/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11571235
fuck you those were nasa men doing great things for great science youre just an incel virgin loser doing poor copies because youre too short dicked to do somethign for real in the real world.

STOP TORTURING ANIMALS NOW OR ELSE, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, FIND OUT OF THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DISOBEY

>>11571235
reminder starship is NOT ugly

>>11571259
ugly? imagine a girl who sucks your dick every day and asks you how you've been as soon as you arrive from work, she spends her free time learning on ways on how to please you working out to be more desirable for you, she does as you say when you command but takes initiative when you need keeps things fresh, she even one day saw that work was keepign you down and went ahead and became a millonaire jsut to keep you from working...

how can that girl ever be ugly? never

same thing with starship, the functionality it has is so fucking amazing that aesthetics goes out the window. deliver cheap 10000 cost in space cost reduction that instantly unlocks sci fi future with regular person being able to go to space, at least 100 probes to every major body in the solar system in the next years, manned missions to all and colonies in at least mars venus and moon, all the while making asteroid mining possible which will in turn generate an era of unprecedented wealth on earth becasue platinum can make clean cars and god tier advanced electronics also with 3d printing organs in orbit granting eternal life and moon helium eternal energy?

how can that rocket ever be ugly? never

>>11571251
he's hopping mad

>>11571251
I'm not that guy who put his pet frog in a rocket though.

I find it hard to believe that pic related scheduled to launch to the ISS next year. I haven’t been avidly following them, so I don’t know how far along they actually are, though.

>>11571285
who launchin it?

>>11571289
Ula

>>11571259
>kr-crack
>siiiiip
Yep. That's a rocket.

>>11571299
Elon confirmed boomer king

>>11571316
i cant believe this one is real

>>11571251
>WHEN WILL YOU FREAKIN' FREAKS LEARN THAT YOUR ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!
Disregarded.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEP1G6PcQO8

>>11571325
Sometimes it's hard to tell if it's real or not.

>>11571235
Too bad the USAF killed NASA via the shuttle. Now NASA is just a bunch or fat grant chasers. Regardless, the space shuttle was fucking sexy as hell.

>>11571335
>Too bad the USAF killed NASA via the shuttle.
How so? Sure, the USAF demanded some tough stuff for the Shuttle when NASA sold it to them, but NASA was the one who approached the USAF. NASA wouldn't have to go to the USAF for more money if they had the budget to develop it properly. The USAF was never really interested in the Shuttle. The real villains here were Congress and Nixon.

>Regardless, the space shuttle was fucking sexy as hell.
Can't argue against that. It does look nice.

>>11571235
>space frogs
today I shall remind them to follow their dreams

>>11571285
very far along. Remember, this was pretty much complete as a CREW transport when they lost the bid to SpaceX and Boeing. It wasn't much extra work to retool it for autonomous cargo transport.

>>11571343
USAF was basically like, "sure we will fund this, but it needs to be able to do this and that and this and of this to, even though you don't need any of that shit at all and we will never use it ourselves for the most part, but we want these options, oh and while you're at it, don't build anything else since you are under contract now"

>>11571343
The OMB were the real villains, not Nixon.

>>11571366
reminds me of that time some XVII century king went ahead and told the ship builders exactly how the ship should be, it turns out it was too top heavy, it sank like 5 minutes after leaving port.

>>11571384
The Vasa?

>>11571387
yeah that piece of shit

>>11571393
Swedish National Pride sunk along with that hunk of junk.

>>11571400
same as americans with the space shuttle

>>11571285
if this works it will be better than anything spacex has done yet, excited

>>11571343
>In March 1970, the White House issued a presidential statement on space saying that “what we do in space from here on in must become a normal and regular part of our national life and must therefore be planned in conjunction with all of the other undertakings which are also important to us.”

I see the logic, but space travel isn't relevant to national life until it is. It was hard to see the impact of airplanes in their infancy, and it was an open question if they could carry much more and go much further and if the common man had any business being on one.

Would be really shitty if mars 2020 determined there's an unignorable chance that life used to be on mars, and woops, we made no serious advances on how to send scientists there to operate so all you can do is trickle samples.

>>11571436
>unignorable chance that life used to be on mars
fuck alien life, just let me coom on another planet, contamination is good for us

>>11571436
>Would be really shitty if mars 2020 determined there's an unignorable chance that life used to be on mars

That’s nice but I’d rather see an apartment complex on Mars than look at some dead stromatolites.

>>11571429
what reduction of $ per passenger/kg is achieved compared to soyuz?

>>11571429
How is that so?

>>11571429
>Expendable launch on a Vulcan
>Clone of the Russian mini shuttle that failed to materialize
Do tell me more about how it revolutionize LEO.

>>11571515
The craft itself is reusable.

>>11571520
put it on a Falcon Heavy

>>11571520
yeah but the booster isnt, 85% of the cost gets lost.

this is more expensive than a dragon capsule

>>11571520
Technically, so is the dragon.
Dream Chaser is Kliper 2.0

>>11571525
Launch it on a reusable booster, then.

>>11571515
>>11571285
Question - is there anything stopping SNC from launching on falcon? why would they pay more than what is neccessary, is it a nasa regulations thing?
Plus ik they got shafted by nasa for cc but how likely do you guys think an eventual crewed variant is (obviously if starship isn't in the equation)

>>11571527
Dragon has to junk it’s service module

>>11571536
second stage still lost, just wait for starship they are what everyone wnants but applied but actual smart people that just do what is objectively righrt by science and dont worry about getting goverment c orruption money because they have skills that make them useful and dont have to steal to live

>>11571539
>Question - is there anything stopping SNC from launching on falcon?
IIRC the Falcon payload fairing is too narrow to fit Dream Chaser. SpaceX isn't going to make a new fairing without being paid, and SNC isn't going to pay for it.

Newest What About It has some bitching animation.

I hope the animation gets its own channel/updates.

>>11571541
so does dream chaser

>>11571578
>The Shooting Star carries pressurized and unpressurized cargo, as serves as power module (solar cells) for Dream Chaser.[7] The Shooting Star is similar to the Exoliner cargo container shown in Lockheed Martin’s Jupiter proposal for NASA’s CRS-2.
>At the end of mission, Shooting Star will destructive reenter the atmosphere and Dream Chaser lands at the Kennedy Space Center’s Shuttle Landing Facility.
Indeed it does.
Not quite so reusable as it says on the tin. Double that up with expendable launcher and it's about as revolutionary as my ass.

As for why it's not launched on a F9 or FH? It's not designed for it. It's not just a matter of strapping a crewed vehicle to a rocket and off you go. If it was just a payload that fit inside a fairing, that would be an entirely different matter.

>>11571589
I think cargo Dream Chaser goes in a fairing though.

>>11571599
With those glider wings? I doubt it. What fairing are they pack it in? The New Glenn?

>>11571589
>As for why it's not launched on a F9 or FH? It's not designed for it. It's not just a matter of strapping a crewed vehicle to a rocket and off you go. If it was just a payload that fit inside a fairing, that would be an entirely different matter.

So what you're telling me is, it's a reusable space craft that can only be launched from expendable rockets, and not even the cheap ones.

Trash.

>>11571556
>>11571589
>Dream Chaser will be reconfigured to fit in a New Glenn
Bezos will buy out ULA and put Musk out of business for good. LEO same day delivery with Amazon prime.

>>11571608
It'll get people to LEO from American soil if it works, same as Crew Dragon. That's something to get excited about.
But it's not revolutionary.

Reminder that Starship waifu is just fucking meta cooler

>>11571429
It won't, Dragon 2 exceeds it's capabilities in basically all metrics, it can carry the same number of maximum crew (7) and the minimal crew NASA will fly will be 4, higher than the 3 for Dreamchaser. Dragon 2 has one ton more payload capacity, and Dreamchaser will either carry crew or cargo, not both at once, it's listed crew with cargo aboard is 0. Twice as many Dragon 2 capsules have been manufactured. Dragon 2 will also fly crew first, assuming both vehicles stick to their schedules. While Dreamchaser will fly sometime around 2021, Dragon 2 is planned to fly crew sometime late next month.

>>11571603
It goes up in the fairing with it's wings folded up.

>>11571589
I hope that SNC can survive competition since i'm one of the "the more the merrier" guys, if they get a deal with New Glenn it will be cool, anything that can get the costs of space travel is good for me

>>11571631
Ah, I see. Well, in that case they might be launched on F9. Still, it might be a case of antitrust laws etc, wanting maximum redundancy.

>>11571634
Oh absolutely. Redundancy is good. I grew up during Challenger.

>>11571285
>SNC needs a larger fairing to launch on falcon
>wont pay for it
>will pay 10x the launch price for an atlas instead
something about this seems off...

>>11571635
>redundancy is good
Pioneers can't be redundant

>>11571645
There were tens of thousands of pioneers.

>>11571289
John Crichton

>>11571523
This.

results
over
rhetoric

Is there some limit on how big a fairing can be?

>>11571658
ULA's rockets are pretty fucking aesthetic, they might still suffer some of the oldspace issues but at least it's not S*S.

>>11571664
Combination of how much payload you actually want to pack into it, how much it's dry weight reduces your payload capacity, and whether that weight might throw off the balance of your rocket too much as it starts to empty out at higher altitude.

>>11571658
Agreed.

>>11571664
It's all relative to core stage diameter. Think about how big the Shuttle orbiter was and then compare it to the main tank.

>>11571665
Vulcan is sexy, especially with the new paintjob, but the name is retarded and gay. Though nothing beats the aesthetics of this bad boy.

>mini space station
>remotely operated science/commercial payloads
>1-2 commercial astronauts go up a few times a year to do maintenance, exchange payloads
>rest of the crew is tourists
>spacecraft used is dragon 2 or dreamchaser
profitable? y/n?

>>11571683
N. Tourism relies on economies of scale so with a mini station you'd need to charge fifty million a head. A rotating torus for tourists would be significantly cheaper per ticket and thus more sustainable.

>>11571578
god fucking dammit what a piece of shit, i thought it was a real honest to god airplane to space turns out hes like every other shitty aersospace project

>>11571687
>fifty million a head
that's what it costs already? people pay it.

>>11571689
Spaceplanes with chemical engines are never going to work right.

>>11571678
Fairings seem to be wider than the core stage itself sometimes. I was thinking more about height.

>>11571683
Nah, I'd start by building quite a large station of out modular components designed ahead of time and rent it to many companies to perform commercial research in zero gravity/microgravity material science. Use the profit to work out how to develop a space factory process to manufacture any interesting stuff discovered, cut deals with companies to let them use the station and it's factories. Use those profits to build more modules for habitation, design larger faster factory modules. Eventually send up multiple stations.

>>11571700
It's simply based on desired payload fraction and dynamics considerations. Bigger PLF = lower payload fraction but a larger payload.

>>11571683
Depends if they can launch it cheap

>>11571756
I was asking because I’ve launched rockets in KSP with whacking great fairings sometimes as large or even larger than the booster itself, but basically as long as you can carry the fairing’s weight it’s not an issue?

>>11571770
KSP doesn't really model friction. It's a fun little game about space frogs, but it's not a realistic model.

>>11571770
>it works i tested it in kspg

god dammit this cant be the average iq of americans, i mean sure some of you are smart but its a very VERY small elite the rest of you are astonishing stupid, like, an european schoolgrader can outperform americans with college degres easily

>>11571780
>KSP doesn't really model friction

*explodes from overheating*

>>11571782
I never said it’d work in real life because I “tested it in KSP”. I said it worked in KSP and asked if it’d work in real life.

Lying is bad, anon. Is lying part of non-American culture?

>>11571783
Yeah, that's not air friction interacting with a big ass fairing the size of your mother's ass.

>>11571789
look honey, he thinks he's not cringe worthy. Astonishing

>>11571770
If you're going to test it in KSP at least do it in RSS-RO-RP1 so you can begin to see some of the issues of a fuckhueg faring

>>11571789
ok retard whose flag is on the moon?

>>11571800
>whose flag is on the moon?
The flag of the best country in the world.

>>11571800
>ok retard whose flag is on the moon?
Thanks to solar bleaching? France's.

>>11571429
It's a lifting body capsule, zero implications for spaceflight, not exciting at all really.

>>11571805
Sorry fellow Chad American, I meant to reply to this smelly European
>>11571782

>>11571806
Reported to ESA, you're fucking dead kiddo

>>11571782
>europeans
>rocketry

>>11571815

>>11571812
No problem, fellow Chadmerican. Carry on.

>>11571800
There’s lots of flags if you count the little decals on rovers and landers, but the only actual physical flags are American, because America is better than Europe.

>>11571812
>>11571820
Damn it feels good to be a burger

>>11571790
So air friction prevents fairings from being too large in comparison to the booster?

>>11571658
The stars and stripes pattern is so fucking ugly and it's going to do nothing except add to cost.

>>11571821
>one full stage for every 10kg of payload

>>11571780
Ksp does model friction, in fact the aerodynamic model was completely overhauled more than once since the good old days of the soup-o-sphere.

>>11571831
yeah that's why they changed it you homosexual retard

>>11571821
Reminds me of Von Brauns old nazi engineering idea of making big staged rockets just by stacking scaled-up V2 rockets on top of one another, which due to the horrific Isp and structural inefficiency would require something significantly bigger than the Saturn V just to reach orbit

>>11571858
>Reminds me of Von Brauns old nazi engineering idea of making big staged rockets just by stacking scaled-up V2 rockets on top of one anothe
You mean this thing? IIRC it's also reusable.

>>11571858
Yeah, it's a fucking joke. It's like kids doing a 1:1000 kit of a Saturn V with their hybrid booster toy.
Here's a version with expected payload size.

>>11571866
how does it land?
Like falcon, like the shuttle, or in the ocean with a chute.

>>11571815
the american space program was lead by an european. Americans weren't into this, they tried to do it without help, they failed. The literal only way they could do it was by putting an european as boss and doing literally everything he said no question asked.

after that european was denied power america instantly lost space superiority, now its close to regaining it, because an african is helping them.

the only thing americans cant do is space. Objectively confirmed.

>>11571884
>americans are just europeans but with creative freedom
yeah i know lol

>>11571866
that's the grand daddy of the space shuttle, too bad von braun, aka the only competent engineer in america, died before it could be implemented, and well the space shuttle is a great illustration of what american engineer without an european to help them is like

>>11571877
https://www.wired.com/2014/09/wernher-von-brauns-fantastic-vision-ferry-rocket/
It lands like the Sea Dragon, where a skirt is deployed to increase cross-sectional area. This allowed spent stages to survive reentry and to have a mild terminal velocity.

Who will win the LSA Phase 2 bidding and why?

>>11571890
you can thank military and politicians for the bloated shuttle, not engineers

>>11572016
Imagine if we got the entire STS package...

>>11571806
Top kek

>>11571608
It’s just the sort of grant chasing piece of shit that NASA loves
Guarrenteed s a steady cost of hundreds of millions a year and so doing anything new has no budget

>>11571429
dumbass

>>11572219
>>11571608
I wish there were more people higher up in space flight to call out shit like this. Anything that's more expensive and less efficient than it needs to be should be shamed at this point.

>>11572235
>attain power in the '''space flight''' industry by lobbying, grant chasing and not stepping on toes
>keep doing those things
>???
>profit
There's just no value in it if you're not a disruptor

>>11571850
Christ that looks even more awful
What is wrong with flat anodized metal?

>>11572351
>anodized
wow that sounds expensive, let's just leave it in the white

>>11571640
Nasa covers all costs so it doesn’t matter

>>11571640
Probably the delay it would cause to design one maybe?

>>11571578
What is the point of Dreamchaser again? Is the market really clamoring for a reusable... What is this even? A kickstage?

>>11572456
It’s not really reusable it’s just a retarded capsule

>>11572456
we call it "falling with style"

>>11572456
The Shuttle established a REALLY low bar for reuseable spacecraft.

>>11571866
Was für eine absolute Mememaschine.

>three stages of fully reusable hypergolic space planes with parachutes

>>11572101
Imagine if they hadn‘t stopped developing the shuttle instead of adding tiny tweaks to the first prototype.

>>11572522
That will probably be the future CCP heavy lifter, but without the wings, and the parachutes.
And when it lands a rural chinese village gets scrapped from the map and the neighbour village peasants die from cancer.
>China will grow larger!!

>>11571894
>like the Sea Dragon
APOLOGIZE

What are the intellectual and scientific advantages of sleeping in a cube like Elon Musk does?

>>11572522
>German
This is a Flüssigkeitrückflugrakete. It flüssigkeits the rakete so it can rückflug.

>>11571894
sea dragon doesnt land you idiot, it doesnt need to land to be economically convenient, its so dirt cheap that it doesnt need to go trough such gay trouble as "reuse" or blowing up ten trillion water towers for god knows what reasons, its just cheap cause its fuck huge and theres no engineering subtelties, nothing requires precision or "space worthy" stuff thats vulnerable to goverment corruption, only way you could go cheaper is if you took all the fuel needed for 100.000.000 shuttle flights with walls 8 meter thick made out cheap steel and put it under a couple of huge fusion bombs to achieve orbit, there you go, you only polute a small part of the desert but for a couple of bucks you have enough fuel for eternity.

>>11572552
that nazi engineer clearly invented a time machine and is now elon musk

>>11572568
>sea dragon doesnt land
False. In fact, reuse is possible because it's so big. It allows the rocket to have a large cross-section relative to it's dry mass thus giving it a low enough terminal velocity with an inflatable skirt to land in the ocean in once piece. The landing allows for faster and therefore cheaper launches, because even though the rocket would be the cheapest per unit mass of payload it's still incredibly massive and expensive per launch.

>>11572591
why would you need to land it tough? the whole rocket cost less than 4 months wage of the janitor

>>11572598
>why would you need to land it tough?
Why not? Turn it around and ship it back out faster.

>>11572549
1d6 random stat bonus on wakeup

>>11572598
>the whole rocket cost less than 4 months wage of the janitor
No? The projected launch cost would be ~$2.62B in 2020 currency.

>>11572607
yeah but thats less than 0.5 cents per thousand kg to orbit, just keep making more, no need to add expense via recovery

>>11572621
Are you brain damaged?

>>11572621
>janitors get paid $2.62B every 4 months
>2.62e9 divided by 500 equals 0.5
Are you okay?

>>11572621
You're doing shelbyposting wrong, sea dragon is too ambitious

>>11572637
you having sex is too ambitious

>>11572672
lmao fucking gottem

>>11572672
my only girlfriend is mars, dad

>>11572672
wrekted

>>11572687
Girls come from venus u faggot

>>11571443
>>11571447
Colonization isn't happening unless you can come up with an export for mars. There are people crazy enough to want to live on mars, but no one crazy enough to pay for it without getting something.

>>11572572
>time machine
Don't you mean the Polizeikabinezeittransport?

>>11572736
>he doesn't want a martian girlfriend (male)
i bet your dick isn't even reusable

>>11572767
I just don't understand this reusable penis meme.

>>11572764
Martian exports will dominate space if the infrastructure is set up. You have access to most of the same raw resources as Earth but the launch penalty is insanely low in comparison.

>>11572764
Bees will be the chief export of Mars when the last natural bee on Earth dies.

>>11571429
>Launch inside a faring of an expendable rocket
>No retropropulsion landing
>Can only use on Earth
>Excited
Dumbass

>>11572788
We can just artificially maintain the gay bee population.

>>11572767
>>11572687
>>11572672

I just don't understand this reusable girlfriends meme.

The amount of money you can save from reusing women isn’t enough to justify how much harder it makes it to do the emotional labour that usually gets you laid in the dating world. I’m sure one day reusability will be more effective, but the truth is that when you have all the challenges that come with relationships in general, it’s almost always much more effective to throw away the woman after she's done her job than to figure out how to make dating part of the mission. I know of no major technology on the near term horizon that would change that.

>>11572831

>>11572456
It pulls less g’s on reentry and landing compared to capsules, so your experiments don’t get destroyed on the way down.

>>11572764
>Muh exports

Colonization is for fun

>>11572897
less than starship?, i was told starship reentry deceleration would be less than 0.5g, survivable by a severe trauma patient.

>>11572897
Muh experiments
50 years of that

>>11572906
But we don't want to hurt the space grown roses. That might alter how they smell. Think of the grant money lost from this, anon! Think of the grant money!

>>11572764
the ultimate goal of starship is to make martian settlement so cheap that pretty much anyone could fund it themselves. If you get the cost of a ticket cheap enough the main export will simply be lebensraum for those crazies. Once kids start being born there in large numbers, you don't really need the crazies or the exports, you're pretty far down the road to self sufficiency. Early days, though, science is still a pretty lucrative export. Funding a human colony is a much better return on investment for someone researching mars than any rover ever launched.

>>11572922
I envision the top Mars industries being

>science
>precious metals
>tourism

in no particular order.

There are probably at least a couple people that would be willing to pay a billion dollars for a round trip ticket first class.

>>11572831
lel

>>11572910
>space roses
>growing in a continuous environment of sweaty astronauts swimming in their own recycled BO
imagine the smell

>>11572941
Short term, science/tourism/celebrity. Mid-long term, shit like steel and cracked fuel throughout the inner solar system outside Earth.

>>11572922
1st of all, it will be the base for all space exploration, including asteroid mining which WILL BE lucrative.

i love how people think that tons of platinum which could make cars so efficient they will consume negative energy will suddenly stop being worth it because le hurr le durr economics. stupid idiots

2 nd of all, you have no idea hwat science they can produce. only superior people who read science fiction like me will go, imagine a place 100% populated by science fiction geeks, not retarded idiots from colleges brainwashed by mainstream media but actual geniuses, 100% that. that will be a genius invention factory, if there is ftl travel it will be discovered within the first 10 years, mark my words it will have a ratio of science bigger than 20.000 times better thn ours, just hope stupid feminism standards of beauty dont get there

>>11572954
>platinum which could make cars so efficient they will consume negative energy
kek
at best it allows you to get away with less expensive fuel cells, which doesn't matter for cars because it's a dead end tech in that sphere. useful for aerospace and other applications, though.

and no it wouldn't become completely worthless, but being useful does not make something inherently valuable. aluminum is ridiculously useful, but so plentiful that it doesn't matter. platinum is more niche in uses, and even if you could find a hundred times more uses for it with oversupply, there would still be more than enough to tank the value with a massive glut.

this is not an argument against asteroid mining, mind you, just an attempt to temper the hype. i for one welcome a world full of platinum so cheap it becomes gauche.

>>11572456
it's just a really big and heavy capsule that lands on a runway instead of splashing down in the ocean

>>11572952
My theory is that the biggest bottleneck for industry on earth is going to be metals for electronics.

So if a Mars colony can find gold/platinum and just start shipping bars of that shit back to earth, that'll go a long way towards paying for everything.

>>11572903
Starship reentry should be about 5 g or so, less than 1 g is impossible

>>11572782
>but the launch penalty is insanely low in comparison.

And the no atmospheric pressure penalty is very high. The entire economy and supply chain has to be redesigned to work in an inhospitable environment.

>>11572946
>when you float by a female astronaut's sleeping pod

>>11573005
A thin atmosphere is great. No rust.

>>11573005
It depends on where you're exporting to.

If you're exporting to earth, there's no way you'll be able to compete because cost of living on earth is so low.

Anywhere else in the solar system, Mars will be king, because it's so much easier to get stuff from Mars to somewhere else.

So in the mid 21st century when people start chilling in Europa or the asteroid belt or wherever, they'll be getting most of their shit from Mars.

>>11572982
>less than 1 g is impossible
Tagh, why you rub stick, dont you know fire with no lighting impossible? tahg you crazy

>>11573005
An atmosphere substantial enough to aerobrake on but thin enough to cause negligible drag means you also get train/sled/maglevs with the benefits of an evacuated cylinder without needing to bury or isolate anything - cheap, hyper efficient travel with a huge throughput.

>>11573011
it's not a thin atmosphere, it's a fucking vacuum for every other purpose other than putting out huge fucking fans that can scoop cubic kilometers of nothingness for a few molecules that are needed to make oxygen, and for aerobreaking, thats it, for any other purpose its a vacuum.

You need very very specialized and sensitive lab equipment to even tell apart mars atmosphere from a total vacuum.

no rust? ok, but still the full force of the sun without any atmosphere shielding and 100 -100 degree heat cycles. thats hell for any material

>>11573084
>thats hell for any material
you haven't taken the steel pill

>>11573084
>no rust? ok, but still the full force of the sun without any atmosphere shielding and 100 -100 degree heat cycles. thats hell for any material

Just throw some dirt on top lol

>>11573084
>You need very very specialized and sensitive lab equipment to even tell apart mars atmosphere from a total vacuum

You're thinking of the Moon.

Mars is like 0.6% the density of Earth's atmosphere.

Not much by earth standards, but still enough that you have basically unlimited air if you want it.

>>11573095
>>11573102
>but still enough that you have basically unlimited air if you want it.
yeah, unlimited if you process the volume of new york each month and have 50 nuclear reactors working at all times.

youd need an industrial base bigger than earth basically to keep anything more than a small handful of humans there

Venus > mars

>>11573107
>source: my ass

>>11573114
it's my ass versus your ass then, mine is cleaner and isnt fucked by trannies

>>11572552
>keitrück
cute

>>11573109
Venus is a tourist trap. Of all the places you could go in the solar system, why pick the one where you not only have to navigate a gravity well the size of Earth's, but you basically have no access to the ground (and thus any raw resources you can't pull out of the atmosphere) once you get there? It's pointless.

>>11573107
I can't tell if you're trolling or genuinely ignorant.

In case it's the latter, it takes about 150 cubic feet of Martian atmosphere to equal the density of one foot of Earth atmosphere.

A decently powerful fan could suck up enough atmosphere to support a human pretty quickly.

You'd have to turn the CO2 to O2 and possibly increase the amount of nitrogen (optional but it makes fires less likely) but it's not really all that difficult compared to getting to Mars.

>>11573126
Why bother processing the atmosphere, at least past the initial period? There’s assloads of oxygen stored in the fucking rocks, which would be produced as a byproduct of any smelting.

>>11573131
The plants need CO2 to grow.

You pump CO2 into the greenhouses at a steady rate, and then bleed off O2 from the greenhouses for the colonists to breathe.

You could also get a shitload from the ground, but it's a por que no los dos situation.

Ideally you'd constantly be increasing the stockpile of breathable air on the planet, and not losing any of it, because it's a closed cycle.

Boeing created Covid19 so they could get a bailout to pay for OFT2.

It's all coming together.

>>11572367
>they already anodize every tank part of Atlas and Delta, and will be anodizing Vulcan too

>>11573139
weren't they left out of the bailout anyway?

>>11572549

You can use the cube as a suspension point for rope bondage and other kinky shit, which together with one's career and exterior life make one feel self-actualized, a positive psychological benefit which redounds to the latter with scientifically measurable positive effects.

>>11572922
Well that's just not going to happen. Popping kids doesn't make anything sufficient. You need to be able to survive, extract material, refine material, manufacturer shit, and trade something to earth and receive back what you can't make on mars. And you have to do this while keeping everyone pressurized. And there's so many unknown variables like is the gravity even enough.

>>11571866
That thing was actually a later, more refined version. The thing I'm talking about literally had a 6000 ton first stage shaped about the same as a V2 except way way larger, and instead of stages stacked one on top of the other, the remainder of the stack was INSIDE the first stage, in a payload faring. Each subsequent stage also had its own payload faring which held the next, and so on. Completely inefficient in every way, but it's what he knew. I'm going to dub this style of vehicle design matryoshka staging, arguably the least optimized style of building a multi stage rocket.

>>11573173
there's a grace period in which any death on the colony will be a national tragedy so the us goverment will input thousand of trillions of dollars to ensure it wont happen, they will probably cap it at 20 people with supplies for 20.000. But when it reaches 50 people and 10 have already died there is free fora ll no one will give a shit about it}. oon the contrary more people will be expecting deaths as a macabre entertainment than the people who will be rooting for them out of some dumb nationalist feeling

>>11573058
Yeah but you're competing against earth to earth which doesn't use rockets to transport goods at all

>>11572544
The problem with Sea Dragon was never the recovery method, since it also used a skirt (which is rarely mentioned). The problem with Sea Dragon is that single engines that large are impossible, sorry to burst the bubble. Truax, who designed Sea Dragon, had no idea that combustion instability at large scales was even a thing. This is partially because Sea Dragon was a contemporary design to Saturn V, and information regarding the issues with developing the F-1 was not public information yet.

What's the best reply to comments like these?

>>11573186
something something Africa

>>11573173
once there are kids there you don't need to be self sufficient because 'won't somebody think of the children' - we're no longer talking about some nutjobs who chose to live in a barren wasteland but an actual society of people who didn't choose to be born into circumstance, and if you think earth would let them starve to death, you're severely mistaken

>>11572982
>5g
Maybe on interplanetary aerocapture, but during normal LEO reentry it shouldn't go higher than 2.5 g, because even though it belly-flops it has significant lift authority and can stay in the upper atmosphere for a very long time to bleed off speed.

>>11573183
Both Earth and Mars need rockets to deliver goods anywhere else, but Mars has the obvious advantage there. My point is that it has a less obvious advantage in cis-mars transport as well, overland travel much faster and more efficient than you can get on Earth without a massive disparity in input (infrastructure, maintenance). No rockets needed, just batteries and/or powered rail.

>>11573126
not that anon, but my initial point was the delta P. Imagine every industry on earth, except now you have to figure out how to do it with large pressure differences. Maybe not so tough for indoor industries, but outdoor ones will be a bitch. The only thing harder would be to do that stuff underwater. And it's not just about overcoming these things. You can't be a sunken cost. You have to do this and export to earth.

>>11573005
Having a thin atmosphere and Mars gravity lets you do reusable single stage to orbit and back with a delta V budget of just 3500 m/s or so. It's pretty much the ideal environment for launch, low gravity that greatly reduces low orbit velocity as well as gravity losses, and an atmosphere to almost completely eliminate the orbit-to-surface delta V.

>>11573186
"I'm glad you also support gassing all nonwhites."

>>11573107
A ten horsepower pump could compress and liquefy several hundred tons of CO2 from the atmosphere into a tank in a day or two.
Source; Robby Z, author of Mars direct.

>>11573191
If you get pregnant on the mars expedition you're getting an abortion or coming home in the next launch window

Do we even know about the low gravity jelly baby situation yet?

>>11573209
long before anyone is legally allowed to breed in space there will be thousand of studies with monkeys in rotating stations gradually reducing the amount of gravity, and when a safe margin for animals is established they will try it on a volunteer (or a hot woman convicted to rape punishment if the legal system continues the way its going)

>>11573122
Worse than pointless, it'd permanently focus our already limited resources on a dead end in space colonization. The Moon sucks, but at least it's very very easy to go from the Moon to anywhere, meaning once the Moon is colonized we can start colonizing pretty much everything as a second step. Mars is even better, possessing more resources and having closer proximity to the asteroid belt, but is harder to quickly colonize because it's further from Earth.

Basically it's like, spend 10 points on colonizing Moon and unlock the solar system for 15, or spend 15 points on colonizing Mars and unlock the solar system for 10, or spend 100 on colonizing Venus and 100 on the solar system, unless you go on to colonize Moon or Mars as your true jumping off point, in which case congratulations you wasted 100 points colonizing Venus first.

>>11573186
The US yearly spends on the order of hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars trying to solve social problems just within it's own borders. Space flight would be lucky just to see just ten billion in a year. Think about how much the US solves it's social problems. Think of all the inequality, poverty, sick, hungry, and disenfranchised just in the US alone. Now, think of that space flight has and can achieve with just that small amount of money, relatively speaking. Think about all of the great technical achievements American space flight; landing complicated probes on Mars, sending people to the moon, studied the solar system for alien life, and much more. Think about what space flight can do; sending people to the moon and Mars not just for a photo-shoot but to live on, establishing industry in the most inhospitable environments ever encountered, and tapping into resources that could free us from having to carve up the Earth. All just in American space flight alone AND only seeing ten billion per year.

Which seems like the more worthwhile investment?

>>11573216
>ten billion per year
For some reason I got my numbers mixed up. It's twenty, not ten.

>>11573214
>real life is a video game

Uh no now excuse me I’ll be in my balloon habitat

>>11573173
>m-muh gravity

Gravity is a health hazard. The less, the better.

>>11573209
Abortion is murder and anyone who performs one deserves death

>>11573122
venus would be like the space shuttle all over again, a huge wasteful dead end project that would look innovative to the untrained eye and would commit endless resources.

i imagine they would spend 200 billion building a shitty habitat floating on a balloon where 5 people live, it will have all sort of problems because its insanely retardedly hard but they cant let "our folks" die there so they would keep sinking resources into that, in the end after enough people and money were wasted the america would ahve to ask permission from the russian to use their less impressive but much more efficient lunar colony like they do today with the soyuz

>>11573131
CO2 is very very convenient because it's easy to acquire, process into sufficiently pure form, and then extract oxygen from, both on a kilojoules per kilogram oxygen yield basis and a physical process hardware basis.

Simply flow high pressure CO2 into a pyrolysis chamber and separate the oxygen from the carbon monoxide produced. Dump the carbon monoxide waste, and keep the oxygen. All reactants and products are all gasses at all times except for the initial purification step wherein you compress the atmosphere to the point of condensation and siphon off the liquid CO2. To accomplish this you need an air pump, a filter, a condenser, a pyrolyser, and a fractional distillation tower to separate the oxygen from the waste. Literally could not be easier, even hydrolysis of water is more complex, especially the acquisition part. Extraction of oxygen from minerals would be a nightmare, minerals melt into gooey dirty slag and are never consistent.

The machine needed to make oxygen from Mars' atmosphere fits into a box no bigger than five cubic meters, and works as soon as it's on Mars and plugged in. It requires zero operating support, except perhaps a filter change once every few months and of course periodic maintenance like any other machine.

>>11573224
no, fetus has no nerve endings, no conciousnes, its cells from the mother.

your skin has cells, when you scratch them yoou kill them, dont scratch or youre either a murder or a hypocrite

>>11573227
And that Venus habitat will continually expand itself just from printing plastics from the atmosphere
Plus mining operations on the plateau

>>11573233
sure, and the space shuttle will usher us into a new era of reusability, we just need 100 billion more and 100 dead astronauts, but it will be soooo reusable it will be worth it!

>>11573231
> no, fetus has no nerve endings

Wrong. The nervous system begins forming within the first month, and unborn babies are able to survive with the assistance of technology outside of the mother by the age of 22 weeks.

> no conciousnes

Consciousness can not be measured, so you should not involve it in any empirical discussion.

> its cells from the mother.

Wrong. The cells of an unborn baby are very distinct genetically and the placenta has to emit immunosuppressives to prevent the mother’s immune system from attacking it, because it’s a foreign body, not part of the mother.

> your skin has cells, when you scratch them yoou kill them

Skin cells aren’t unborn babies.
There exists no actual distinction between a fetus and a baby except for their physical location in space, and deeming lives forfeit because of their physical location in space is delusional and evil. You’ve been brainwashed.

>>11573235
Closer to earth
More sun
An atmosphere
Don’t be greedy

>>11573237
doesnt matter if youre uneducated, abortion is coming, its the truth, you will go down into history as retarded christians who thought the sun was a cube or something, thats what gonna happen like it or not

>>11573239
you need to have a fucking balloon working on you 100% of the time, no access to raw materials.

no way americans can design something so intricate that works reliably

>>11573224
>>11573231
>>11573237
>>11573241
Could you guys take this to another thread?

The only kind of abortion that's /sci/ is jello babies.

>>11573220
>implying all strategy games aren't fundamentally just simplified versions of real world restrictions and problems
>implying that it wouldn't be worth it to colonize lower gravity worlds first anyway even if Mars were a perfect garden of Eden
>implying having human civilization growing on even a single lower gravity world than Earth wouldn't immediately result in a rapid acceleration of the number of colonized objects and development of technology overall
>implying colonizing Venus would even be worth it when you could turn a small asteroid into more living space by building orbital habitats out of its mass, both more easily and much faster than trying to fill Venus' atmosphere with floating 'cities'
Enjoy your permanent resource anemia and zero contribution to Humanity overall. I'll be on Mars using 4500 ton rapidly reusable SSTO vehicles to launch 1200 ton payloads into orbit to support the strip mining of Phobos and Deimos in order to produce the basalt fiber and sheet steel necessary to supply the orbital habitat construction effort going on in Mars surface-stationary orbit.

>/sfg/ Space Fetus General

>>11573242
Good thing balloons have no issue working 100% of the time...

>>11573241
>u-ur dumb n stoopid

I’m atheist, and everything you said about the nature of the fetus was a demonstrable lie. Discussion over.

>>11573224
Anyone who believes in free will should be locked up in an insane asylum, nobody makes choices and even if they did the choices they'd make wouldn't matter anyway

>>11573243
no need, i already destroted the ass of that stupid christian, if you notice hes the one who brought it here. All space babies will bea borted as fit, becauise its 100% confirmed scientficially that its 0% concious or murder and theres NOTHING that wrong person who is an idiot can do about it.

talk what you must, action is not decided by your kind not it never will be don

>>11573246
NOOOOO YOU CANT DEFILE THE NATURAL STATE OF THOSE CELESTIAL BODIES ITS IMPERIALISM

>>11573248
>>11573249
seethe harder

>>11573233
Downvoted for science fiction

>>11573251
>no need, i already destroted the ass of that stupid christian, if you notice hes the one who brought it here. All space babies will bea borted as fit, becauise its 100% confirmed scientficially that its 0% concious or murder and theres NOTHING that wrong person who is an idiot can do about it.

Is this parody?

>>11573259
You'll be the one seething when you're sizzling on the way down.

>>11573246
>I'll be on Mars using 4500 ton rapidly reusable SSTO vehicles to launch 1200 ton payloads into orbit

I just now realized that low gravity and no atmosphere will allow for retardedly large rockets on Mars.

You could launch an entire space station into the asteroid belt in one go, ship all the platinum group asteroids back to Mars, turn them into bars of pure platinum and gold in Martian foundries, and then send that shit straight to earth in exchange for hookers and blow.

>>11573264
You could also make buildings ridiculously large

>>11573186
GRB, Yellowstone, bat soup v2 etc.

>>11573265
The real limit would be pressurization.

Mars has all the ingredients to make polyethyelene.

There's nothing stopping Mars colonists from building Dyneema domes the size of mountains, except for the high probability of some retard shooting through it with a bow and arrow or some shit.

>>11573267
Wouldn’t gamma ray bursts kill Mars too?
They can’t be that narrow. If they are, then it’s basically worrying that someone is going to hit you with a laser pointer from the moon

>>11573263
you = stupid idiot saying stupid things who

me = the way of the future, my word shall be action

this = the only objective truth that will happen (sunny) weather you like it or not.

your ass = destroyed, wrecked, wrektetkonated to the maxymax

>>11573269
>There's nothing stopping Mars colonists from building Dyneema domes the size of mountains, except for the high probability of some retard shooting through it with a bow and arrow or some shit.

Finally somewhere to keep the anarcho-primitivists

>>11573270
Mars is a stepping stone. An important one but not the "end goal".

>>11573247
Speaking of, pic related was generated by that derp learning network a day or two ago.

>>11573264
>no atmosphere
Thin atmosphere, 0.6% of Earth sea level is still a considerable amount of atmosphere. This is a good thing, because a thin atmosphere lets you land essentially for free by aerobraking, while hardly hampering your launch to orbit at all, you don't even need to worry about having separate engines for ground level vs vacuum.

I did the autistic math required a few days ago, and found that a vehicle using 10 SpaceX Raptor engines optimized for vacuum, taking pessimistic Isp and thrust figures, could lift off with a local thrust to weight ratio of 1.2 and reach orbit with a payload of 1300 tons, of which 100 tons would actually be landing propellant for later. This thing would have a payload mass fraction sitting on the ground of 29%, and a structural mass fraction of 15.6% (very doable especially with the very large propellant volume and minimal aerodynamic considerations needed and the lower gravity overall). I also figured out that with a single secondary flight to refuel the first, this SSTO gets 900 tons to Phobos, and with two refueling flights can get 200 tons to Deimos. I also found that during landing, the thing has an effective dry weight of 1850 kN, which means the vehicle can land on a single Raptor Vac engine (but I envisioned it having two mounted close to the middle of the vehicle anyway, for redundancy).

Just to be clear, using nothign but modern technology, we could build a Mars SSTO that masses about 500 tons LESS than the full Starship Super Heavy stack will on Earth, but places over 8.6 times the OPTIMISTIC SSH payload mass into orbit. That is to say, it's a gigantic improvement, and we don't need any magic for anything whatsoever.

>>11573276
It would be very cool if the future government hunted down and trapped all anarcho-primitivists on Earth in order to transport them into space and lock them inside of hyper specialized rotating space habitats containing entire ecosystems, each one being sent off to other star systems via a massive fusion propulsion section once the population inside reached 200.
>Go be backwards somewhere 5000 lightyears away, please.

>>11573300
I’m not sure I could morally justify doing so to myself unless they were all sterilized. I don’t like the idea of trapping new people into such an existence where they have a high chance of dying before adulthood.

>>11573293
So many posts talking about how easy it is to get something off mars but what is that thing supposed to be?

>>11573316
Metals for export, building materials, spacecraft, whatever.

>>11573280
Correct, and in that respect, every object in our solar system is a stepping stone, which we will need to use in one way or another to escape the solar system as a whole and begin to use alien stars as stepping stones to colonizing the galaxy. Once enough of the galaxy is colonized, specifically along very long 'lanes' of systems, we can use those lanes as accelerator tracks (via laser propulsion) to launch huge fleets of huge spacecraft with huge populations at huge velocity to other galaxies.

The end goal is to colonize everything. The argument about Mars vs Moon, and more recently Mars vs Moon vs Venus, has NEVER been about which one to colonize and which ones not to. It's always been about which one is the best FIRST colonization target. It's about which one will allow us to do the most in terms of expanding into space, faster, cheaper, and in a more robust manner. Venus is totally not on the table for those purposes, because it's basically Earth Launch Economy 2.0, with worse resources and worse atmosphere and worse regional space weather and no moon. Moon is obviously a moon already, but it's also got very low gravity and is obviously very close. Mars on the other hand, apart from the proximity, has all the best qualities. It's got more gravity than Moon, but the atmosphere means that a round trip to orbit and back from Mars is actually less difficult than the same on the Moon, in terms of delta V. The atmosphere and ground volatiles make fuel production straightforward, whereas Moon is ultra dry (the lunar poles have only a very exhaustible supply of water and maybe some CO2). Mars is closer to the asteroid belt, and even has two tiny asteroid like moons to exploit.

Mars is clearly the best option, but really Moon is so close we should just start doing both at once, especially since any rocket that can do Mars can get to the Moon anyway. Venus is for faggots.

>>11573288
Looks like some kind of Metroid Prime phazon bug creature or something

>>11573316
Anything and everything people further out from the sun need. The delta-V to get something from the surface of Mars to, say, Ceres or Ganymede is tiny compared to what's needed from the surface of Earth.

>>11573315
You'd only send adults. Everyone knows unborn children cannot be morally considered because otherwise it becomes impossible to punish anyone for anything ever.
>You want to lock me up? Wow, so you're just going to delete a gigantic number of potential offspring who likely wouldn't do anything wrong?
Also, consider literally any country on Earth with a low standard of living. If you do not advocate for the immediate sterilization of their entire population you're a hypocrite. If however you DO advocate for that, that's pretty fucking based.

>>11573324
The easiest case for mars is raw materials, any kind of refining or manufacturing makes it harder to stay in the black. So for the sake of argument, let's say that there's something you can mine on mars for cheaper than you can mine on earth, which I don't think is likely but whatever. It's a piss easy launch, but how do you land it on earth? You still have to contend with the difficulties of earth re-entry.

I think you guys are just too focused on how easy it is to get and and off mars and ignoring what's before and after that. Yeah you can launch a megastructure from mars easily, but building a megastructure's components from a martian supply chain instead of an earth supply chain is massively more difficult if not impossible. And anything you need to import from earth negates any advantage you gained from easier launch conditions.

>>11573316
Sheet steel to weld into big propellant tanks and rotating habitats to assemble into giant slowboat colony ships that can cruise out to Ceres and set up fuel factories and enough ISRU equipment to build some big surface bases until the planets align and it can move on to Jupiter, doing the same thing all over again but with more practice this time, and keep going outward to Saturn and Uranus and Neptune and the Kuiper belt, all on just chemical propulsion. Of course it wouldn't be alone, there would be fleets of dozens and hundreds of these ships not just moving outwards but moving back inwards as people wish to emigrate and immigrate around the solar system. If in the mean time while this is happening we develop better propulsion systems for large and small vehicles the old ships will be retired as museums or simply parked in a comfortable orbit to continue to house people or even get refitted with fancy new engines. Using this model with fusion rockets lets us colonize the whole galaxy given enough time, and with the eventual development of laser highways and black hole engines we can go further and begin colonizing other galaxies as well.

>>11573328
It's probably a very young derp learning network and hasn't seen much yet.

Maxar and JPL are collaborating to turn (essentially) a commercial GEO satellite into a solar electric probe to explore Psyche

>>11573343
>Also, consider literally any country on Earth with a low standard of living. If you do not advocate for the immediate sterilization of their entire population you're a hypocrite

Somalia has lower infant mortality than prehistoric people.

>>11573331
Launching from Mars to anywhere is straight up a 6 km/s slash off of your required delta V budget. For some destinations even this isn't enough, but in those cases all you do is refuel in a highly elliptical Mars orbit and boost away with full tanks. Since pretty much all rockets will always have good wet-dry mass ratios with payload excluded, SSTOs even on low gravity worlds will always have at least 6 km/s of delta V when carrying no payload, simply because it means you can really bloatmaxx the payload mass fraction and still get to orbit easily.

>>11573417
What's this?

>>11573423
Doesn't matter, it's still objectively shittier than first world living standards. In fact according to your opinion it would make sense to sterilize everyone on Earth because none of us are living in a utopian post-scarcity society of space faring godlike beings that reshape the cosmos in their image and bend the laws of physics to their will.

>>11573431
Maxar and JPL collaborating on turning a commercial GEO satellite bus (pictured) into a solar electric probe to explore the asteroid Psyche

>>11573431
>Doesn't matter, it's still objectively shittier than first world living standards.

Good enough for me.
Sadly for you, you don’t decide my standards for acceptable wellbeing, so your cringe argument fails

>>11573436
Who said it was my argument? I wouldn't advocate for sterilization of any population, even if they had terrible living standards or completely self destructive backwards ideologies or were jewish.

Remember to exercise

I'm nervous, bros. Are we really going back to the Moon this decade?

>>11573659
If you can count on one thing it's Donald Trump's willingness to spend money to accomplish vanity projects. We'll have men on the moon by the 2024 election.

>>11573662
If he loses in November, Artemis goes Constellation 2.0. Fucking guarantee it.

>>11573659
I sure hope so. My daughters will be old enough to understand what’s going if they saw it in 2024

>>11572967
But why? Capsule has a much less complicated reentry. And Starliner can also land on land. Dragon could also do this in theory if Nasa let them and the motors don‘t blow up.

>>11573670

>having daughters

You have my pity.

>>11573693
It’s fun

>>11573662
There is no increased budget for that and no amount of money makes these bureaucrats move faster
Everyone at NASA is going to be a hardcore never trumper or democrat so you can imagine they don’t want to see a man on the moon by 2025

>>11573724
What are you talking about? The material is coming along steadily if slowly

>>11573727
There’s like 3 launches they need to do before they shoot for the moon

>>11573300
That's very myopic of you, it's more the other way around: techno enthusiasts will colonize space and with time Earth will lose importance to eventually become a backwater place inhabited only by old fashioned people, eco fanatics and so on.

>>11573370
Actually better than cyber truck

>>11573361
Yes, the idea Earth could import raw materials from Mars is very unrealistic.
Anyway if space colonization takes root there will be demand in space itself, to build big structures.

>>11573889
How so? By the time we have in situ extraction large enough on Mars to extract a significant enough amount of tactical resources that it actually matters, we're probably at the point where Mars' gravity well is of no consequence for sending a payload back.

>>11571814
ESA will probably surrender as well, so the other Anon can play with their rockets

>>11573872
There's a lot of that in sci-fi stories.

>>11573911
>at the point where Mars' gravity well is of no consequence
Let's see...even on Earth the cost of launches isn't really the fuel. It is the device itself. Mars' escape velocity is 2.63x less than Earth's so that helps at least for fuel and type of device. It might also help for sci-fi type solutions like a space elevator, though you'd need to get rid of the two moons for something like that to work. That might be fairly easy considering how tiny those moons are...

...barring that sort of sci-fi tech, 4.25km/s escape velocity may be easily achieved using a ground-based mass launcher of some type. Like a HARP/SHARP guns, which should work easily. No need for removing the moons with that...

>On November 18, 1966, the HARP gun operated by BRL at Yuma Proving Ground launched an 84-kg Martlet 2 missile at 2,100 m/s, sending it briefly into space and setting a world altitude record of 179 km. This feat has remained the world altitude record for any fired projectile.[4][16][23]
>2,100 m/s (slightly less than half the velocity needed for Mars escape)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP

>Headed by John Hunter, the SHARP gun fired projectiles using expanding hydrogen and achieved velocities of 3 km/s (6,700 mph) or Mach 8.8 for 5 kg (11 lb) projectiles. Had the project continued, there were plans to elevate the tube and begin space launch trials potentially reaching speeds of up to 7 km/s (16,000 mph), or about Mach 21.[1]
>3km/s (nearly the velocity needed to escape)
>7km/s (this would be the money maker for Mars mass launching)
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_High_Altitude_Research_Project

With Mars' nearly non-existent thin atmosphere I bet those velocities would be far better. Too bad such gun-launch systems are for such small payloads. Mars blow better be some damn good shit if you can only launch 5kg of it at a time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-rocket_spacelaunch

>>11573960
What I'm saying is that any real resource extraction from Mars is a long way in the future. By that time, our current rocket technology is most likely like the fucking VW Beetle is to us today.
While the physics involved may not change, our transports will.

>>11573361
>how do you land it on earth
You don't because that's retarded. Mars' sphere of influence is basically everything outside of Earth's gravity well. I don't know how you missed the point so badly. From one point to another within the same gravity well you obviously don't give a shit that the source is in that gravity well, so no competitive advantage exists. From that point to anywhere outside of it, you suddenly do, and living inside a massive gravity well becomes a massive disadvantage.

>>11573960
>Let's see...even on Earth the cost of launches isn't really the fuel. It is the device itself.
Which changes with full reuse. Even an expensive craft's lifetime price becomes fuel and maintenance dominated over sufficient launch cycles. There's no reason anything designed for use from Mars should be vehicle-dominated in cost save for prototypes or oldspace-tier design choices.

>>11574006
i am pretty sure an airplane or helicopter flight costs much more than just what you have to pay for the fuel

>>11571850
Jesus fuck it's like a penguin

>>11574091
Going a long way in a big plane? Fuel is your dominate cost. Then you have maintenance and labor and that's basically your main cost drivers and anything left over is not relevant to the comparison anyway. But regardless, the up front cost of the aircraft is not the cost driver. This would also be true of any decent hauler rocket.

>>11573122
Venus COULD have probes come in and deploy chemicals that radically change the atmosphere into something safer for humans to survive in. Like autonomous drones that fly in, juuust skirt past the stupidly thick atmosphere, launch chemical payloads, and return to the mother probe for refueling and recharging. This would certainly be after humanity establishes a working Mars society though

>>11573991
>I don't know how you missed the point so badly.

no u. You can't start a martian colony without an export to earth. Your response of "the point isn't to trade with earth dumb dumb" reveals your 75 IQ. Earth isn't going to take massive sunken costs to build an infrastructure on mars it can't benefit from.

>Mars' sphere of influence is basically everything outside of Earth's gravity well.

Then there's no way you can go directly to mars and colonize it. You need to require something else in the solar system that mars can get easier, or mars needs a customer somewhere else in the solar system. And then that advantage needs to outweigh the overhead of starting a martian supply chain.

>>11574117
>You need to require something else in the solar system that mars can get easier

And forgot to add, this thing still needs to go back to earth

>>11574117
The advantage of Mars is 1/3g. You can stage off it much easier than Earth, so literally the entire solar system is easier to access from Mars.

>>11573968
>While the physics involved may not change, our transports will.
That is why it's difficult to think about transportation to and from earth being cheap enough.
Even today on our own planet we don't use airplanes for raw materials, it would be way too expensive.
We need the equivalent of ships and trains for that economy to work.
While these are conceivable in open space I find hard to believe we'll have anything like that for Earth-space travel.
BTW I'm thinking more about the asteroids belt than Mars, but it's true that Mars is still going to be a lot cheaper than Earth.

>>11574123
Read my post

>>11574117
>You can't start a martian colony without an export to earth.
If you can get a government on Earth to pay you .5 gajillions to haul and install a space station, that's an export to Earth. Doesn't matter where it is.
And no you don't start with infrastructure, smoothbrain. You start with other revenue streams, like science, tourism and entertainment.

>>11573241
You only support abortion because it could kill white people, right? Too bad faggot, most abortion victims are blacks :)

>>11574117
>Earth isn't going to take massive sunken costs to build an infrastructure on mars it can't benefit from.
A possible export is the colony itself. If there is a will to do that, people on Earth are going to pay for it.
Tourism is another possible export (because tourism is export, it's just that instead of moving the goods you move the people who enjoy them).

>>11573275
>meanwhile behind your screen

>>11574117
>NOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CANT JUST GO DIRECTLY TO MARS AND COLONISE IT, WHAT ABOUT MUH 6 GORILLION NIGGERS ON URF THAT NEED THEIR GIBS

>>11572922
>>11573191
Please tell me how you're going to get massive population growth on Mars, when we can't even get above replacement fertility birth rates in ANY wealthy western society. If you have an educated female population you cannot have high birth rates, because surprise, surprise, actually smart women don't want to be baby factories. We probably need the technology to grow humans in vitro before we can colonize space.

>>11574130
Yes, Mars will most likely be bypassed for asteroid belt unless prospecting is a right fucking pain in the ass and a one in a billion chance of hitting paydirt.

>>11574145
>sitting around waiting for people to be born
There are plenty of people on Earth, even with sub-replacement populations. Only a tiny fraction need to be crazy enough to want to live and work on Mars to make a productive colony. There are more than enough crazy people.

>>11574133
>You start with other revenue streams, like science, tourism and entertainment.

The revenue changes hands on earth and all those people come back

Do you not understand what a colony is? A mars colony would need the supply chain that can mostly sustain itself, then another supply chain that can recreate that supply chain to repair or grow it. They can't make that themselves. Earth has to pay for it. We can't start an Antarctica colony by handing 5$ to a penguin and saying hey thanks for the opportunity to do science and arctic tourism.

>>11574145
You can't really predict that.
We're talking about very dedicated women, not a random choice from the general population.
If there is a will to do that there are also some measures that can be taken, like very serious kindergarten facilities, jobs tailored for that purpose and so on.
Actually these are the things we also need badly here on Earth, but they could be easier to get if you're building a whole new world.

>>11574145
>If you have an educated female population you cannot have high birth rates

If you think that a generation or two of dumb thots taking birth control until their 30s and 40s because of social pressure and media manipulation is an "educated female population", I don't know what to tell you.

>>11574168
If nations said "fuck the antarctic treaty, this shits free land, go set up your own nations" you would have a self sufficient continent in under a decade.

>>11574145
>implying mars colonists are a representative sample of western society
we're talking about zealots who are willing to uproot their entire lives to go live on a dead rock. They'll be willing to have kids for the cause, and will also likely raise their kids with this zealotry. Plus on mars there's no 'muh overpopulation'

>>11574174
>educated female population
Chasing meme degrees and racking up student debt for it still counts as educated.
Just because their degree doesn't account for jack shit doesn't mean they haven't successfully managed to create an entire fucking market for it.

I just don't understand this reusable rockets meme

Think of it this way. You add things, and costs, to a rocket in order to enable it to be reused. Propulsive flyback adds lots and lots of things. So, and individual booster that that has been built for reuse costs more than if it were configured to be expendable. That's why flying a booster twice does not mean it costs half as much per flight.
For example, a propulsive flyback booster design essentially starts out as an expendable design. Then you add things.

For example;

HARDWARE & SOFTWARE

- A second set of avionics

- New and additional software development and maintenance to control reentry, terminal flight and landing

- A second set of batteries with higher capacity for the additional active flyback systems

- Aerodynamic control surfaces, actuators and control electronics for the aero surfaces

- Landing sensors, data processors, and interface electronics

- Landing Legs

- Hydraulic or electromechanical systems and control electronics to deploy the landing legs

- An Inco, or another other high temperature material, aft heat shield in place of the light weight and inexpensive composite version

- Other high temp metal structures vs light weight, low cost aluminum on the aft end for greater reentry survivability

- Bolted vs light weight welded aft end structures and interfaces to facilitate replacement and refurbishment.

- Others
RECOVERY LOGISTICS

- A fleet of ships or recovery barges to deploy down range for the missions for missions where the 30% to 50% impact of flying back to the take off point can't be tolerated

- Additional land transportation services to return recovered boosters to the factory for refurbishment

- Landing pads and their maintenance
REFURBISHMENT

- Extensive inspections

- Replacement of parts that cannot be economically salvaged

- Refurbishment of parts affected by the reentry thermal environment

>>11574144
Extraordinarily based, FUCK E*rth and FUCK E*rthers!

>>11574168
>The revenue changes hands on earth
You still don't seem to understand that you don't have to physically be somewhere to be economically connected to it. You treat these systems like free standing monoliths. That's not how it works. Yes, Earth is the economic center, no shit. But if they're paying for something they can only get from Mars, Mars has an economy.

Hell, the money maker doesn't even have to be from Mars, initially - what matters is it is in the hands of people with the intention and capability to expand a Mars colony.

>>11574194
Based MCRN poster

>>11574181
Yes because oil

Mars needs space oil

>when the martian war of independence actually started here on 4chan even before the first human touched Mars.

>>11574185
Yeah it's a math problem. You can have extremely expensive "reusability", like the shuttle

But the reusable falcon 9 is cheaper than an expendable falcon 9 all things considered.

>>11574207
>Fuck earth
>Hasn't even left earth

Based future Martians.

>>11574117
>Then there's no way you can go directly to mars and colonize it. You need to require something else in the solar system that mars can get easier
>It's another episode of a jew failing to comprehend manifest destiny and forever thinking that you can't do anything without needing to make a profit from it

https://spacenews.com/op-ed-the-fccs-space-safety-order-we-all-need-to-mitigate-collision-risk/

>>11574226
Settling the american west was about capturing the remaining resources on a continent and was a self sustaining expansion, it wasn't other people paying for settlers to live there. Imagine settling death valley and the only thing it offers are science and tourism.

>>11574230
>op-ed
Into the trash it goes
>whining about the FCC and muh collision risk
It's another "Starlink is taking my lunch and I need to cry about it" episode

>>11574230
>>11574240
The guy posting is VIASAT co-founder, just FYI.

>>11574233
The point is that there is literally nowhere you can go and settle outside of some shitcunt governments jurisdiction. That was a big drive for settling America at that time, a lot of settlers were religious people wanting to gtfo from Europe. Where do I go to settle now if I want to gtfo from existing governments? I'll give you a hint, fucking nowhere. Everything is already claimed or made illegal to settle.

>>11574233
> Imagine settling death valley and the only thing it offers are science and tourism.
If they were so desperate to know more about death valley that they sent gorillions of dollars worth of specialty equipment there just to do jobs that add up to a day of human labor, it would make a lot of sense to send humans there for science and tourism. Basically your comparison breaks down because you're dumb and your shit's all retarded.

>>11574244
Sounds like I got the jist of it then.

>>11574006
>ignore the rest of the post
herp

>>11574133
>tourism and entertainment.
This. Open up spess gambling and spess brothels and you will have cemented spess travel for all time to come.

>>11574259
>tear down the one part of the post that's relevant to anything
Why would I need to address the megastructure wank when it's completely irrelevant. Just make a fucking rocket dummy.

>>11574246
I completely understand the motivation. There are plenty of people who would coom instantly if you gave them a space base and said go live on this dry freezing shit hole with no air that's baptized in radiation every day. But someone has to pay for that lifestyle and they're going to want back something useful for what they put in. That's why every administration has noped at the mars pricetag, scientific knowledge of the planet isn't a big enough reward. Think of the buyer's remorse of apollo x10

>>11574233
What is Dubai
(Which kind of looks it could actually be a martian city)

>>11573246
Based. More people need to get onboard this kinda vision for the System, instead of waiting until they can terraform every rock they see.

>>11574250
And it still wouldn't be a colony. The ISS still won't be a colony when we send space tourism there. Nor will a moon base with science and tourism be a colony.

>>11574270
>What is Dubai
A shithole city that sprung up in the desert in an effort to diversify an oil based economy. In order to prop it up the government is hosting major events and routing their extensive aviation business through the city.
Nothing about it is organic, and its appeal will not survive.

Some people on SLS subreddit was celebrating their SLS's capability. So I made bit of correction here.

>>11574270
> It is also a major global transport hub for passengers and cargo.[9] Oil revenue helped accelerate the development of the city, which was already a major mercantile hub.

What is mars connected to that makes it a good global transport hub? Mars needs to be connected to people that need imports and shit to export to be analogous to dubai.

>>11574208
Although, even in expendable mode Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy shots are extremely cheap. As of now it costs $62M to expend a Falcon 9, compared to a rocket with extremely similar characteristics like Atlas V, which costs $110M. Both can hoist 20,000kg to orbit or more, both are bellow the 600 ton range fully loaded, they have a nearly identical sucess/failure ratio 83/82 for Atlas and 83/81 for Falcon 9, yet Atlas for some reason is nearly double the cost. What really interests me is that in spite of being lighter by about 40 tons and utilizing nominally inferior engines in all stages (in terms of ISP) the Falcon 9 still exceeds Atlas V's payload capacity by 2800kg. I think this comes from the second stages, Atlas' second stage is an RL-10A-4-2 which burns for 842s, developing 110kN of thrust with an ISP of 465, Falcon's current second stage operates using one Merlin 1D+ which burns for 397s, however in spite of burning for less than half as long and also being 33% less efficient, the Merlin 1D+ produces 8.4x as much thrust, 934kN. I'd guess that the stage itself also probably has a significantly lower dry mass due to the common usage of keroLOX as opposed to hydroLOX. If I'm not mistaken then this means in spite of having a much less efficient second stage, Falcon 9 also has a second stage with greater overall delta-V, on top of using a simple to manufacture common engine, while Atlas uses a foreign engine for it's first stage and a very complicated and expensive hydroLOX engine for it's second stage.

>>11574272
>And it still wouldn't be a colony.
Not if oldspace was running it, no. Not if we came into it with a mission of making bootprints and profound statements. Not if we worried about "muh plantary protection". Not if we treat science as the end goal instead of a tool.

But with any actual ambition, the initial phase is only a stepping stone, not the main goal.

>>11573084
>You need very very specialized and sensitive lab equipment to even tell apart mars atmosphere from a total vacuum.
...or you look at the sky?

>>11574277
>SLS subreddit

oh its real

How do you have discussions about SLS and still retain enthusiasm about it?

>>11574289
I just go there to see the mental gymnastics.

>>11574277
But refueling starships doesn't count as multiple launches? I don't see how 150+ is for one launch.

>>11574333
You can bring 150+ ton in 1 vehicle, which can be refueled so it can send that cargo to anywhere in the solar system.

>>11574346
That tin can needs to stop implexploding and actually launch before it goes on any fucking chart though.
And I say that as someone who would like nothing more than it to succeed.

>>11574357
>That tin can needs to stop implexploding and actually launch before it goes on any fucking chart though.
>SLS Block 1
>SLS Block 1B
>SLS Block 2 [kek]
>New Glenn
>B-but no, you can't include THIS rocket because it's in development

>>11574289
>How do you have discussions about SLS and still retain enthusiasm about it?
By overlooking how bloated the project is, and believing that doing it the SLS way is the only way.

>>11574293
They seemed to have sobered up abit after that OIG report last year.

>>11574346
That still is more comparable to the idea of assembling a space craft in space like the proposed earth orbit rendevous or the constellation projet, than a single launcher. Still better than those two proposals though, especially if it actually finishes.

>>11574363
>That still is more comparable to the idea of assembling a space craft in space
Not really.

>>11574360
The parts of the flying turd SLS has at least flown before. Starship is nothing but a bunch of tanks that still hasn't even gone through a fucking firing test.
Curb your fucking enthusiasm.

>>11574374
>The parts of the flying turd SLS has at least flown before.
>Starship is nothing but a bunch of tanks that still hasn't even gone through a fucking firing test.
>he hasn't seen the flying water tower
Not going to make it.

>>11574185
also, they may not be doing it to lower costs, but to allow a higher launch rate with less capital expense for manufacturing. More launches = more cashflow. And they don't even need to sell more launches since they are bootstrapping StarLink themselves.

>>11574357
None of the SLS, new glenn, or vulcan vehicles have flown, or will fly for next few years. Atlas V will be discontinued.

>>11574383
The SLS is slapped together from leftover parts of the shuttle program.

>>11574384
Someone said that to me 30 years ago. I would have believed the claim the "SLS will fly soon" 20 years ago or even 10 years ago.

>>11574384
>he keeps saying it like it proves something
If your parts are so reliable and it's just an afterthought to slap them together, make it and launch it on time.

Oh wait, "on time" was three fucking years prior to the current slated launch date. Eat steel, bitch.

>>11574397
>>11574403
It's a fucking jobs program just like every god damn old space program.

>Eat steel, bitch.
What part about wishing that tincan succeeds didn't register? It's time to actually show results instead of continuing to fuck up though.

Cool video on programming a solar system in Unity:
https://youtu.be/7axImc1sxa0

>>11573681
the lifting body reentry is great
upsides: lower heating load, lower g-load, swag, land on a runway, immediate unloading instead of waiting for a boat, no chance of drowning
downsides: more complicated manufacturing, more complicated launch analysis

>>11574408
>What part about wishing that tincan succeeds didn't register?
Idc what you wish, I was responding to your actual points which are regurgitated nonsense. You can't just dismiss SLS' problems because it was made out of a parts bin and ignore its years and gorillions of overruns while criticizing SS for prototype testing, something they can't even afford to do with SLS.

>>11574412
russians have been landing capsules on solid ground since the beginning without issues.

>>11574414
I'm not dismissing jack shit. It's still way ahead of Elon's Junkyard.

stacked

>>11574418
"still way ahead" is a misnomer. Its been "its space shuttle parts" for 30 years and no results.

>>11574444
Jobs program. lrn2politics.

>>11574454
Yeah, thats why first part of comment.

>>11574418
>A project 10 or 20 years in development depending on semantics is ahead

It shouldn't be ahead. It should be in space

>>11574459
It should be in the fucking trash can, but here we are.

>>11574418
>ahead
That terminology doesn't even make any sense. The SLS should have already passed the finish line long before Starship was even a proposed design document. The fact that we're even talking about the two in the same fucking era means it isn't ahead.

>How much you hate SLS is a purity test for /sfg/

The way it should be

>>11574442
real stacked

>>11573325
The end goal of humanity should be to spread across all of existence in as great a number with as high a standard of living as possible

So I've been thinking about the ISRU needs for the first Mars missions. What if an extra refuel Starship was launched into low Mars orbit along with every passenger Starship? You'd only need to produce enough fuel to launch the Starship into low Mars orbit, and the entire rest of the return trip can be fueled by the extra Starship. Doesn't remove the need for ISRU, but should reduce the 5 football fields of solar panels energy requirement to some extent.

>>11574418
>been in development for 10 years
>working off a predecessor that was in development for 5 years
>which was based off studies going back 23 years from that predecessor
>studies on using parts that are almost 40 years old now
>after all of that precursor work the project still struggles to get a prototype done
>even now it's sitting on a test stand doing nothing
>even though the project was advertised as being swift in development
>SOMEHOW this project is "way ahead" of another project that just started 8 years ago
I'm with >>11574464, SLS should be flying now. The fact that there's even a race between SLS and Starship is a sign that SLS has failed significantly.

https://twitter.com/JimBridenstine/status/1251178705633841167
May 27
AMERICAN ASTRONAUTS
AMERICAN ROCKETS
AMERICAN SOIL

>>11574511
>SLS should be flying now
see >>11574461

>>11574515
Bleh, I was hoping for around 17th, since that's the Norwegian national day and we're probably going to be all locked down and somber.

>>11574515
HABBENING

>>11574117
>Earth isn't going to take massive sunken costs to build an infrastructure on mars it can't benefit from.
That's why it's going to be the USA, not "Earth", doing the colonization. Americans will colonize empty wastelands and make them paradises because that's what we do. The living space itself is the value. Doing it on a planet named for the Roman god of war only makes it more American and gives us an excuse for classical architecture in space.

>>11574515
AAAAAAAAA

"American astronauts on American rockets from American soil" - May 27, 2020
https://twitter.com/JimBridenstine/status/1251178705633841167

>11571235

>>11574145
>Please tell me how you're going to get massive population growth on Mars, when we can't even get above replacement fertility birth rates in ANY wealthy western society

Mars will be a Mormon world.

> If you have an educated female population you cannot have high birth rates

Wrong. Fertility rates correlate very closely with religiosity. Non-religious people, being less fertile and less happy, are simply inferior and can’t be allowed to move to Mars. They wouldn’t handle the stress as well as Christians would and they wouldn’t have as many kids.

> because surprise, surprise, actually smart women don't want to be baby factories.

Every intelligent woman wants to have many children. You’re thinking of brainwashed “womyn” who have fifteen cats and die alone, unhappy, and full of regret.

>>11574508
Most of the delta-v is still invested in that hop to orbit, so you'd be knocking 5 football fields down to something like three and three quarters football fields. Probably easier to send more solar panels than an entire dedicated refueling ship.

>>11574246
>Where do I go to settle now if I want to gtfo from existing governments?

Mars

>>11574272
>And it still wouldn't be a colony

Permanent habitation inevitably appears around these places. That’s how like every town and America started. Some guy builds a tavern at a crossroads and then some other guy builds a house nearby

>>11574560
I thought the intention was to load a few Starships before the return-mission carrying a bunch of relevant supplies.

>>11574107
Don't handwave away the problem by supposing we use 'chemicals'. What you need is calcium metal, which reacts to form calcium carbonate in a CO2 atmosphere, also known as limestone. You also don't need to 'skirt the atmosphere', just fire slugs of calcium at Venus and let them vaporize after slamming into the atmosphere, that'd help them atomize for a faster reaction rate anyway. The thing is, since calcium makes up 40% of the mass of the CaCO3 molecule, that basically means that in order to sequester the CO2 component of Venus' atmosphere you need to transport a mass 40% of that of the CO2 content of the atmosphere, and therefore you're looking at launching ~1.85x10^20 kilograms, or 185 quadrillion tons of calcium metal. Not exactly an easy thing. Also note that it's not like we have a nice pure lump of calcium in the asteroid belt to just cut chunks out of and fire at Venus, we'd have to dig up large amounts of randomly sorted regolith to separate out calcium-bearing minerals, then refine the calcium out with some amount of yield loss, THEN proceed to fire it at Venus.

>>11574271
Agreed. Terraforming is a meme that will only happen on planets in other star systems that already happen to be very close to habitability but never developed life for whatever reason. It would be dumb to ignore the potential of a planet with a working water and carbon cycle but no life, literally just add microorganisms to the water and lichen to the land and give it some time while part of the colony population lives inside big tented habitats on the surface, and the rest continue to live on the big space habitat fleet that they came over in, as they set up asteroid mining and production of more space habitats. Terraforming Mars though, and especially Venus, is simply not worth the effort. Just do para-terraforming at Mars, and ignore Venus until you can afford to spend the resources necessary to skip directly to disassembling it entirely for raw materials.

>>11574515
God Bless America

>>11574599
Terraforming an existing planet to Earth standards: woefully inefficient, generational effort, no significant return. Vanity project.
Bioforming humans and existing life into something which can form an entirely novel ecosystem: based. Mars for Martians, down to the biological level. Skinfags take the exoskeleton pill or go home.

>>11574599
I can see temporary terraforming of Mars being worth it

>CFCs are thousands of times as effective per gram as greenhouse gasses as CO2
>build factories on Martian surface that do nothing but turn CO2 into CFCs and vent them back into the atmosphere
>Martian surface warms, releasing water vapor and CO2
>runaway greenhouse effect, eventually gets to the point where rain becomes a thing on Mars again
>outdoor agriculture becomes possible, plants and other life can be introduced

The hard part would be creating an artificial magnetosphere so that the solar wind doesn't strip away the new atmosphere

>>11574498
>spread across all of existence in as great a number
yes
>with as high a standard of living
debatable

>>11574618
What about terraforming the sun?

>>11574582
To the same destination, though. They won't have significant fuel reserves unless you hook them up to ISRU either.

>>11574582
No, you only need the one. Eventually the idea is to be able to relaunch every Starship that lands on Mars back to Earth, but in the early days when propellant is a bottleneck they're only planning on sending one back per sinode.

>>11574619
Does it upset you when people have high living standards, Mao?

>>11574618
>The hard part would be creating an artificial magnetosphere so that the solar wind doesn't strip away the new atmosphere
Literally just throw a big magnet into the atmosphere by that point

>>11574617
>Bioforming
Never going to happen, do not count on magic technology. Assume that the technology we have today is all we'll ever have, and plan to colonize the entire universe regardless. If and when great technological advancements are made, roll those into the plan. The wait equation is a jewish mind toxin that makes otherwise smart people wish for better Isp engines and magical light materials when they could be living in a world with a colonized Moon and Mars if we ignored the siren's call and just pushed our capabilities using what already worked.

>>11574633
'Atmosphere stripped away by the solar winds' is a meme anyway. It happens over timescales so long it makes even terraforming look like a short term project.

>>11574618
>eventually gets to the point where rain becomes a thing on Mars again
Except even optimistic estimates for Mars' frozen CO2 content are too low to support this idea. What would really happen is, at low elevations temperatures would increase enough to allow water ice to sublimate, and this water vapor would be blown around until it eventually reached higher elevations and precipitated out as ice again. The overall result is that Mars would have a dustier atmosphere and a much more dry equator.

>>11574644
>Except even optimistic estimates for Mars' frozen CO2 content are too low to support this idea

Giant blocks of frozen CO2 launched from Venus incoming

>>11574629
We should maximize the human population at all costs, we should be expanding into the universe with roughly the same standard of living and personal resource use as an average hiveworld citizen from W40K.

>>11574653
But that sucks. Denmark is a better place to live than India

>>11574650
Venus a fuck and gay.

It would be both easier and faster to redirect comet to strike Mars instead.

>>11574637
You don't NEED any kind of *forming to make a stable colony. However it's inevitable that genetic engineering will be applied to make living things useful to us hardier in extraterrestrial environments, and that's already something basically within human capability.

>>11574644
>Except even optimistic estimates for Mars' frozen CO2 content are too low to support this idea

Assuming it's the CO2 alone and you aren't dumping tens of thousands of tons of CFCs into the Martian atmosphere every year.

>>11574293
Care to share some fun examples?

>>11574656
An Indian today lives with at least a dozen times more wealth that a human in the ideal population-maximized future.

>>11574660
No idiot, I'm talking about atmospheric pressure and thermal gradients corresponding to elevation. Even if the Martian atmosphere was pure CFCs, it has over 30,000 meters of vertical terrain height variation. You're not going to be able to warm up most of the southern hemisphere highlands, and certainly not the peaks of the big four shield volcanoes. Those areas are going to act as high altitude cold traps which will collect water ice over time. Also, as buried permafrost becomes surface glaciers surrounding the south pole, the overall albedo of the planet would increase significantly, which would counteract the effects of the CFC atmosphere and cause the temperature to plunge again.

>>11574663
Population maximized and wellbeing-maximized aren’t the same thing

>>11574674
Interesting.

Would the variation in terrain height begin to drop off if oceans started to form?

>>11574659 self-followup
The big difference, in my opinion, is that it can be done both gradually and usefully, with every step along the way providing tangible benefits. Lifeforms that clean/utilize Martian perchlorates aren't the most exciting kind of bioforming, but it's something that would actually make sense to do and over time becomes one part of a transformative whole. That's a very different process from terraforming's "haha we'll just make one hundred thousand megastructures which will provide no benefit to anyone for one hundred thousand years"

>>11574659
Digging pressurized tunnels and building house-sized sealed habitats counts as an early form of para-terraforming, which literally means to just coat an inhospitable planet or moon with sealed hospitable environments.

Some genetic engineering will probably happen, sure, but you aren't going to be able to remake people such that they can survive on Mars. That's simply not a possibility. At the very most, with extreme genetic engineering, you could make it such that people lose consciousness and die after minutes of naked exposure to the outside elements instead of after seconds. It's not possible to rebuild a human from scratch using brand new artificial biology, which is what would be needed to be able to survive on Mars, let alone Titan or an atmosphere-less world.