/sci/ - Science & Math

Don't be so mean to the poor man

>>11458635
That man is Maxime Allen "Max" Faget. One of designers of the Mercury capsule. He also contributed to the designs of the Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle spacecrafts. In fact, he laid out the basic design of the early Shuttle.

>>11458662
Although, he called it the DC-3 at the time as a reference to the Douglas DC-3. It incorporated the winged booster and orbiter stages of the early Shuttle designs. The "Shuttle DC-3" had superior low speed and glide characteristics over the Shuttle. Both stages also had provisions to have jet engines mounted to them after landing so they could be flown like regular planes to a refurbishment center. His designs were expected to fly thirty times per year with a fleet of six orbiters and four boosters. The whole system could bring 12,500 pounds to LEO for $23M in 1985 (a little over $93M in 2020). Although the frequent flights, and iterative improvements to the system could bring that down.

http://www.astronautix.com/s/shuttledc-3.html

>for some reason the first mercury capsules used rectal thermometers
Fucking hell Max..

>>11458701
>$23M in 1985 (a little over $93M in 2020)
I mean't $38M in 1985. Was thinking of different numbers when I typed that.

Boeing a shit

>>11458720
Wow what a stunning and brave statement

>>11458730
Tough guy?

>>11458730
Boing should really spend more money to fix their spaghetti code, instead of on damage control on four chins.

>>11458833
What’s spaghetti code?

Your "backup for humanity" was too late, cucks.

>>11458876
>Kills orders of magnitude less people daily than heart disease or cancer

Oooo I’m scared now.
Fuck off with the boring doomer memes. You’ll grow out of it if and when you stop being depressed.

>>11458876
A cull was necessary. Gotta unload some of these old people, get a little pressure off the medical and social security systems.

>>11458879
It will probably double the deaths from those things just by existing and incapacitating hospitals and medical staff.

>>11458866
It's code that is poorly structured and formatted. Usually results in large blocks of codes that can't be easily maintained nor modified as the parts of the codes and their relations to each other are hard to follow. Spaghetti code in a professional project is a bad sign as it shows that the people working in the project aren't being cohesive.

This can result from stuff like; amateur coders with no set style, multiple coders working together without resolving their different styles, feature creep, edits made by someone outside of the original coders, and more. Having to clean spaghetti code is a slow laborious task that often gets sidelined by more pressing project issues. Some cases of spaghetti code can get so bad that writing new code to replace the old code is a faster solution.

-t. had an internship which involved cleaning code that was almost as old as my dad

>>11458884
>Useless conjecture devoid of empirical data

Wouldn’t it be wild if the government made policy decisions based on just that? Oh wait....

Haha boing

I can't understand what hes saying in pic related. Can someone explain it to me?

>>11459170
He's just thanking the people who work behind the scenes who don't get to stand on the big stage and take credit. What's there to explain?

why did Japan never pursue rocketry like the Germans did in Ww2?

>>11459181
Because they knew better? The V-2 wasn't exactly a great weapon. Personally I'm glad the Germans were idiots in that regard though.

>>11458876
>3%
>extinction level
Mate with the current population it could have a 50% mortality rate and infect everyone on earth and in a century it would be like it never happened.

>>11459181
Germans were known for not sharing knowledge with other allies.
Plus Japan was resource starved they barely had metal for their guns.

>>11459174
How can advancing the cause used as working behind the scenes?
Im not a native english speaker tho ;-;

>>11459182
They didn‘t know any better. They made balloon bombs.

>>11459232
Does the dude on the floor who figured out how to weld the turbopump so as to squeeze out a little more specific impulse while doing the job get any recognition? No.
That's the kind of person he's thanking. The average Joe who builds the shit remains nameless and faceless no matter how much he or she contributes.

>>11459235
Well, never said anybody's perfect. The V-2 was a feat of engineering, but as a weapon of war it was a spectacular failure that cost more than the Manhattan project and used over 30 tons of potatoes for fuel during a famine.

>>11459239
Sorry, 30 tons of potatoes *per* launch.

Reminder that gingers cannot into space. Rusty Schweickart (left) threw up a bunch during Apollo 9 and didn't perform the transfer from Spider's porch to Gumdrop's hatch. Stu Roosa (right) needed SIX GOD-DAMN TIMES to dock with Apollo 14's Antares. No other CMP had these problems.

Redheads cannot be entrusted with human space exploration. This is why no other redheaded person has been allowed into space, before or since (ignore counter-factual "counter-examples" which may be posted in response to this helpful advice).

SLS will usher in a new era of spaceflight.

>>11459328
A new era of disappoint?

>>11459328
You are right, not other time in the history of space flight have there been two rockets capable of the same mission and the one 8 times more expensive was chosen.

>>11459328
Indeed, the fire rises brother!

>>11459352
In 10 years everyone will know about NASA and its rocket and no one will even remember spacex.

>>11459422
I'm cautiously pessimistic. I'm too old for this same fucking dance.

>>11458544
>>11458662
>>11458701
his ideas are finally happening

>>11459471
That’s just CGI anon

>>11458720
orange rocket bad

>>11459232
>quietly help
>advancing the cause is the only reward

>>11459475
yes, but >>11458701 was also an "artist's rendition"
There's hardware down in Boca Chica now, in Florida and in Hawthorne and in god-knows-where-else
they've got manufacturing in Michigan as well

>>11458730
Well, they're the primary reason Artemis is well over time and well over budget.
Not that the other contractors are much better, but they're being on time at this point is due to Boeing being so fucking behind that they managed to catch up.
Read the fucking audit.

>>11459488
>There's hardware

The word hardware doesn’t really have the same weight to it for Starship, as with other rockets. When people see completed Vulcan, New Glenn, SLS, Ariane 6 etc hardware they get excited, because it’s going to be part of a functional orbital launch vehicle. With Starship you expect the hardware to end up strewn over a field in South Texas and eventually be sent to the scrapyard.

>>11459498
what if the hardware I'm talking about isn't the vehicle, but the production line for the vehicle?

>>11459494
>Well, they're the primary reason Artemis is well over time and well over budget.

You can’t really say that when the crewed landers and Gateway modules haven’t even started construction yet. SLS isn’t holding back anything currently.

>>11459503
Read the fucking audit. Crewed lander isn't planned until what, 3rd or 4th mission?
Boeing is struggling with supplying first.

>>11459506
>Crewed lander isn't planned until what, 3rd or 4th mission?

3rd and there will likely come a point where the third SLS for Artemis 3 (which is already being built) is ironically waiting around for the lander to finish development.

>Boeing is struggling with supplying first.

They did struggle, but the first has recently been delivered to NASA. So it’s past-tense.

>>11459511
Does it or the software work then?
Because I fucking doubt it.

>>11459515
>Does it or the software work then?

I assume so because NASA developed the software not Boeing. Also, the whole point of the Green Run is to test that it works.

>>11459519
>NASA developed the software not Boeing
The audit says otherwise. It criticizes Boeing software division.

>>11459520
You’ve misread the audit. What it actually says is:

> “Boeing’s software development for the ICPS is also an ongoing concern as final modification of the software cannot be made until NASA finalizes the Artemis I mission requirements.”

Although, it name drops Boeing. The audit actually places the blame for the overrun on NASA not finalising the Artemis 1 trajectory and giving it to Boeing. Also, the ICPS isn’t really SLS, it’s the modified Delta 4 second-stage provided by ULA. The SLS core-stage software is developed by NASA at MSFC.

>>11459501
I don't see any advanced large factories capable of building anything resembling a functional super shuttle. I see a junkyard in texas.

>>11459532
obviously you've never been in a shipyard, anon
I see plenty of the fixtures you'd need to mass produce space shuttles. At least... the cargo version.

https://youtube.com/watch?feature=emb_title&v=IvmZ3Z_6Go8

>>11459181
Germany had a rocket community long before WW2 i think it was thriving well enough in the 1910s certainly the 1920s.

The V2 was on the drawing board in 1933 i’m pretty sure i’m right in saying. It wasn’t really a Nazi military iniatitive and certainly wasnt adequately funded until late in the war. It was something that was going on in Germany anyway that was of benefit to be militarised (and thus funded) Japan didnt have that.

>>11459539
the X59 is the most TEH FUTURE thing NASA has done in a long time
looking to shape up to be a great X-plane if you ask me

>>11459253
Paul Scully Power wants a word.

>>11459181
They did, pic related.
They had neither the scientific establishment nor the spare industrial capacity for something like the V1 or V2. Given the (lack of) accuracy of those things, they also had no possible use for them.
>>11459235
Orders of magnitude smaller resource commitment than V2s, and provided literally their only way of damaging the US mainland other than shelling with submarines. Got further than the Germans did, in that regard.

>>11459554
>pic related.
Though I attached it.

3 new spacecraft, 1 year

>>11459722
what's this

>>11459726
From top to bottom: China’s next-generation crew capsule, Huoxing-1 Mars orbiter and lander/rover, Chang’e 5 lunar sample return probe.

>>11459722
Could I please have a few more pixels Xi?

>>11458544

https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1237725784745230336
Ramping up promo I see

>>11459917
why do they all have rgb desks
and why are they all set to blue

>>11459921
>Why is Blue Origin so obsessed with the color blue?

>>11459927
yes, thank you for rephrasing my question
now where is the answer

>>11459934
Blue Origin is a reference to Earth in some poetic way. Blue Origin goes all in with the blue for branding like how Apple is all for grey.

>>11459938
you mean like how SpaceX have a fetish for white and black until the engineering said shiny and chrome was better?

>>11459941
Yes, although IIRC the black on the Falcon 9 came from a material sciences need.

>>11459949
Starship is going to look great, raw stainless steel and raw ceramic tiles
if Elon follows through on the crew version having that giant window there's no way it doesn't have a gold mirrored coating on it

>>11459917
Remind me again, what's the practical point of having a huge video wall like this in %CURRENT_YEAR%? Asking unironically, from the best HCI practices standpoint, and all that.
It probably made sense in 60s, but now everyone got their own customized display according to their role, without distractions.

>>11459953
it looks good for the press

>>11459953
I guess so you can see what's going on without running from desk to desk.

>>11459953
To display key information that everyone should see even if it's not directly important to their role. It allows everyone to quickly see such information without having to change their screens.

>>11459952
>Starship is going to look great, raw stainless steel and raw ceramic tiles
Once they buff out the wrinkles.

>there's no way it doesn't have a gold mirrored coating on it
Gold is pretty aesthetic on spacecraft desu.

>>11459973
Golden visor on stainless backed by black ceramic

>>11459328
Yes, by being such a monumental failure that the entire industry will pivot permanently to reusable rocket architectures, especially for heavy lift.

>>11459973
>Gold is pretty aesthetic on spacecraft desu.
Pajeet plz

>>11459981
if starship gets an unmanned trip to Mars before SLS gets an unmanned trip to the moon, NASA is going to look very stupid

>>11459984
the golden space MLI is aesthetic as hell and if you don't agree you're a heretic

>>11459984
Tastelet detected
gold is bold

>>11459938
>Apple is all for ghey.
FTFY

>>11459984
Gold is the color of first place. All other colors are for losers.

>>11459995
Based and gooooooooooooldpilled.

>>11459539
>>11459543
Just for clarification to the guys in the dark like me, X-59 is that supersonic jet that's designed to minimize ground-level sonic boom pressure by using a funky shaped body and wing. If it works it could let us build supersonic passenger aircraft that can fly over land, which would be a HUGE deal for the industry. Concorde was expensive because it had a very limited number of routs and a limited number of flights on those routes, so every ticket had to be pricey. Jets leading from the X-59 could be much much cheaper, because they could fly any route that ended with a long enough runway.

>>11460004
somebody's going to shove a turboramjet into one of those things and try to break the SR-71 records

>>11460004
>X-59 is that supersonic jet that's designed to minimize ground-level sonic boom pressure by using a funky shaped body and wing.

It also doesn’t have front-facing windows...

>>11460014
FUUUUUTTUUUURRRE

>>11460014
>X-59 pilot's reaction when he's flying

>>11460017
>>11460021

>>11460014
who needs them
it's all computers and GPS anyway

>>11460010
COGE already broke all imaginable records by being the highest altitude aircraft possible anyway. I remember there was a paper where they measured meaningful lift in it. There's also a record for the lowest satelloid, and it belongs to Japanese SLATS

>>11460035
what are you talking about?

>>11460014
This looks impractical as fuck.

>>11460044
it's NASA doing bleeding edge science on what the fuck even are sonic booms

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1237763237212553219
Elon please that's a picture of the moon

>>11460039
This thing. It could have been an aircraft by all accounts; it could fly at lower-than-orbital velocity, using continuous thrust and lift to compensate for its weight. As was SLATS, a similar lower flying satelloid. GOCE did test the lift-compensating mode once it was deployed, SLATS didn't, since both weight and lift were minuscule and SLATS wasn't equipped with a super sensitive accelerometer to measure anything. Both acted as satelloids during the main mission phase. (not using lift)

>>11460044
>>11460047
The design is purely dictated by the science of how to reduce the sound of sonic booms. It’s an X-plane, none of them look practical.

>>11460070
the pic

>>11460014
>minimize
How about we maximize?

>>11460081
D-directed sonic booms?

>>11460052
Elon here, come apply at SpaceX. We need low IQ posters like you.

>>11460081
Pay for my windows Jose!

>>11460081
That's how you get the Thunderscreech.
>continuous sonic boom while stationary

>>11460081
>>11460085

>>11460076
GOCE was a thermospheric rocket satellite, not an air-breathing airplane
rocket planes have already beaten all of the SR-71 records
>>11460085
fighter jets and such with sufficient maneuverability and acceleration can focus sonic booms for testing
NASA uses an F/A-18 for that purpose

>>11460103
>NASA uses an F/A-18 for that purpose
Neat, I didn't know that.
>>11460101
What a beautiful nightmare-machine.

>>11460118
>what a beautiful nightmare-machine
somebody needs to make it happen and then put it on Mars or Venus and have it just cruise around collecting data

>>11460095
I can only imagine how loud this thing was. I watched Tu-95s flying over my house several times during the Syrian war (I live in Russia), I thought it was going to collapse.

>>11460120
Hell, if you were trying to design a Venusian variant it could still launch MIRVs with science packages instead of warheads, flying around and dropping short-lived experiments on the surface below.

>>11460138
make one for Mars with the same capability just to demonstrate to Elon that if he has any dreams of becoming independent from EarthGov he needs to shutter them

>>11460120
Too ambitious for the current mindset of probe design. Let's recycle a rover instead.

>>11460151
yeah but what if you could get the Space Force onboard with the potential to big stick SpaceX's Mars outpost

>>11460151
It's gonna drive a whole mile per year and has the potential to dig entire milimeters below the Martian soil, maybe somehow potentially possibly answering the question of whether or not Mars held life!
>inb4 quadcopter drone lifts off and nosedives on the first flight

>>11460120
No Anon, we need an expendable rover running on a ten million dollar 200 pound RTG using .01% enriched uranium that generates one volt of electricity a day with one spindly aluminum probe arm that's got the strength of a mouse with rickets to drive a million dollar thermometer 2mm into the dirt to discover that the dirt is, indeed, slightly cooler under the surface than it is ontop.

>>11460155
I'm open to anything that would BFTO the "space exploration must be done by small impotent probes" group.

>>11460163
Hate to break it to you, but minimizing mass is always going to be a concern with space travel. Having humans on a space ship for exploration is simply never going to be a good idea because of all the extra necessary mass for life support.

>>11460174
Then just build bigger rockets. Don't make space flight be trapped by small launchers by accepting the piss poor state of the space industry. Go big, or go home.

>>11460183
Even when spacefight is cheap and easy, ships are always going to be small and light craft because there's exactly 0 reason to go big. Even hauling asteroids around the solar system can be done with a tiny spacecraft. Only maybe space stations might get big and heavy because they don't have to go anywhere.
In reality the ideas of a big freighter like the one in Alien or space exploration vessel like The Enterprise are pure fantasy and will never make sense.

>>11460159
>maybe somehow potentially possibly answering the question of whether or not Mars held life!

Searching for life on Mars is literally banned for “planetary protection” reasons. A life-detecting experiment hasn’t been sent since the 70’s

>>11460190
>duuuur big rokkit impullsibl

>>11460224
are you telling me that trying to find life on mars is banned because we don't know if there's life on mars?

>>11460190
>there's exactly 0 reason to go big
100t+ rockets are ALWAYS significantly cheaper than 20t+ ones, $ per kg wise. The only problem is finding the payload for a single 100t+ launch.

>>11460190
>ships are always going to be small and light craft because there's exactly 0 reason to go big
Except for...
>large cargo shipments because transfer windows are infrequent
>entire labs for studying other worlds
>telescopes with lenses unbound by gravity
>colony drops
>propellant depots
>manufacturing plants
And others that I'm probably overlooking.

>>11460224
>Searching for life on Mars is literally banned for “planetary protection” reasons
Even though NASA is still sending probes there to look for life?

>>11460224
Isn't that why they always say "seeking evidence for whether or not Mars HAD (not HAS) life"?

>>11460226
>>11460232
I'm not talking about rockets, I'm talking about the craft itself and baking in escape from Earth is never going to be productive since it's a much crazier constraint than just zipping around the solar system. The size of the craft WILL be minimized for the smallest possible vehicle needed to do what it needs to do, regardless of the size of the rockets and fuel tanks. This will mostly likely mean cutting out humans entirely of most missions and in the case of exploratory missions, probes will ALWAYS reach celestial bodies decades if not centuries before any human sets foot.
>>11460233
>large cargo shipments because transfer windows are infrequent
ok, I'll give you this one
>colony drops
and this, I guess, but only by necessity
the rest of these aren't constrained by mass because they just need to be parked in orbit somewhere, it's a different use case and in all of these scenarios can be assembled piecemeal instead of as a single craft.
>entire labs for studying other worlds
>telescopes with lenses unbound by gravity
>propellant depots
>manufacturing plants

>>11460230
>are you telling me that trying to find life on mars is banned because we don't know if there's life on mars?

They’re worried about contaminating the possibly nonexistent Martian biosphere with probably nonexistent Earth bacteria that has somehow survived the conditions of the interplanetary void. For this same reason, Curiosity was forbidden from travelling a few hundred meters to investigate surface water features.

>>11460291
aerocapture is so good, and reentry on earth is one of the most demanding aerocapture environments possible

>>11460239
>Even though NASA is still sending probes there to look for life?

Not directly. The Viking Landers were the last ones to be equipped with actual experiments designed to look for metabolic activity in soil samples. Funnily enough, both of the Viking Landers had positive readings for these experiments.

>>11460224
>>11460230
>>11460239
>>11460292
Why are you still peddling this ban on searching for life bullshit?

>Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman and Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals (SHERLOC) is an ultraviolet Raman spectrometer that uses fine-scale imaging and an ultraviolet (UV) laser to determine fine-scale mineralogy and detect organic compounds designed for the Perseverance rover as part of the Mars 2020 mission.

>>11460302
>Funnily enough, both of the Viking Landers had positive readings for these experiments.
Source? Because I thought that it was a false positive?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_lander_biological_experiments
>The GCMS measured no significant amount of organic molecules in the Martian soil. In fact, Martian soils were found to contain less carbon than lifeless lunar soils returned by the Apollo program. This result was difficult to explain if Martian bacterial metabolism was responsible for the positive results seen by the Labeled Release experiment (see below). A 2011 astrobiology textbook notes that this was the decisive factor due to which "For most of the Viking scientists, the final conclusion was that the Viking missions failed to detect life in the Martian soil."

>>11460303
>Why are you still peddling this ban on searching for life bullshit?
https://ufos.news/2019-10-16-life-on-mars-in-1976-nasa-banned-experiments-hide-science.html
I think I found his source lol

>>11460308
nobody can agree on that subject and it's been a fistfight in the science community for decades, so probably a good idea to drop it

>>11460303
Literally just a laser. Not a metabolic experiment and sending rovers to surface water features on Mars is still banned.

>>11460312
>ufos.news
That sounds legit.

>>11460302
Oh I see what’s happening here...your passing off the word of that delusional schitzo who used to work on Viking 1 and 2 as credible evidence. Basically, there’s a senile schitzo-boomer from the Viking program who’s deluded himself into believing the probes discovered life on Mars, but he can’t prove this claim with any credible evidence, so has been generally ignored.

>>11460312
>ufo.news

>>11460312
> tfw this is the average credibility level of the sources utilised by your average /sfg/ poster...

>>11460308
>Because I thought that it was a false positive?

Never been proven. The lack of organic compounds is explained by the fact that heated perchlorates destroy organic compounds and produce chloromethane and dichloromethane as a product, which the spectrometer did detect.

>>11460320
>Oh I see what’s happening here...your passing off the word of that delusional schitzo who used to work on Viking 1 and 2 as credible evidence

Nope. Please learn how chemicals interact with eachother.

>>11460320
>>11460332
the guy's a total schizo-boomer but has proven that it was possible for the experiment to produce a false-negative

>>11460338
The metabolic experiment’s positive result is only considered to be a false positive by some because the spectrometer failed to detect any organic compounds, but any organic compounds would have been destroyed by the perchlorates in the soil when heated to produce compounds which WERE detected.

daily reminder that anyone who pushes for planetary protection should be dragged out and shot

>>11460341
that doesn't prove anything except that rovers gay

>>11460341
Then change the experiment so that the perchlorate issues don't happen and try again.

>>11460343
Planetary protection doesn't seem to have that much power anyways.

>>11460344
It’s inconclusive. Human astronauts could do more work than every probe sent to Mars did over thirty years in an hour or two.

>>11460239
The "search for life" isn't' banned by planetary protection. Searching for life is.

>>11460353
>Human astronauts could do more work than every probe sent to Mars did over thirty years in an hour or two.
This. The Insight mole can be fixed in 15 minutes with a guy an a spade.

>>11460351
>Then change the experiment so that the perchlorate issues don't happen and try again.

That’d mean launching another bajillion dollar lander with that equipment, which hasn’t been done. Perchlorates are created on Mars by radiation so maybe you could dig deep into the ground, or preemptively destroy the perchlorates in the sample using enzymes.

>>11460366
no, you need a guy with a hammer and a pole

>>11460362
That makes no sense.

>>11460368
>or preemptively destroy the perchlorates in the sample using enzymes.

But I don’t think this would be viable because then you’d get a false positive from the enzymes, so I guess you’d need to dig down to where perchlorates don’t occur. Dunno how deep that is, though.

>>11460368
>That’d mean launching another bajillion dollar lander with that equipment, which hasn’t been done.
Launching a probe with any equipment will never be done if the probe must have equipment that was launched before. Make probes cheaper and send them. If they break, then they'll be cheap enough to replace.

>but launching them is expensive
Make the launchers cheaper. SpaceX has already shown that this is easily possible.

>>11460047
They are doing diddly shit.
Every single thing is outsourced

>>11460387
well yeah, but nobody would do that research if NASA wasn't paying them for it

>>11459232
but you are gay haha

>>11460387
>>11460391
Why are people here so illiterate about contracting here, NASA doesn’t outsource anything. NASA works hand in hand with contractors (in the X-59’s case Lockheed Skunkworks) to design and manufacturer a vehicle which fits their goals. NASA does the R&D for a concept, sets the design parameters for a vehicle testing this concept, contractor bases the vehicle design off these parameters, contractor builds the vehicle while NASA observes and assists to make sure the parameters are met.

>>11460424
oh that makes sense, that's an incredibly inefficient way to design something
no wonder everything NASA does costs a bajillion dollars

>>11460424
>doesn’t outsource anything
>with contractors

You literally just said that they outsource manufacturing to a third party.

>>11460439
They don't even design shit, they just draw up a list of specs and fire off a bidding round.

>>11460439
>You literally just said that they outsource manufacturing to a third party.

Contractor personnel and NASA employees both work hand in hand, together during the manufacturing phase. NASA personnel are usually responsible for the more specialist tasks e.g. developing life support for Crew Dragon.

>>11460445
Have you ever read an RFP? The requirements are very stringent and detailed. Also, this is just the first-phase, the contractor and NASA have to sit down and agree on a final design for CDR.

>>11460458
Yes I have and while list of specs is very detailed, NASA does not do the design.
They might give feedback on the design, but they do not the design. If they were the designers, they'd hand off blueprints to the contractors, they don't.

did someone say contractors?

>>11460469
Thats all nasa my dude

>>11460469
it's always easier when they are all called Boeing, right?

>>11460469
Source on that list?

>>11460490
https://www.nasa.gov/specials/ESDSuppliersMap/

>>11460026
Good luck flying that cofin when you get a power failure and you gave to glide he sucker in.

>>11460503
>2,462 Orion contractors
>558 SLS contractors
>793 EGS contractors
>3,813 total contractors (assuming no repeats)
How can this even be managed without massive headaches?

>>11460513
Who said there are no headaches?

>>11460513
Don‘t you read the controlling reports? It can‘t.

>>11460517
>>11460524
Let me rephrase then, how can this even be managed without the project collapsing in on itself?

>>11460529
What makes you think they don't?
We've had how many decades now of programs that run over cost and over time until they get axed only to get relaunched with some minor changes here and there, a fresh coat of paint and a new name? Fucking hell man, we haven't done jack shit since 1972 due to this fucking shit.

>>11460529
because congress keeps this tangled zombie alive

>>11460537
Until they no longer do, then they kill it, only to resurrect it a term or three later down the line under a new name with a fresh coat of paint.

how long until we see SN3 getting tested?

>>11460546
They done fucking the puck?

>>11460549
i thought thats what they got done with when the SN2 test was successful?

>>11460533
>We've had how many decades now of programs that run over cost and over time until they get axed only to get relaunched with some minor changes here and there, a fresh coat of paint and a new name? Fucking hell man, we haven't done jack shit since 1972 due to this fucking shit.
I assume you mean specifically space flight? Hopefully this new era of private space flight will fix some of these issues.

>>11460551
I thought that was what they were going to do with SN2 if it withstood the cryo.

>>11460555
>private space flight
Will be relegated to satellite launching, payloads and contracting for NASA as well as "space tourism". Don't kid yourself.

>>11460559
>Will be relegated to satellite launching, payloads and contracting for NASA as well as "space tourism". Don't kid yourself.
Ok defeatist.

>>11460559
>Will be relegated to satellite launching, payloads and contracting for NASA as well as "space tourism".

Prove it.

>>11460580
Neither you or I live in Ancapistan, stop pretending otherwise.

>>11460584
>We don’t live in anarcho-capitalism therefore corporations can’t fly to the moon

Lol

>>11460586
You live in some fantasy where you pretend corporations get to have any say in national and international matters. That is Ancapistan.
And I'm not having this stupid discussion again.

>>11460546
before the end of the month

>>11460584
SOON
techno-corporatism will fall

>>11460594

>>11460584
I didn't say anything about being ancap.

>>11460602
Nor did I imply that *you* were one, yet your fantasy that corporations hold such powers is such a one.

>>11460590
>You live in some fantasy where you pretend corporations get to have any say in national and international matters.
How is a company sending it's own employees and customers to the Moon and Mars a national and international matter?

>>11460590
>You live in some fantasy where you pretend corporations get to have any say in national and international matters

Never been to America, huh?
Corporations are going to the moon and there’s nothing you can do about it, commie.

>>11460584
>property law in space doesn't currently exist therefore it will never exist and the lack of its existence will prevent the pressure of the necessity of its formation
dumb

>>11460615
>Corporations are going to the moon
No they're not. They're barely getting to send some robotic shit there thanks to NASA and Artemis, that is if Artemis doesn't get yanked.

what if starlink/megaconstellations werent an option for whatever reason, what could spacex do to fund a mars colony then?

>>11460612
Just because I share an idea with an ideology doesn't mean that I subscribe to that ideology.

>>11460619
they'd pretty much have to hope Musk's other companies succeed enough that he could bankroll the entire operation like Bezos does for BO

>>11460618
>No they're not.

Yes they are. Starship is going to land it’s giant thicc ass on the moon and cause quakes while commies like you seethe.

>>11460620
And I just said I did not imply you shared it. How many times do I need to spell that out for you?

>>11460619
Sell tesla shares and fund it til there's money.

>>11460626
If NASA decides to try a couple for the novelty value, maybe. Doubt they'll ever send that shit to the moon for anything but a flyby though.

>>11460635
>If NASA decides to try a couple for the novelty value, maybe.
Who said NASA has to be involved with Starship landing on the moon?

>>11460635
SpaceX can land on the moon without interacting with NASA at all. They don’t own it.

>>11460649
>>11460654
What fucking fairy land do you guys live in? Honest question. SpaceX lives and dies at the grace of US authorities.

SOON

>>11460658
YES, AND THEY WILL PERMIT THEM TO FLY
NOBODY WILL STOP THEM, AND THE COMMIES WILL SEETHE
EVEN NOW THEY BUILD >>11460660
THE FIRE RISES, BROTHER

>>11460658
NASA isn’t the sum total of “US authorities”. All they need to do is register the launch with the FAA. If SpaceX wants to go, there is no obstacle stopping them or any other company doing the same.

>>11460665
they might need to do an environmental impact assessment

>>11460658
and what reason do you have to believe the FAA will so no to a private moon landing? There are literally no laws against it. If SpaceX wants to OWN part of the moon, then we'd have to figure out how we want property laws to work in space, but that's an inevitability.

>>11460670
property law is ILLEGAL in space

>>11460669
Oh yeah we wouldn’t want to disrupt the habitats of moon tadpoles.


It’s a bunch of dead irradiated rocks.

>>11460658
Don't tell me you're that one guy here who honestly believes that SpaceX is going to get nationalized. Also, what's the government going to do to stop SpaceX? As long as the FAA is fine with the launch, then SpaceX can send their stuff anywhere as long as it doesn't threaten important government space hardware. SpaceX has already booked a fly-around to the Moon and no stoppages from the government as happened as far as we can tell.

>>11460670
Nation states are pretty covetous beasts. It's not a matter of ownership, it's a matter of prestige.

>>11460680
Fuck no.

>>11460676
>Interracial marriages are ILLEGAL in Alabama

>>11460679
that was a joke
environmental impact statements are jokes

>>11460685
yes, so when the chinese try to claim property on the moon it will be totally appropriate and sanctioned to lynch them in our head-to-toe white spacesuits with pointy tops

>>11460691
We could always get MASA to design new boots for our space suits.

>>11460691
Would there be enough gravity to lynch someone on the moon? Would a guillotine even work?

>>11460695
what the fuck is that
anon I'm trying to make a KKK joke here

>>11460700
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_pointy_boots

>>11460688
I wasn’t so sure. Some actually important woman on Twitter was seething because of the Tardigrades that fell onto the moon a while ago.

>>11460699
inertia is the same so the same velocity is required, and there's no air resistance
you might need to make it taller

>>11460670
>If SpaceX wants to OWN part of the moon, then we'd have to figure out how we want property laws to work in space, but that's an inevitability.
IIRC, there are none. The Outer Space Treaty forbids claiming any part of a celestial body other than Earth. Now, while China can just ignore that, SpaceX would play nice with the US government and not try anything related to claiming land (other than asking politely if they could). However, SpaceX would still own any material it sends to other bodies. So a habitat set up on the Moon or Mars by SpaceX will still be owned by SpaceX, just not the land that the habitat is on.

>>11460704
literally nobody would have given a shit about those tardigrades if they had just filled out the paperwork first
but they didn't
so now they're screwed

>>11460710
There's a "nobody's an illegal immigrant" joke there somewhere.

>>11460707
The Outer Space Treaty will inevitably be modified or junked.

>>11460707
>>11460676
>>11460691
"No property in space" will definitely be discarded the very second that having property in space becomes a technologically feasible possibility. I can't imagine anyone thinks that any asshole nation on earth would continue to play nice with this rule to their own detriment.

Also I think the most appropriate historical analogy would be all of the various Indian reservation treaties where vast tracts of land were totally cut off and legally barred from any American development until about five minutes after gold or oil was discovered in them

why do redditors keep responding to low effort trolls
make them work for their (You)s

>>11460728
>>11460717
I wonder how long before the treaty gets reworked/replaced. 2030? 2050?

is boca chica worth visiting or should i wait?

>>11460790
yeah

>>11460790
if you see an old man walking around with a camera, make sure you give him booze, it brings good luck

>>11460790
How far are you travelling? I’m in the UK so i’m waiting.

>>11460804
a few hours

>>11460811
do it

>>11460811
a few hours drive*

how hard is it to plan a trip to the cape to watch a launch? I wanted to go see one in person but I wouldn't want to go for a day only for things to get SCRUBBED

>>11460820
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4_Atlas_5_Falcon_9_Launch_Viewing.html

thanks Elon
>>11460820
it really depends on if you're okay with sleeping in your car and showering at a random gym or if you want to get a hotel room
>>11460814
where are you driving from?

>>11460691

>>11460877
Curious what kind of ammo those guys would be packing. Hypergolic?

>>11460877
imagine getting shot and being propelled into space where you float away for the last minutes of your life

>>11460886
The dude who shot you is going to have some issues dealing with the recoil too.

>>11460881
IIRC most modern gunpowder has it's own oxidizer mixed in.

>>11460881
Solid.

>>11460881
gunpowder already has its own oxidiser, at worst you'd just make sure it's all sealed and that something like the gas feedback for auto fire has it's own external pipe

>>11460892
>>11460895
I'm not a chemist nor a homeloader. recoil would still be a bitch.

>>11460877
>>11460895
SHALL

>>11460881
Magnetically-accelerated?

>>11460888
would the principles of recoilless rifles still work in space?

>>11460910
I don't see why not. Although gyrojets may work better.

>>11460910
yes

>>11460914
>gyrojets
someone get this man a bolter

>>11460910
>recoilless
Well, they're not entirely without recoil, while mostly negated, I imagine it would be noticeable in 1/6th of our gravity.

>>11460881
the only thing you'd need to be worried about in vacuum would be your gun vacuum welding itself together if the oil evaporated, so you'd need some pretty serious grease in there
it would also need to resist both burning hot temperatures (naturally from a gun) and a freezing cold
the AR-15 is already naturally sealed against dust so there's no worry about that

>>11460920
Soon...

>>11460926
if you form the base into a proper de Laval nozzle you could frictionfit the primer into the throat, if it was made from a softer material than the throat it would get blown out the back

>>11460926
>you will live to see the return of gyrojets, manufactured in zero-g

>>11460660
can someone pls explain the color key

>>11460939
the different colors indicate different sections
he just went around the color wheel, they don't mean anything in particular

>>11460935
Thanks for the idea! Could work with a change in manufacturing methods from 3D printing. Maybe a pressed tube with a back plate brazed on?

>>11460938
Once faster burning solid propellants become a thing, then it'll come back. Either that or a change to hypergolic cartridges.

>>11460943
>faster burning solid propellants
smokeless powder from a gun burns completely in under a hundredth of a second, dude

>>11460941
oh, thanks

>>11460851
hasn't he made this mistake before though?

>>11460975
the man's an overworked retard, he needs to sleep more and work less
spend more time on his memes

>>11460967
Alright, but there's no good data on using regular gunpowder as a propellant.

>>11460981
there's only one way to get that data

>>11460701

>>11460701
I fail to see the point of those.

>>11460992
Get MASA to incorporate some shit like that into the new EVA suits and the Chinese astronauts don't stand a chance. Suit punctures abound.

>>11460992
Mexicans don't tie the toes to their belts though, they point upwards with no support. Clearly a superior technology.

>>11460695
https://youtu.be/NkRkuI0ZgX0?t=83

my school just canceled classes and is going online only for the rest of the semester. Anyone want to do an autistic /sci/ meetup at boca chica for spring break? Considering making the 12hr drive

>>11461109
>school cancels because it's dangerous to gather in groups
>"lol bros lets meet up and do some group stuff!"
the state of american "intelligence"

Another 60 Starlink coming this saturday, on 14th.

>>11460660
Holy cow didn't know it was that big, that little person puts it into scale.

I just hope this rust bucket actually flies one day.

so who has been following this shit?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=ZBInhPFFVog&feature=emb_title

Feels like it's too good to be true.
At best in my mind they found a cheap way to destroy nuclear waste.

>>11461114
first 5th launch of falcon 9!

ORANGE
ROCKET
BAD

>>11461153
>1:28
>pandering electric universe
no thanks

>>11461132
it's literally the size of a small skyscraper

>>11461153
>electric universe bullshit
fffuck off

would people get pissed off if an NTR spaceplane was built and perfected on the moon and then landed on Earth?

>>11461188
Retards are pissed about nuclear right now even though it's the safest mode of electricity generation bar-none, what do you think the reaction would be if the world knew a nuclear reactor dropped out of orbit over their heads?

>>11461188
Yes. They get pissed off about people spending money on space instead of feeding poor migrants

>>11461153
>Electric Universe
No. Just no.

>>11461188
Fissile materials in space gets everyone uncomfortable, even NASA as they load up an RTG powered rover. You might away with it if you did it on Mars and kept it away from Earth.

>>11461201
Those "people" don't even matter.

>>11460341
carbon-chlorine compounds are still organic compounds, you know

>>11460371
Simply stomping on the ground around the probe, then shoveling a pile of dirt on top for added weight, would let it start digging on its own.

>>11461250
hmmmmmmm

>>11460888
Why
Recoil would be exactly the same, inertia is the same in space

>>11461112
It’s not dangerous to gather in groups.

>>11461247
>carbon-chlorine compounds are still organic compounds, you know

I suppose so, but they must have been looking for other ones if they considered that a “negative”.

>>11459973

We have these hams at my menial job that we're selling for Easter/St. Patrick's, that are wrapped in gold foil. Each time I see them I like to imagine they're important probe components.

>>11461392
yes, honey baked hams are absolutely wrapped in MLI for important space reasons

>>11461392
But anon, they are very important space flight components. What would the astronauts eat for Easter or St. Patrick's day (based on the Martian calendar) if they don't have their MLI wrapped ham?

Made a mehme

>>11461737
You should take it to reddit
and then fucking stay there

>>11461737
5/10 made me exhale and smirk

>>11461737
no thank you

>>11461737
Based and funny

>>11460701
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwYu8Lb2gA0

>>11461962
Ah, good old Leningrad Cowboys.

>>11460025
>Windows is installing the updates
>5% complete
>Please do not turn off your computer

>>11462331

>>11462348

>>11462353

>51 posters
>309 replies
whats this?

>>11462546
discussion

>>11461746
Ironically, I actually stole that shit from r*ddit. Totally get why you hate that gay ass site though, mods are literal tranny coomers that disallow good shit.

(you have to go back)

>>11462597
it was shit, why did you post it here

>>11462597
>"Look! I made a meme!"
>"That's shit"
>"Ackhshually I stole it from plebbit! a-hahahahaha..."

ExoMars rover delayed to 2022.

>>11460025
The rear cockpit of MiG-31 has pretty much the same view if not worse and they unironically use a folding periscopic mirror to see shit on landing. Some other Russian military 2-seat trainers as well.

>tfw ExoMars 2022

It hasn’t been a good night for Europe...

>>11462676
Yeah, I've been spending the last few days stocking up on canned and dry goods and preparing for extended vidya sessions. About all we can fucking do here soon.

>>11462597
Go the fuck back and fucking stay there, you subhuman mongrel
No, you do not fit in here, and never fucking will
GIT GONE

>>11462597
So the mods are actually doing their job now.

>>11462749
they also deleted some vargposting, which was nice

Sucks that the virus will destroy the economy and bankrupt NASA, SpaceX and Blue Origin.

>>11462835
>bankrupt NASA
Not a company, governments don't go "bankrupt" unless they're third world failed states.

>SpaceX
Not a publicly traded company.

>Blue Origin
Bezos has money to spare, not bloody likely.

>>11462835
>bankrupt NASA

That would involve bankrupting the US government

>SpaceX

Definitely possible and Elon has lost a decent chunk of his net worth this week, but Coronavirus hasn’t had a adverse effect on the launch market yet. It would be interesting to see what happens if a SpaceX employee gets it.

>Blue Origin

To bankrupt Blue you’d have to bankrupt Amazon and Bezos, not happening. However, Blue’s headquarters is located in Washington state, so they could be badly effected.

>>11462835
launch market is steady and doesn't dip during recessions and won't affect SpaceX
NASA is USGov
Blue Origin doesn't have any revenue and as such cannot suffer from recessions

>>11462676
Launch window 2020 was going to be so amazing.

>>11462597
Come on man. At least own up to your shitty memes when they backfire.

>>11462542
>>11462348
I forgot windows doesn't even say please anymore, it just does whatever it wants whenever it wants

>This will take a while

>>11462542

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1237470108731289605

>>11463225
They better not be holding on progress while waiting for the election to blow over.

>>11463268
If they do and there's a change of parties, bye bye Artemis.

>>11463271
If that happens, then NASA is dead to me.

>>11462597
fucking hell mods, look at you giving a shit

>>11463273
>then NASA is dead to me.
As if NASA has anything to say about it. Politics run that fucking shitshow and they'll pull out that fucking rug to score political points or prevent the other team from scoring points all the time.

>>11463286
I know, but what's the point of rooting for NASA if shit like this happens regularly? How can someone get excited for what NASA is doing if it's going to be cancelled 4 to 8 years later?

You Yanks shit yourselves over SLS being a mere 2 years behind schedule, but imagine if European programs received the same level of scrutiny...

>>11463300
now do the russian MPLM Nauka

>>11463300
>You Yanks shit yourselves over SLS being a mere 2 years behind schedule
More like 4 (not counting Constellation), but I see your point. How is that thing not so outdated that building it would be pointless?

>>11463311
>How is that thing not so outdated that building it would be pointless?
The SLS is using engines that were on the Saturn V if we're talking "outdated".

>>11463319
hmmmmmm
no, the SLS is using derivatives of engines that were on the Saturn 1

>>11463319
I meant ExoMars not SLS.

>>11463322
Yeah, ok nitpick away. Point still stands.

>>11463268
Their obviously not holding progress (Bridenstine would kill them for doing so), it’s just the work their currently doing is boring but technical (to the point that it’s ITAR-sensitive). They’ve got to do months of leak, avionics and software tests before actually putting propellant in the tanks.

>>11463324
Oh I'm well aware, you brought up something very delayed being outdated, I brought up something also very delayed and very redesigned having gone through several names and reincarnations using many old and re-purposed parts that you already used for comparison.

>>11463328
not really, SLS is using neither the F-1 nor the J-2
is the Apollo CSM main engine being used on the Orion CSM? I wouldn't think so...

>>11463337
>not really, SLS is using neither the F-1 nor the J-2
IIRC, the RS-25 came from the HG-3, which came from the J-2.

>>11463342
only in that they both use hydrogen
the RL-10 was used in a cluster on the Saturn 1, and is being used as the throw stage for SLS as well as on Vulcan Centaur

>>11463311
The 2016 ‘original target’ for SLS is kinda bullshit, because it was a purely political date (set by Congress, not NASA) from the 2010 NASA Authorisation Act, which was passed 4 years before the SLS program actually started bending metal.

>“In August 2014, as the SLS program passed its Key Decision Point C review and entered full development, costs from February 2014 until its planned launch in September 2018”

>For Vulcan, the upper stage will be an upgraded version named Centaur V. The upper stage will be the same diameter as the Vulcan first stage, 5.4 meters, compared to Centaur III’s 3.05-meter diameter. Centaur V will always be powered by two RL-10 engines.

>Currently, Centaur III uses hydrazine to power its attitude control thrusters, which requires a separate propulsion system from the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen system for the RL-10 engine. However, Bruno says the ULA is studying the opportunity to use thrusters powered by hydrogen and oxygen in order to eliminate the second propulsion system. This would also allow a more complete and efficient use of the stage’s energy, leaving less unused residual propellant on board. According to Bruno, Centaur V is currently planned to include this new thruster system in its baseline configuration.

>>11463372
Interesting. I wonder how they're going to make the new thrusters be able to fire nearly as fast as the hydrazine thrusters.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-selects-first-science-instruments-to-send-to-gateway

>The radiation instrument package, built by the European Space Agency (ESA), will help provide an understanding of how to keep astronauts safe by monitoring the radiation exposure in Gateway’s unique orbit.

>The space weather instrument suite, built by NASA, will observe solar particles and solar wind created by the Sun. As we move deeper into space, human and robotic explorers face greater challenges from the sometimes violent and unpredictable outbursts of the Sun. The space weather instrument suite will gather data and enhance our ability to forecast events originating from the Sun that could affect our astronauts on and around the Moon as well as on future missions to Mars.

>>11463372
I note that this is similar to what SpaceX are proposing on Starship

>>11463384
It makes sense for pretty much all applications too, except perhaps extremely low power deep space probes. Launchers, booster stages, orbital taxi busses, etc all benefit from being as simple as possible, using as few different components and propellants as possible. I guess the downside is that no matter which thruster is firing you're always invariably losing delta-v, while if you have a self-contained separate RCS propellant your wet mass is going down without your primary propellant being consumed.

>>11463417
it does let you use some of the same margin for both uses

>>11463417
Another upside to using thrusters and other propulsion units that share propellants is that it makes the logistics of ISRU easier.

>>11463417
The main downsides from using cryogenics for RCS is increased complexity and lower reliability (harder to ignite) in comparison to hypergolics. Cryogenics provide better performance and disposal. The propellant loss from cryogenic RCS is minuscule, to the point that a completely separate hypergolic system would have more negative effects on performance due to the extra weight it adds.

>>11463380
>GAtEwAy iS dEAd

t.eRiC b*Rg*R

>>11463462
Yeah I doubt it's dead, probably more like it will cost twice as much as currently projected and only half of what's proposed will actually get into orbit.

>>11463470
As long as it doesn't become ISS 2.0 and some actual work gets done up there, then I'll be happy with it.

>>11463470
>probably more like it will cost twice as much as currently

It’s good that Gateway is built out of existing hardware and using fixed-priced contracts then.

we need a new thread dumbasses

>>11463480
It's a fraction the size of ISS, the piece of shit will be running of of the HALO minimal crew habitat until 2026 when the iHAB arrives. What work will it possibly be doing?