/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11444559
Axiom private station assembly for your consideration

Final CRS flight for Dragon coming up soon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MkcWK2PnsU

How long until space x relearn show to build rockets

>>11444565
Comfy breakfast tune-in tomorrow.

When are they bopping the popper again?

>>11444578
When they're done fucking the puck.

>>11444570
They aren't re-learning, they are pioneering!
Prediction: SN2 will survive it's pressure tests

>>11444572
Sad to see the end of Dragon 1. This will be the third flight of this particular capsule.

>>11444581
Well, not like the Dragon 2 is a lesser capsule.

>>11444590
True, but Dragon has been a huge success. SpaceX's second greatest accomplishment, after booster reuse, and totally underrated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6GG8KHDjZk
Winged reusable boosters probably not as efficient as those who landing back vertically, but still, it's a very cool concept.

>>11444814
Yeah, the downside is a substantially higher dry mass due to the size of the switchblade glider wings, the upside compared to ass-slamming boosters is obviously that it's already well known how to fly a glider and the touchdown is much gentler and less likely to involve splatting your booster. In the end though I think it's paid off to just have somebody try to leap ahead of intermediary steps and go straight on to figuring out how to land a rocket the same way it takes off.

https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/moon-lander-engine-breaks-record-at-marshall-space-flight-center

>On February 28, 2020 Intuitive Machines’ propulsion team successfully test fired its VR3500 moon lander engine for over 600 seconds, breaking the continuous test duration record on Marshall Space Flight Center’s Test Stand 115, set by Intuitive Machines two weeks prior with a 360 second test firing of the same engine.

>VR3500 development and testing were performed on contract for Boeing’s Human Landing System (HLS) NextSTEP-2 BAA Appendix E – Architecture Studies and Technology Prototypes contract that support’s NASA’s goal of returning humans to the lunar surface in 2024.

>During the record-breaking 10-minute duration test, the VR3500 ran at full throttle for approximately 540 seconds and spent the other 60 seconds performing demonstrations of mixture ratio and deep throttling excursions, including throttling as low as 10% power level. The duration, throttle level, and measured performance all exceeded representative mission requirements for landing on the Moon.

Even from a purely technical perspective that ignores politics, Boeing have a decent chance of winning the Artemis human lander contract. Intuitive Machines who are building their proposal’s engines are making good progress. Blue have also made good progress with their BE-7 and Dynetics will likely use existing AJR engines. Therefore, nobody can really be considered lagging behind the others so far...

>>11444570
They know how to build rockets, they are learning how to do it orders of magnitude cheaper than they do it now which is already just about an order on magnitude cheaper than the competition.

>>11444581
I'm hoping they use one of the remaining / recovered Dragon 1's for an extreme re-entry test. Without ULA levels of funding they don't get to do heaps of tests to destruction.

>>11444814
Very old concept that lost funding as the USSR fell apart, I hope they do bring it back.

>>11444855
Kind of a general question, but how do they test vacuum engines on Earth? Do they test fire them in a vacuum chamber? Or is it fine to just fire them at sea level pressures?

>>11444879
Tiny thrusters can have short runs in vacuum chambers but anything sizable will fill the chamber with exhaust increasing the pressure pretty fast.
They generally just run them at sea level and see if they hit predicted over-expansion and thust levels.

>>11444879
>Kind of a general question, but how do they test vacuum engines on Earth?

Vacuum engines are usually just tested at sea-level without their nozzles attached, their performance in a vacuum, with the nozzle attached is simulated. But there are a handful of facilities (pic-related) that allow the test-firing of smaller vacuum-optimised engines in a simulated environment (a vacuum chamber). Aerojet has one such facility in Florida and the AFRL has one at Edwards AFB which Blue Origin are currently using for BE-7.

Launch thread will be up a couple hours before launch, as always.

>BTFO’s the GAO

Nothin personal accountability niggas

>>11445191
Just two more months until it gets postponed two more years?

>>11445201
JWST doesn’t have a launch window to meet, so it can be launched any day of the year. The most likely scenario is that the launch is delayed a month or two, so NASA aren’t rushing to make a date and have plenty of time to check things over. The guy speaking was talking about how he was currently reading a book about Challenger, to emphasise the importance he was placing on thorough testing of JWST before it launches.

>>11444855
>deep throating excursions

>>11444814
While not easier and definitely not as efficient it fades most of the complexities of landing a rocket vertically.
Im just amazed why nobody tried to build a smol rocket for smol satellites.

>>11444814
>probably not as efficient as those who landing back vertically
Too early to tell. I'd like to remind that VTVL was also "inefficient and economically pointless" and everyone seemed to agree in principle, until it was proven otherwise.

Spaceflight is full of untried ideas which may or may not be worth it, but nobody actually tried them. Space tethers of different kinds, inflatable decelerators (actually tried and proven true in IRDT but never continued), tether reentry parachutes, microwave-fed boosters, small winged capsules with relaxed failure modes like Spiral/Kliper/Dreamchaser, winged flyback boosters, inflatable habitats (tried and proven but never used), open-loop droplet cooling, etc etc etc, dozens of solid ideas never really implemented in practice.

Any of it may also fail though. What haven't been actually flown, doesn't exist.

>>11445245
don’t forget OTRAG

>>11444866
>Very old concept that lost funding as the USSR fell apart, I hope they do bring it back.
Not really, Baikal is mostly a post-Soviet development which has been shelved due to the lack of money. They eyed it again in late 2000s. Some wind tunnel tests showed that foldable wings were unexpectedly hot at reentry, and the entire thing would have hit the weight limit that was making it uneconomical. So they didn't bother. That was a problem of a specific implementation though, not the general idea, which is still sound.

>>11445245
>Spaceflight is full of untried ideas which may or may not be worth it, but nobody actually tried them.

>Space tethers of different kinds

https://spacenews.com/tethers-unlimited-says-early-results-of-deorbit-hardware-test-promising/

>inflatable decelerators (actually tried and proven true in IRDT but never continued)

NASA are planning to test a large one in 2022 (pic-related) and ULA’s reusability plans for Vulcan involve one.

>small winged capsules with relaxed failure modes like Spiral/Kliper/Dreamchaser

A fuck ton of lifting bodies have been atmospherically tested and Dreamchaser will actually go to space in 2021.

>>11445251
What is that?
WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT?

>>11445270
Looks like MOAR BOOSTERS.

>>11445270
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ed4w4Cz5ccU

>>11445270

>>11445270
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed4w4Cz5ccU

TL:DW - The worlds first private manufacturer of rockets. Aimed to reduce costs by making the rockets as simple as possible. Unfortunately their biggest customers were dictators who wanted ICBMs

>>11445270
aspergerus staging

>>11445274
>Hyper autistic asparagus clusterfuck of standardized self-contained modules flying heavenward on a cloud of diesel and NTO.
Of course it was krauts, it could never be anybody other than krauts, I think this is the most German rocket I've ever heard of.

>Boeing/NASA teleconference

So there is a list of 61 things found that need to be corrected. Boeing is running hard damage control right now, trying to say its only 3 issues, but all the new reporters are like "WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 58 ISSUES?"
Boeing keeps trying to say that most are related, so its 'only' 3 major issues, not 61.
JFC, the state of boeing

>>11445331
The actual problem here is that your an ignorant retard, in reality there are 61 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS which need to be taken to solve those 3 ISSUES. There’s a VERY DISTINCT difference between errors and corrective actions.

>>11445289
they completely overengineered the exact wrong parts of it while leaving the essential bits unoptimized
it was a pressure fed rocket

>>11445331
What an idiot...there’s 3 issues with Starliner which need to be corrected with 61 corrective steps.

>>11445331
3 major issues which each will need an average of 20 fixes to resolve.

>>11445336
>>11445342

Boeing said one of those "3 major issues" was to "check and correct software" which is a major point, but could be 30 corrective actions.
WHICH MEANS THERE ARE UP TO 30 "SOFTWARE" PROBLEMS.

>>11445351
It really doesn’t, but keep on being delusional. We know nothing about these corrective actions: how small or big they are, some of them might be process changes instead of modifications to Starliner etc. 61 corrective actions doesn’t account to 61 software changes.

>>11445357
Ok Boeing

>>11445362
Seethe harder

starship currently only has 1 issue, it isnt finished yet. the 6300 corrective actions that must be taken to make it flight worthy do not count as individual issues

>>11445367
yeah but the current thrust of Starship development is "what ARE the corrective actions that must be taken, we don't know yet"

>>11445377
They only discover corrective actions when a Starship blows up...

>>11445380
yes exactly

>>11445367
honestly the issues with starship sounded like they were more about management than the design itself

>>11445385
>more about management than the design itself
The thrust puck design is apparently all fucked up and not working as intended, so it's a bit from column A and a bit from column B.

>>11445410
More like pucked up? Amirite?

>>11445413
The puck's proper fucked mate.

>>11445415
Don’t puck with me m8!

>>11445385
no the other way around
Starship is having design issues
Starliner is having management issues

die reddit

>>11445435
“The Reddit” in German?

>>11445268
Tethers Unlimited are extremely cool, too bad they don't get many chances to test their stuff.

There's also this weird ass idea for reentering without heatshields
https://doi.org/10.1016/0094-5765(95)00108-C
basically a 20km long tether dangling behind the re-entering spacecraft that creates the drag required to slow it down without excessive heating. It's also self-stabilized by the gravity gradient in vacuum and by some hypersonic effect in the hot phase.

>>11445270
I call it pillar rocket.

>>11445498
There's also a follow-up it seems
https://doi.org/10.2514/1.48126

>>11444905
NASA actually built a humongous vacuum chamber for $350mil to test the J-2X for Ares. (test stand A-3 in Stennis). The Constellation got cancelled, but they finished it nonetheless many years after that, just to mothball it for $700000 a year. It's a colossal waste. I wonder if it can be used for something else.

>>11445553
>I wonder if it can be used for something else.

I remember reading somewhere that it’s being re-purposed to test NTRs.

owo but I exhaust from there~~~

>>11445587
oh nice, is this SN2?

>>11445587
Extremely lewd puck.

>>11445587
god bless Nomadd

>>11445587
DON'T SHUCKY THAT PUCKY

>>11445274
i can't stand this guy's voice.

>>11445693
Literal blasphemy here folks

>>11445693
fuck you, he is Scott Manley and you will know him and love him

>>11445693
H-hullo?

>>11445719
Hullo!

>>11445693
get this unsafe flyer outta here

>>11445724

>>11445764

>>11445693
i dont like him either but its not cool to say that around here he is like /our guy/ in this thread

SN2 tank already on the way to pressure test, that was fast, road closures for today

>>11445801

>>11445804
>‘SN2’

>>11445804
So, they are testing only the lower section which is the one that failed?

>>11445826
Yeah the puck

To continue from lasthread, containers are rated to be stacked 14 high, when loaded. Unloaded could go higher. And they don't need to be welded together-just use the same twist-lock connectors that keep them from falling off cargo ships.

>>11445804
Did they break the water tower land speed world record?

>>11445817
A nomenclature change is way overdue anyway. For the next, I vote for "prototype A/B/C/..." then an additional number for minor versions, like "prototype D3"

>>11445890
I mean the nomenclature just changed from Mk1/2/3 etc to SN-1/2/3 etc...

>>11445890
I vote for the return of the Rainbow Code.

Hans is rocking a bow tie today

>>11445999
where?

>The CHAD sea breeze vs the VIRGIN Falcon 9 booster

>>11446008
>Literally cucked by the wind

>>11446004
>>11445999
https://youtu.be/21X5lGlDOfg

>people expecting some sort of technical wizbang thing which killed the booster
>lol it was windy

>>11446061
>inbound Starship from Mars Colony
>coming home to see the family after a decade away
>Starship comes in for flip and burn landing
>falls over because it was windy, all hands lost
whoops lol

The virgin "eeeeh this small electrical error means we can't fly" vs the CHAD "it's too windy oops"

Is building a giant humanoid mech more practical on Mars than it would be on earth because of the lowered gravity?

In my layman brain it seems like the much lowered felt "weight" would resolve a lot of the worst design hurdles.

What did he mean by this?

>>11446456
>pls stop selling, why does my stock keep on dropping

>>11446456
It is exhausting Chicken Little shit after SARS and MERS and H1N1 and Swine Flu

>>11446456
He’s just salty SXSW got cancelled

>>11446440
Mechs would only be good on a planet made of stairs.

>>11446471
And, that's just in the past few years. Remember the AIDS/HIV scares? Or, ebola or zika?

>>11446440
We don't use mecha because tracked/wheeled vehicles are more useful, so you gotta think about environments where those vehicles are useless. To me that sounds like asteroid fields and space stations. Infantry are the primary option here, but what if you need some form of vehicle? Mecha it is then. Probably small mecha though, and maybe not necessarily bipedal in nature.

>>11446607
I can't wait for the shitty ball future

>>11446456
Panic over this is dumb. Worry, sure. Cancel highly packed events, maybe. Stockpiling food and essentials, no.

>>11446619
>stockpiling food and essentials
not doing this is stupid, you should always have enough food to sustain yourself for a month or two

>>11446621
If that's your normal practice, sure, keep at it. But empty shelves now means there are people hoarding goods in a panic. There's no reason to do that yet.

>>11446644
if you don't have at least two thousand rounds on you at all times you're just asking for it

>>11446456
He knows that panic is only counterproductive because coronavirus culling the weak will be good for the world. He knows that the world could stand to benefit from losing ~5% of its population if those people are generally the old and burdensome.

Launch thread will be up, don’t worry. Just busy right now someone away from my computer.

>>11446456
He meant that the Coronavirus scare is dumb, and it is.

>>11446621
>not doing this is stupid, you should always have enough food to sustain yourself for a month or two

The only time this would ever be helpful for me is if nuclear war happened, and I’d just kill myself in that scenario anyway.

>>11446831
no you should kill your neighbors in that situation
it's fun

>>11446456
>JUST A FLU BRO
>building a literal rocket factory to get the fuck off the planet asap

>>11446844
>Elon Musk started SpaceX years ago because of a meme disease that didn’t exist until a few months ago

Kys schizo

big

>>11446859
Ugghhhh thiccer

>>11446859
What flavor of corn is it?

>>11446862
liquid atmosphere

>>11446864
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2f1ECjs9fA
Yummy.

>>11446831
Or if you want to buy bulk and save money. Costco/Winco please.

>Rocket will land in highest winds ever at Cape Canaveral tonight. This is intentional envelope expansion.
hype

>>11446923
So what they're saying is the Cape might get a brand new crater?

T-10 for launch thread.

>>11446859
They're cranking this shit out fast. I wonder if building a Tesla factory in China partially inspired Elon to pursue the lower quality/higher quantity approach.

Let's say someone actually made a viable fusion rocket with a good thrust to weight ratio-how soon till ol musky had one in the starship upper stage?

>>11446947
musk only cares about the rocket economy, if it's not cheaper it gets cut

>>11446954
This. He might push for SpaceX to develop the Eagle fusion engine to use on a whole new rocket system though.

>>11446935
Youre off by 1 hour

Launch thread
>>11446963

Now, watch another starship SN explode, live:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg8N_vDE9JY

>>11447283
(switch to sapphire cam)

>>11446456
it's bad for business

https://europe.autonews.com/sales-market/china-sales-drop-80-february-coronavirus-empties-showrooms

>>11447283
Today's a water test only. No big booms is expected until cryo test tomorrow or some time later, with whoever gave the last test a go even though they knew the weld was bad sitting on top.

>>11447518
If the weld is known to be bad it is still a good idea to go with the test and see how welding error affects the structure and how it fails. It is a lot of learning material

>>11447826
Apparently the engineers were concerned with the aforementioned puck, but the QC ignored them and went with the test (were they ex-boeing employees?). Elon was super pissed and even said to the workers to email him directly if they think there are some problems and their superiors ignore them

>>11446619
>>11446831
>nuclear war is the only disaster ever
>stockpiles are only good in disasters
Monkey IQ takes right here

I bet you live paycheck to paycheck, and have no plan in place for if you get fired

>>11446456
Panic by definition is grade A retardation
Calm preparation is the correct way to survive a disaster

>>11446938
starship sn50 subcontracted out to Close Enough Engineering & Construction, LLC

>>11447848
I think it’s more that Elon usually goes to SXSW. It got canceled because of covid19

>>11447847
>nuclear war is the only disaster ever

Nuclear war is the only disaster I could conceivably be in where two months of food supplies would be useful. You’re strawmanning me because you’re a low IQ dishonest retard. In the case of an earthquake, tornado, or fire, I could just leave.

>stockpiles are only good in disasters

Stockpiles are only good in disasters.

>I bet

I bet you’re a gay retard. Cringe.

>>11447836
You got it backwards. Elon met the QC guys which said they were concerned about it, raised concerns, but no further action taken by the engineer.

>>11448087
That’s how you get a Challenger

>>11446859
Is this thing really going to fly in space? It looks like something cobbled together out of scrap metal. I admit my ignorance of Starship/Superheavy or whatever but this can't possibly be real.

>>11448443
it's a fuel tank, why bother with aesthetics?

>>11448443
>Is this thing really going to fly in space?
IIRC, that article wont. It'll be used for high altitude tests.

>It looks like something cobbled together out of scrap metal.
That's partly due to the manufacturing being rushed on the prototypes to develop the rocket faster, and also SpaceX's goal to make final production as cheaply as possible.

>>11445251
>flying world trade center

>>11448448
no, they're using that article to test the thrust interface to destruction
the next one is on the docket for high altitude tests

>>11448443
that thing won't
but once it looks like this, then it will fly
maybe next month if all goes well

>>11448443
>It looks like something cobbled together out of scrap metal
Put together by dozens/hundreds of rocket engineers

>>11448703
its designed by rocket engineers, but put together by mexican welders

>>11448720
Si anónimo.

What did they mean by this?

>>11448732
Nothing. A thing happening once is not useful to science and it's irresponsible to draw conclusions from it.

>>11448738
But it's fun to speculate.
Come on, anon, aren't you the least bit curious?

Besides, the origin of all scientific knowledge comes from asking questions about what we observe.

>>11448748
>the origin of all scientific knowledge comes from asking questions about what we observe
no, the origin of all scientific knowledge comes from devising experiments to repeat, understand and qualify observations. If this can't be done, it's of no interest.

>>11448748
A janitor bumped the wrong switch while he was mopping.

>>11448754
No, that's the process by which science is done.
But what inspires you to write the initial hypothesis? Curiosity about what surrounds you.

>>11448732

>>11448783

>>11447283
Are they doing a pressure test tonight?
>>11446847
>Getting this mad on 4chan

>>11448443
Not this precise one but it will fly. You'll look back and laugh when these are as common as a aeroplanes.

It does look pretty scuffed right now but bare in mind that this 2020 and Camera's and picture quality is unreal. Look at HD photos of the Space Shuttle it's all tiles and stripes. It looks like it's covered in blankets on top. You could say the same for that.

>>11448443
>It looks like something cobbled together out of scrap metal.
Why do you think I made this?

>>11448822
shuttle is covered in blankets

>>11448822
>Look at HD photos of the Space Shuttle it's all tiles and stripes. It looks like it's covered in blankets on top.

>>11448860
>>11448822
they're called thermal blankets, and they help protect the aluminum structure of Shuttle from the heat of reentry, because even the backside of the fireball is too hot for it
compare against Starship, which has no leeward protection because stainless stronk

there is a nice programme at https://youtu.be/21X5lGlDOfg right now

do we think axiom space will have a realistic chance of getting their own commercial space station? what about bigelow?

>>11446619

Not gonna make it.

>>11449568
bigelow's hardware is cool but the man himself is an asshat, shame that they are not run by someone more level headed and able to negotiate viable commercial contracts

>>11449585
Only boomers aren’t gonna make it.

>>11449591

Or 0.2% of non-boomers. Which is a shit ton of people.

Or my pregnant wife or unborn child.

"Only ___ are gonna die". Dont you realize you that that blank gets filled by actual people?

Moments like this really reveal how psycho event regular people can be.

>>11449605
>actually going outside
you deserve what you get

>>11449613

Hell no I am not going outside. Ive got like 4 months of food. I work from home. Everything gets delivered now.

>>11449617
>I work from home.
hook us up with side work

>>11449605
I don’t have time to waste energy and make myself unhappy by worrying about people dying I’ll never meet sorry lol

>>11449617
>I kinda liked it, it was a good feeling, being alone up there
>the only man on this side of the moon

>>11449637
lucky, must have been very cozy

>>11449568
I'm curious as to how this thing will perform. Are there any detailed designs of it available yet? It seems like with the panels way out on top it's going to act like a shuttlecock and turn to point the cupola prograde over time. Doesn't seem like they have much room for CMGs like the ISS either. Also where are the radiators?
I know it's a smaller station but it seems like it's going to have even less comforts than the ISS, where like half the structure is just there just to provide power/life support/etc. Tourists may expect a little more comfortable living.

Buzz: I'm the first man to take a piss on the moon

>>11449650
Who do you think was the first man to fart on the moon?

>>11445270
KSP

>>11449620
You want to commute to his home?
What if you show up early,do you show up in pajamas and snuggle up with him?

>>11449568
That looks like /ourgirl/ doing a handstand! :)

>>11449605
>Dont you realize you that that blank gets filled by actual people?
It's necessary. Properly exploited, it may be an even bigger boon for space exploration than the Cold War.

>>11449650
But who was the first man to piss on Elon's girlfriend? That's what counts

>>11449648
>Also where are the radiators?
The solar panels are on a fold-out tower, and the tower panels are radiators IIRC

pls post the link to the hayabusa song.
The cute one where she is running.
I can't find it.

Boeing gets cost plus contracts and still can't build a capsule.

>>11449782
Doesn't seem like a very efficient layout, but I guess it'll work if their margins aren't too tight.

>>11449568
Seems like it given Axiom's connections. Although it can change with time. They would have to sell services beyond just tourism though, and being paid to do busywork isn't gonna cut it either.

7/10 have my doubts, but it looks promising. Best of luck to them.

>>11449826
They’ve been getting more money than spacex all along too
And nasa has been deliberately delaying crew

Why do you need a meme capsule at all anyways I don’t get that
Do airplanes have capsules? No

>>11449860
>And nasa has been deliberately delaying crew
Source?

>>11449867

>>11449866
Its delayed now because they want the crew to be trained for extended stay. Sort of a last minute change, who knows what the rational behind it is.

https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1236481037724725254?s=19

cryo test underway

>>11446859
lil stubby boi

>>11449919
Its already done. Rather uneventful, as expected. Success is underwhelming. Failures are the real spectacle to watch for.

>STX-00036
they added another 0 on.

>>11449919
>>11449951
noooo old space bros we got too cocky

>>11449951
>Success is underwhelming.
Nah. Watching stuff launch and insert without a hitch is great. Pressurization tests or similar aren't as exiting but it's still nice when everything goes well. More space is good.
I'm still bummed because of Astra. Hopefully they'll get their shit together.

>>11444560
Christ, what happened to that webm?

>>11450186
Slowed down for autists

>>11450187
proper webm slowing cuts the number of pixels per frame

>>11449951
Water test done, cryo aborted. Something about an extra slosh baffle restricting the flow or whatever.

>>11449812
THIS!
Also,check these dubs

>>11444814
well that was fucking cool.

>Ask Elon Musk a question at SATELLITE 2020!

https://accessintel.wufoo.com/forms/ask-elon-musk-a-question-at-satellite-2020/

>>11450686
Never mind that, it was just someone's guess that people took too seriously. For now it looks like last night's test was water again. They also installed a huge hydraulic cylinder under the engine mount point, probably to simulate the thrust force.

>>11451103
sick shit and based

>>11451082
>All questions must be submitted by March 4, 2020 in order to be considered for the opportunity. Good luck!

How complicated will it be to build structures in space? I'm not talking about docking lots of modules, which is pretty much trivial, I'm talking about welding rolls of sheet metal into vessels capable of containing a habitable atmosphere or different types of propellant. I imagine that scraps from welding and cutting and grinding out represent a huge orbital debris risk if we didn't do anything to catch or contain it.

>>11451470
>ywn be on day one of your space construction apprenticeship and have the lads take the piss by making you hold the spark bucket

>>11451470
Space shipyards and dockyards will likely have giant enclosed rooms where actual construction takes place. After construction is complete and cleanup is (mostly) done, the slip is opened to eject the completed vessel.

>>11451534
But how do you build the giant room without an even bigger room to catch the debris from construction?

>>11451548
expandable
modules

>>11451548
Either build the initial room modularly on the room on the ground (Earth, Moon, or Mars, depends on where the shipyard is going to be orbiting) and assemble on-orbit, or just make sure all of the big pieces of debris are caught from initial construction.

Another option is to just wrap the whole initial volume in a bigass inflatable bag, build, then collapse the bag and cut it off to reveal the completed structure.

>>11451548
>>11451555
>>11451562
You guys are all retarded, just build the shipyard in a low orbit with high drag, then move it up to a higher low-drag orbit for actual use.

>>11451612
And if the shipyard is being built around the Moon or other airless body?

>>11451612
just fly around with a magnet every now and then and pick up all the junk. If it's big enough, wouldn't the particles just start orbiting the construction anyway? Seems like a non-issue as long as all the materials are in place first.

>>11451103
SLS just passed that test!
>>11451470
>in space
making a pressure vessel in orbit is going to be a pain in the ass, you don't understand just how much dust and trash that produces until you've worked as an ironworker
>>11451617
build it on the surface and then launch it

>>11451617
Build it on the Moon, and launch it, like that other guy said. Moon orbit is cheap and easy to get to. It'd also more convenient to build in gravity than in zero G anyway.

>>11451678
>making a pressure vessel in orbit is going to be a pain in the ass, you don't understand just how much dust and trash that produces until you've worked as an ironworker

Construct it inside of a pressurized drydock.

>>11451660
It'd not like the debris will float 'in formation' with the thing you're building, if metal flakes from a grinder are being flung off at 100 m/s they will continue to move away unhindered.
>if it's big enough won't things just orbit the construction
No, if you're building in LEO then nothing has a sphere of influence bigger than itself, not even a sphere of osmium would be dense enough. If you're building in very high orbits where an object's gravity could become relevant (say minimum of 1 m/s escape velocity), then debris isn't much of an issue anyway because nothing has a very high relative velocity even if it's on a retrograde orbit at that distance.

>>11451700
>No, if you're building in LEO then nothing has a sphere of influence bigger than itself

At GEO, satellites can have stuff orbit them. Not sure about LMO or HMO

>>11451678
I can imagine it produces a shitload of debris, however if you choose to build them in orbits where debris will have a lifetime of only a few months at most, then you really shouldn't need to worry about it even if guys are throwing old zip disks over their shoulders into the void.

>>11451700
it depends on the direction it's launched
if it's launched along the radial or normal axes then it'll recontact the station after an orbit

>>11451709
zip disks can launch their own dang selves into the void lol

>>11451704
"Can" is not necessarily relevant. If your object has an escape velocity measured in mm/s, then any debris generated won't be sticking around anyway.

>>11451711
Sure, but contact with grains of metal at 100 m/s is not a big deal. Source, you can place your hand into a shower of sparks from a grinder and it doesn't hurt.

>>11451718
yeah, but exploding cutting disks coming back to recontact the station would be a big deal
using an inflatable container is 100% required, fill it with argon or something and have all the workers in flight suits

>you will never work with a crew of crusty spacers in LEO manhandling sheet steel into position and tack welding it into place for the automatic welding machine to go over later
>you will never get harassed during your months of surface leave by green peace demanding that you justify 'ruining' the night sky by building humanity's future in space
feels bad man

>>11451731
>using an inflatable container is 100% required, fill it with argon or something and have all the workers in flight suits
If you vented through a screen of some kind the outrushing gas would probably make cleanup of the smallest particles pretty easy. Then just reinflate and send in crews to grab any debris that's left and reset for the next job.

>>11451731
Nah, just put up kevlar blankets over the immediate work area to catch big and fast debris, and don't worry about the small and/or slow stuff. It'll deorbit itself.

>>11451718
It could be a few km/s for someone else. Also you don't want grinding dust in your airlock seal.

>>11451783
can confirm, grinding dust destroyed my last phone

>>11451783
>It could be a few km/s for someone else
Hence, do it in a low Earth orbit, below everything else, so nothing else will come by with a high relative velocity. After a few weeks the grains will all have reentered due to their high drag to mass ratio.
>grinding dust in your airlock seal
You won't get any in there, with no atmosphere to slow things down dust won't hang around, and astronauts won't be touching seals or even touching any construction equipment, instead they'd be tele-operating robots most of the time and going outside to replace a few parts at most.

>>11451612
Giant orbital 3D printer that shit's out a massive steel frame.
Workers put inthe wiring&plumbing&doors&etc.. after.
O'neill cylinders will be built that way.

>>11451830
>3D printer
M E M E
A big robot that welds sheet metal into rings and rings into tubes is not a 3D printer, and thank god, because 3D printers are shitty for anything other than small, weird parts for niche applications.

>>11451830
fabrication doesn't work like in the movies.

>>11451824
>instead they'd be tele-operating robots most of the time and going outside to replace a few parts at most
This is a meme. It's going to be easier, cheaper and more efficient to just have humans do everything for a very long time. Robotics is simply not even close to anything like this—the only thing they would be used for is assembly-line type construction of components, but actually assembling them into a big structure is going to be done by humans.

>>11449898
It's because when that one Crew Dragon exploded, it shifted the capsule pipeline up by one vehicle. They were originally going to use a capsule rated for 14 days in space, but that one got used for the abort test. The next capsule (the one they're going to use) was built for the first regular mission. This gives NASA the option to extend the stay of the crewed demo flight.
But if they somehow use this to let Boing launch first (because muh flag) after all the crap we've seen from them, there better be some heads flying.

>>11451824
100 m/s sounds just about right for a sharp metal dust to embed itself into soft rubber surface upon impact

>>11451846
>the only thing they would be used for is assembly-line type construction of components
That's exactly what on-orbit construction will be though. Load a roll of sheet metal into a feeder, unroll and weld it into a single-seam spiral weld pipe of whatever diameter. Trim the ends with a robotic cutter. Weld on end caps. Done. Repeat.

>>11451879
It wouldn't even embed itself into your skin.

>>11451534
Why would you need a room
You need a room on earth to block wind and foreign matter, not a concern in space

>>11451886
>assembly-line type construction of components
*on Earth
assuming building space stations doesn't wait for people to figure out efficient asteroid mining and processing

>>11451889
Construction debris containment and an environment that can be tightly controlled, if need be.

>>11451889
kessler syndrome

>>11448443
New Shepard prototype looked like a flying boiler.

>>11451915
True
But it was a piece of shit, lest we forget

>>11451908
>>11451896
A nice low eccentric orbit makes that irrelevant

>>11451692
An airdock, if you will.

>>11451692
Then you wouldn't know if it has a flaw that can't hold up under 1G when it lands.

>>11451915
>>11451917
> In 2011, Blue Origin conducted flight tests of the PM-2 prototype of the first stage of the suborbital New Shepard vehicle. In place of the space capsule, the PM-2 carried only a haf-spherical aerodnyamic cap.

>The first flight was a short hop with successful soft landing on a concrete pad. For this flight only, three of the five BE-2 engines were used. The second flight, powered by all five engines, went out of control at a height of 13.7 km at a speed of Mach 1.2. The vehicle was destroyed.

>>11451928
what? It never experiences 1G. There's no reason to build a spaceship in space if you're also saying it has to land and relaunch from Earth. Just build it on Earth, then.

>>11451830
>>11451840
>nobody remembers spider fab trusses.

>>11451915
It looks ugly as sin, but I want to build something like that.

>>11451815
To be fair, that wasn't Grinding Dust's best album.

>>11451875
>But if they somehow use this to let Boing launch first
Interference doesn't have to be that blatant. SpaceX could be delayed few more weeks to allow Boeing to not fall too much behind.

Take a look at how vote counting are manipulated. The vote counters don't need to do anything blatant. They just need to ignore handful of votes from certain low count districts to get the full vote. In the end, a state wide vote could be rigged with as little as 1% change in total vote due to prioritizing key essential counties.

>>11451928
No idea why you’re building something in orbit you intend to land on Earth or Venus. That’s for building fuckhueg motherships that are born and die in orbit.

>>11451534
>Space shipyards and dockyards will likely have giant enclosed rooms where actual construction takes place.
No. If space construction of pressurized habitats will be a thing someday (and I have serious doubts), it will likely be performed with DEXTRE-like semi-autonomous robotic manipulators from pre-produced parts, not cut from metal in place. Cutting metal in space is a pretty dumb idea.

>>11451470
>How complicated will it be to build structures in space?
Much more complicated than connecting lots of modules together. And most importantly, it's useless. You can build a structure of any size with docking. Pressurized, unpressurized, whatever. Just combine as much trusses and fixed/expandable pressurized modules as you want. It's cheaper, easier and has less failure points.

Nevertheless, the most feasible approach (besides inflatable habitats) seems to be robotic-assisted building with hexagonal panels. Welding, sealing, and in-orbit testing is the most complex part, both complexity/reliability and energy/thermodynamic wise.

>>11451928
>lands
Anon . . .

>>11451937
You just can't beat simple, dude. Sheet steel, tubes, and half dome end caps. Bundle completed tubes together using sheet metal as banding, with welds to hold them together. You can get 95% of vessels built using that method, only a tiny bit of additional structure would be needed, mostly bracing to transfer thrust from engines to the main superstructures, as well as the installation of doors and so forth.

>>11451948
This. Orbital construction may be used to build big ships to land on Mars or the Moon, but not Earth.

>>11451973
Modules are a joke compared to a couple guys welding sheet steel over a frame and spraying insulation

>>11451973
Dextre is probably the most important ISS contribution to spaceflight. It showed that you don't need EVAs at all, at least for routine operations. The only reason EVAs are still a thing is that the station is not optimized for Dextre-like robots. It's capable to move along the entire station, it doesn't need spacesuits, airlocks, life support, it can be remotely controlled or automated, it's tireless, it's more universal than astronauts (there was a case when one of the Russian spacemen refused to go on a spacewalk to fix a solar panel, because he considered the plan to be too dangerous) etc. Robots are cheaper, simpler, faster, better in any work outside the station.

>>11452026
This
Continuous spiral weld construction for big steel or aluminum vessels is going to be fast and easy, and allows us to launch building materials limited by mass instead of volume.

>>11452032
Yeah. Almost all the advantages of dexterity and mobility that humans have over robots go away once you put them inside of restrictive pressurized space suits in zero G.

Can a catalyst support bed be made from a steel mesh or do I have to order one?

>>11452072
if this is for your janky pipebomb rocket then go steel mesh as the bigger the explosion the better.

>>11452026
>>11452039
Anons here read too much sci-fi it seems, and don't think about routine and boring spaceflight practicalities.
You can't make things of sheets in space, that's really dumb. And even then, it's better performed by robotic manipulators than "two guys".
>Continuous spiral weld construction for big steel or aluminum vessels is going to be fast and easy
It's certainly neither fast nor easy, what are you talking about? Where do you get the energy, how do you dump the heat? How do you control the quality of the welds? Do you even realize that you have many times more connection points that need to be tested - in vacuum? Connecting pre-produced hexagonal sheets is easier, but then you have even more welds to be checked. What if there's a leak after you test (with whatever poor method you have in orbit) and pressurize it? More importantly, why do you need your single-volume modules to be larger than a certain size, with no emergency hatches in them? Compare this to simple berthing (or replacing) of modules that have been verified and tested in much simpler conditions.
>Modules are a joke
In what regard? What do you imagine would be possible that isn't possible with modular construction?
> allows us to launch building materials limited by mass instead of volume
It's already the case with modules. You can build any pressurized volume with them, and any truss-based unpressurized construction. Expandable habitats can be as large as you possibly want.

Hey guys. Callisto rover when?

To me it makes logical sense as a next step after the upcoming JUICE and Europa Clipper missions to launch an RTG powered rover similar to Curiosity, in order to land it on Callisto.

Some reasons why Callisto makes the best destination for our first landing in the Jovian system;
It's entirely outside the elevated radiation fields surrounding Jupiter, so whatever we send can last a long time
It's the second biggest Jovian moon, and third biggest in the solar system
It's the least differentiated of the 4 Galilean moons, and has the oldest surface
It's the least expensive in terms of delta V to orbit and land on
It has some interesting surface features (ice spires) not seen anywhere else in the solar system
It's the most relevant moon in terms of human colonization in the Jovian system

Since Callisto's surface is largely water ice, there is no extremely harsh abrasive dust to deal with, and temperature swings from day to night are less extreme, arguably making Callisto a more hospitable environment for a rover than the Moon. A Curiosity-clone with increased thermal insulation and more powerful communications equipment should be able to function on the surface of Callisto for a very long time.

One issue for this mission to Callisto would be our currently incomplete mapping of the surface: finding a suitable flat spot will be important. Also, the ~16.5 day rotation period will mean a roughly 200 hour period of darkness each night during which it will be difficult or impossible to navigate, so the probe may have to hibernate between periods of daylight activity.

>>11452072
Use steel mesh or grating

>>11452084
>Where do you get the energy, how do you dump the heat?
Solar panel array, you only need a few square meters of area to be able to weld. To dump the heat, use radiators, duh.
>how to you control the quality
No oxygen to worry about, figure out the right settings to get good penetration and use those settings, then xray afterwards
> Do you even realize that you have many times more connection points that need to be tested - in vacuum?
Yes, and if there are leaks, apply a sealant.
>More importantly, why do you need your single-volume modules to be larger than a certain size, with no emergency hatches in them?
To build space habitats, anon. 100 meter diameter cylinders cannot be launched.
>> allows us to launch building materials limited by mass instead of volume
>It's already the case with modules.
It won't be with Starship, or other similar fully reusable vehicles. It also won't be true when we're mining the Moon or Mars or asteroids.
>Expandable habitats can be as large as you possibly want
100 meter diameter, 1000 meter length, in a bundle of 6 with a non-rotating hub sphere habitat at both ends.

>>11452107
>Callisto rover when?
Depends on the bureaucracy RNG, mostly. There's no shortage of proposals, there's shortage of something else.

>>11452134
>there's shortage of something else
testosterone?

Is it gonna pop?

>>11452151
It didn't, I don't think it will

>>11452123
>To dump the heat, use radiators, duh.
I can already imagine the complexity of the cooling system needed for this, alone. (in case of humans it also needs to be running on siloxanes or something similarly poor but non-toxic)
>No oxygen to worry about
Hate to disappoint you but space is not empty, it's a pretty tough environment. Plenty of ionized oxygen (depending on altitude), hard UV, most metals simply erode in space.
>then xray afterwards
>apply a sealant
X-ray is not nearly enough, you need to test it under >1 atm of pressure for a prolonged time with thermal cycling if you're going to trust it with your life. Sealant is a joke, it doesn't hold under thermal cycling and space conditions properly. It's for emergencies, not for prolonged use. By the way, even proper leak detection tech in space is just a prototype and is several years old. Space welding haven't even been tried.
>It won't be with Starship, or other similar fully reusable vehicles.
What are you on about? Starship-sized rockets allow for even larger modules. Mining won't need welding either.
>To build space habitats, anon. 100 meter diameter cylinders cannot be launched.
>100 meter diameter, 1000 meter length, in a bundle of 6 with a non-rotating hub sphere habitat at both ends.
Why would you need for that a 100x100x1000m death trap you cannot even replace? Do you realize why sea ships are built like they are? Do you realize what hatches between ISS modules are for? Skylab and future Bigelow modules are already as large as a single pressurized volume can possibly be without raising safety concerns. Empty space larger than a couple meters in diameter is impractical in zero g unless you like to be suspended like a turtle, larger modules like Skylab already need to be separated into compartments or have plenty of railings inside.

Anyway, it seems you are dreaming about generation ships and all that. Speculate all you want, because it can only be a speculation at this point in time.

>>11452147
Funding and proper organization, not "we are going to give every EU member space org a job, no matter how poorly fit they are".

>>11452268
Oh, you are talking about NASA. The organization applies as well here though.

>>11447283
looks like it held together this time

>>11452257
>Space welding haven't even been tried.
this surprises me. you'd think it would be one of the first experiments they'd try on or around the iss.

>>11452331
That's because Salyut, Mir and ISS proved that modular construction is practical enough, and works for pretty much any zero g station you want in foreseeable future.

Although there's also an experiment proposal for welding the hexagonal panels with specifically designed robotic arms, I forgot the name. Would be extremely interesting to see it happening, of course.

>>11452331
didn't they use electron beam welding on salyut 7?

>>11452257
>>11452331

>Space welding haven't even been tried.

I love how people in this general make bold accusations and statements about the capability of organisations and nature of space travel whilst staying hilariously uninformed.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Y2nQ8isf55s

https://awo.aws.org/2015/07/welding-in-space/

>>11452354
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cвapкa_в_кocмoce
Hm, looks like Russians did try it on Salyut

>>11452376
why the fuck is 4chan mangling the vodka runes?
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%B2_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B5

>>11452268
Speaking of ESA, both Germany and France could easily run their own space programs. ESA is just slowing them down

>>11445553
There's some proposals to use it for NTP, and they've hijacked some of the supporting facilities to replace outdated ones in the older stands (for example, the SLS green run is controlled from the former A-3 control room).
Still wasteful, but odds are looking decent it'll find a good use.

>>11452372
>misinformed
I don't think that lack of knowledge of some obscure experiment in the spaceflight history means being misinformed, especially considering they didn't try it for pressurized welds, they didn't made it practical, large scale or anything like that.
Speculating that manned large scale construction in space is easy does show the lack of understanding, though.

>>11445583
>>11452424
Wait, since when they are considering nuclear thermal again?

>>11452400
ESA is there in the first place because european nations can only spend so much money on spaceflight without the opposition screaming about "MUH WELLFARE"
Also, ESA has a slow but steady aproach to space exploration, they always get decent results, for a much smaller budget the nasa.

>>11452441
>ESA is there in the first place because european nations can only spend so much money on spaceflight without the opposition screaming about "MUH WELLFARE"
I hate those kinds of "people".

>>11452076
I actually want this thing to work though. I've been debating on making a new smaller thruster that I would feel more confident that it would work.

>>11452111
Thanks. Maybe I can use a steel mesh wrapped around a thicker grating so that the mesh doesn't get pushed out as easily.

Cmon, pop already you little fuck.

>>11452458
All the wellfare should be abolished, it seems like the more is given out the whinier and more entitled people get.

>>11452502
This
The only welfare program should be free euthanasia if a person is ready to give up.

When is the Dragon supposed to arrive again?

frosty

>>11452589
Fingers crossed it doesn't pop.

>>11452615
fingers crossed it pops exactly where they expect it to

>>11452627
Are they popping this one on purpose to see if they can replicate the failure and confirm that the puck should be shucked?

>>11452589
Water towers won't get us to Mars anytime soon.
At first I was optimistic about Starship, but now there's no way you'd get me to board that thing even if you paid me.

>>11452641
it's a good thing nobody asked you

>>11452641
>Water towers won't get us to Mars anytime soon.
>Water towers don't fly

>>11452645
Well the plan is that people pay SpaceX to get them to Mars. Not sure all those kaboom events are inspiring confidence in future customers.

>>11452647
They do Fly.
Just not to Mars.

>>11452649
SpaceX blew up lots of Falcon 9s during it's development, and now there are people who want to pay SpaceX to ride on the Falcon.

>>11452660
Well they also lost all their second stages.
This is a second stage. and they can't even weld it right.
It will just keep blowing up/ disintegrate on re-entry/ Miss its landings for the next decade before they give up.

>>11452677
>This is a second stage. and they can't even weld it right.
That's why they're testing. Give them time.

>It will just keep blowing up/ disintegrate on re-entry/ Miss its landings for the next decade before they give up.
Like how they kept blowing up Falcon 9's landing them? Yeah, SpaceX was smart to give up on the Falcon 9 after failing to land them some 19 times. The 20th would've been a failure too.

>>11452653
>SpaceX blew up lots of Falcon 9s during it's development

They only blew up two during flight operations (CRS-7&AMOS-6) over a period of 6 years (2010-16). They did blow up F9R and a bunch of cores when landing boosters was in it’s experimental phase, but that had no effect on missions.

>>11452696
Don't get me wrong, I love explosion videos, so I'm thankful.

>>11452589
>>11452615
OH GOD IM GONNA POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP!

>>11452641
I don't think it would have the capacity to lift your immense mass anyways

>>11452770
>poop
>this is fueled by methane
Oh no here come the BRRRAAAAAAP jokes

Tank test happening!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg8N_vDE9JY

>>11452811
Ugh! We get it! You vape!

>>11450186

*autistically assembles self*

>>11452824
It's tradition.

>>11452811
Someone's ballparking 15-30 minutes more till it's topped off.

We unironically need more women in Space. We have made progress, but not enough.

>>11452873
I presume because they're lighter right, the idea here is mass efficiency correct? I don't see why manlets would not be more practical, although personally I think we need more 6'+ skellys, extra reach for moving in microgee without the weight limitations of gigachads.

>>11452257
>Hate to disappoint you but space is not empty, it's a pretty tough environment. Plenty of ionized oxygen (depending on altitude)
Not enough to affect welds to the point that a cover gas is needed, retard.

>>11452437
Only very recently, they want to develop the minimum amount of hardware that qualifies as a nuclear thermal engine. IIRC it will have an Isp of around 500 and use gaseous hydrogen as propellant (that is to say, hydrogen stored as a high pressure gas instead of liquid). The demonstration tech won't be useful for anything more than proving that yes, nuclear thermal engines work in space. Afterwards they'll need to redevelop the thruster to handle liquid propellants in order to make something useful. Even if the eventual end product only has a thrust of 1 kN and an Isp of 800 using hydrolox, that would still be pretty great in terms of firing probes at the outer solar system.

>>11452554
How come the panel is see through?

>>11452331
That’s not true. The Russians did weld in space

>>11452641

>>11452770
calm down pajeet

>>11452931
That was 6 month ago and they've only progressed backward since then.

Reminder to exercise every day.

>>11452437
Yeah, the current admin mandated that NASA restart research into developing a viable NTPR for travel to Mars and the Outer Planets. All the indicators are that it will be a low (20%) enrichment cermet fuel element rocket, only maybe 25-30% more efficient than it's chemical counterparts, however that's still a significant improvement and if it will appease the safetyfags then I'd say at least it's a step in the right direction for rocketry.

>>11452944
>progressed backward

>several versions of Raptor have been developed since then, improving production and engine reliability/performance
>new manufacturing techniques and equipment are being used to work with steel that is less than half as thick/heavy
>rings are now made from a single sheet of steel rather than multiple panels, overall everything quality is better
>manufacturing rate has increased by a huge amount, they will be able to pump out a Starship prototype every two or three months at this pace
>version two of the engine mount/thrust plate structure is being testes literally right now

>p r o g r e s s e d
>b a c k w a r d s

>>11452964
FUDdites don't have the capacity for critical thinking, they've been so heavily blackpilled (or are so salty that their predictions continue to fail) that they are now completely unable to make an accurate analysis of reality. It really must be torment to be a FUDdite.

>>11452964
>the engine mount/thrust plate structure is being testes literally right now
>testes
Elon you madman

>>11452964
Well engines and trust plates don't go up if your tanks blow up.

>>11452986
>ywn fondle Starship's chrome balls

>>11453003

>>11452920
it's not see-through, it's reflective

I want a rendering of starship/superheavy with white frost stripes around the LOX/methane tanks and header bulkhead tanks.

Someone should tweet that Italian broad on Twitter who does okay renderings.

>>11452400
Don't forget their insistence on muh wimminz. I'm sure that can only help

>>11452641
Starship as heavy lifter.
Falcon 9&dragon for people.

it's that simple.

>>11453951
Starship is for people. Dragon is intended to be abandoned as a crew craft.

>>11453957
No shit.
But spaceX alrealdy had to jump trough a lot of hoops to get falcon 9 human rated with the whole fueling thing, but even then falcon 9 human rating would be a walk in the park against the work that needs to be done to get starship human rated.

>>11453964
Who cares? They’ll do it.

>>11453969
sure, but starship will be flying cargo for years before a human does.

>>11453972
Whatever imaginary scenario floats your boat.

So it didn't blow up?

>>11453978
They only did a water test, not a cryogenic test.

>>11453981
They did a cryo-test for most of yesterday. It didn't blow up for it, either.

>>11453981
see:
>>11452822

>bombs your village

New thread
>>11454091
>>11454091
>>11454091