tested today...

Also, Astra/DARPA launch tomorrow

>>11421793
We should invade Cuba and kill everyone.

>>11422024
>OmegA
How they capitalized that will always bug me.

>>11422052
Also Chine

>>11422024
god fucking dammit I hate solid motors so FUCKING much I am going to LOSE my SHIT

FFFFFUUUCK THE OMEGAAAA FUCKITFUCKITFUCKIT RIGHT IN THE ASSHOOLE

>>11422051
ah yes, more polluting of Alaska's soil

>>11422064
Alaska deserves a nice big orange cloud desu

>>11422053
Any reason behind the capitalization? Is it some wacky acronym?